Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2015 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS

  
 
OntheRez
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


In light of Fred's post of the Canon rebate for the 24-70mm f/4.0L IS I've resurrected this old discussion. (I sometimes wonder if Canon tells Fred before they tell the rest of the world. $800USD for a NEW Canon L. Wow! Slightly mind stopping. I've done a fair amount of searching and most of the discussions focus on the 24-70 vs the 24-105 or the Sigma and Tamron offerings.

As I noted originally, I'm still amazed at how much I use the 24-70 focal range. If you'd have asked me what my most used lens was I'd have guessed at the 70-200 f/2.8 II. Nope. I work as the sports photographer/reporter for this small town newspaper. This brings me in contact with much of the school and some other community organizations so I end up taking my fair share of group shoots - from team photos, to featured student "portraits," to the occasional general news. Virtually all this is done with my earlier version of the 24-70mm f/2.8. Now I know this lens has been knocked about by our local "experts" repeatedly for various failings and there is no doubt that at the edges (particularly wide) it isn't the sharpest pencil in the box.

Probably the first and utterly reasonable question is "If you use the 24-70 FL the most why not buy the ver. II model?" Valid question with an immediate answer and another longer one. First oft is simply price. I have no doubt the new 24-70 is sharper than "a mad fisherwoman's tongue." A thousand bucks more for the 24-70mm f/2.8L II is some serious freight in this small, isolated, extremely poor town and region. While I'm considered the only "professional" in the region (by many) that doesn't mean very many folks make use of my services. I still see proms, weddings, and senior pix taken with cell phones quite a few that end up in the paper as it tries to capture all that goes on in town.

The second less obvious reason is that I virtually never try to shoot a moving object with the 24-70 unless it's all I've got and I'm firing in desperation. I don't do portrait work or weddings (shiver, hold up the hex sign but a lot of what this lens does is "portrait like." Football is shot with flash and the 70-200 and all of the local indoor venues (local here means about a 150 mile radius) are so poorly lit that f/2.8 is waaay too slow. When spring comes and we can go out and play ball it's always in the afternoon (no fields with lights), besides a 24-70 at a ball field is a bit like the old "bringing a knife to a gun fight."

So it boils down to three questions. (1) Is there really $1,000 added value with the V. II for the sort of work described above to justify the wait and scrape it would take to buy it? (2) In particular has anyone moved from the older f/2.8 to the newer f/4.0? What are your thoughts and experiences? (3) How does Canon's f/4.0 hold up against the competitors?

I'd really appreciate hearing from those of you that have direct experience with these lenses or some combination there of - particularly between the original f/2.8 and the newer f/4.0.

Thanks,

Robert



May 06, 2015 at 10:22 AM
ggreene
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


If you don't need the extra stop for freezing motion I would grab the F4 IS. KEH has the 24-70 2.8 v1 from $850-$1050. If you sell your 2.8 it would not be much of an investment to get it. Then you would have a very sharp corner to corner zoom with IS.

I still occasionally use 24-70 for action so I stayed at 2.8 and upgraded. After I sold my v1 and bought an on sale refurbished v2 from Canon it cost me $450. That to me was worth it but I live in a state with no sales tax so refurbished prices are really attractive. Free shipping as well.



May 06, 2015 at 12:56 PM
netexpress
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


Robert,

I can't give you any feedback on the f4 model. I've owned both f/2.8 versions and I just can't see being without f/2.8 for a lens that you use so much. Having a f/2.8 for focus and being able to blur the background on portraits or group shots make it more valuable than having IS or a slightly sharper lens. And I just don't care about having IS on the 24-70. It's not that useful to me personally and I don't see how it'll improve my work. I can't live without the IS on the 70-200 but that's a different story. Is the new version II worth $1K? Probably not. The version 1 is good enough. I'd stick with what you have now. But maybe someone with experience with the f/4 can offer you an alternate perspective.



May 06, 2015 at 01:47 PM
kezeka
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


I have owned both version of the 24-70 and I primarily shoot events. To me, the primary reason for looking at the V2 isn't the increased resolution, but the significantly improved rendering style, contrast, and coloration. Indubitably, the resolution is nice but there was a huge improvement in the rendering. Photos taken with the V2 just feel like the stand out better. I sold the first version and switched to using a 35L and 85L. Once the second version came down in price to around $1700 used, I picked one up. It seriously renders like a prime lens.

If it matters to you, the second version is mechanically more sound and able to handle jostling much better without the decentering issues that the first version had issues with.

Much like netexpress - I have no use for IS, as my subjects are always moving around so I have to keep my shutter speeds up regardless.


I hear the f/4 IS is a fantastic lens. I just wouldn't use an f/4 lens to shoot events. I have always found the change in subject isolation between f/4 and f/2.8 to be immense. Also, more light is always more better .

When I am considering two lenses, I always go to the flickr pools for those respective lenses and see what other photographers are using them for and to differentiate their rendering styles in ways that you can't really do while just talking about them.

f/2.8 I
https://www.flickr.com/groups/24-70l/pool/

F/2.8 II
https://www.flickr.com/groups/canon24-70f2point8l2/pool/

F/4 IS
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2201964@N21/pool/

best of luck!



May 06, 2015 at 08:41 PM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


Not a user of the 24-70 2.8L but I really like the 24-70 4L: deadly sharp, well corrected for distortion, doubles as macro lens, focuses fast and is relatively lightweight. I mainly use it for landscape and travel, using it stopped down most of the time. The hybrid IS is excellent and gains me about a stop over my similar range lenses with IS.


May 06, 2015 at 09:27 PM
Shield
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


I used to have the 24-70 II 2.8 but sold it and picked up the 24-70 F/4 IS and never looked back. Since I do about 50/50 stills and video, the F/4 lens has tremendous hybrid IS, is much lighter and more fun to work with all day. It's a killer combo with the 6d.


May 06, 2015 at 10:51 PM
jrscls
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


I have owned the 24-70 II and now the 24-70 f4 IS. I'm really liking the 24-70 f4 IS on my 6D.


May 07, 2015 at 05:08 AM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


I must say that I was very sceptical of the F4 IS due to the price it WAS pitched at . I own(ed) the 24-105L but I never really liked it when shooting crop and going back to it when I got my 5D3 didn't improve my thoughts on it .

anyway a couple of weeks ago I bit the bullet and got the 24-70/4 as its dropped to a much better price plus had a good cashback offer as well .
Ive only been able to test it and then use it on a family day out but initial thoughts on it are great . seems tack sharp at all focal lengths (i purposely tried it at 50mm where its meant to be weak) focuses nice and fast (faster than the 24-105 seemed) and just playing around with it the macro mode could be a fun to play around with (I know its not a true macro replacement ).

I also own a very nice mint 28-80L which I picked up for those days I just wanted to use it as it has a much better 'look' compared to the 24-105L . But I can really see me not minding parting company with it now .

previously Ive owned the old 28-70L and currently have used the mk1 24-70/2.8 (the f4 seems better than both of those were) but for me the IS and smaller size are much greater benefits compared to the 1 stop faster hunks of glass .



May 07, 2015 at 06:37 AM
molson
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


I bought a used EF 24-70mm f4L IS to try on my Sony A7II, and it's so much better than the equally-expensive Sony/Zeiss version that it's not even funny.


May 07, 2015 at 10:27 AM
bmwrider75
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


I shot with a 24-70 II / 6D for about 18 months, and LOVED that lens. No complaints or issues at all, just great images all the time. Ultimately though I felt like I wanted to downsize my kit, and I started shooting more with primes that had particular rendering styles/looks, so I sold the 24-70 II, but then picked up the F4 IS version on a whim when one popped up locally for a very good price, just as a zoom backup for those times when I wasn't in prime mode.

To my eye, it's the equal of the II in colours/contrast/sharpness, and the macro mode works great. Losing 2.8 is not ideal, but given that I mostly shoot a faster prime, it's not that critical, and the IS works extremely well - better than the 24-105L and 35 IS that I've had.

It's quite a bit smaller and lighter and it's a great combo for the 6D if you don't really need the 2.8.

I never loved the 24-105L as I found the distortion at 24mm really aggravating, and the 24-70 F4 has way, way, less. It's also sharper.

dc



May 09, 2015 at 06:43 AM
asiafish
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · 24-70mm f/2.8 (V-1) vs 24-70mm f/4.0 IS


I shot with the 24-105 for years and liked it, but never loved it. I love the 24-70/4, and that says a lot as I'm mostly a prime shooter, and tend to use my zoom (I only own one) for casual family (non-photography) travel or with it locked at 24mm as a slow prime. My other Canon lenses are the 35/1.4 mk II, 50/1.2 and 100/2.8 IS, and while much slower, the wide end of the 24-70/4 isn't too out of place when used as a landscape or street prime.


Oct 03, 2016 at 03:09 PM





FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.