about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
534 903778 Mar 26, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $1,192.24
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.69
8.38
9.3
ef_24-70_28u_1_

Specifications:
This new lens does what many pros thought couldn't be done - replace the previous L-series 28-70 f/2.8 lens with something even better. Extended coverage to an ultra-wide angle 24mm makes it ideal for digital as well as film shooters, and the optics are even better than before with two Aspherical elements and a totally new UD glass element. It's now sealed and gasketed against dust and moisture, and a new processing unit makes the AF faster than ever.


 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next
      
lamontsanders
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 7, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 352
Review Date: Nov 2, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,055.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: IQ, Sharp, Color, Contrast, Build, Feel, Image pop. I don't feel like this lens is all THAT heavy honestly, feels nice on my 5D2
Cons:
Well, it ain't the cheapest. It's worth it though.

I had the 28-75. I had the 24-105L. They are good. They are not quite as good as the 24-70L though. Yes the 28-75 is cheaper. Yes the 24-105 has range and IS. The IQ and sharpness of the 24-70L trump those to me. If you value image quality above other factors, this is the choice without hesitation.

Nov 2, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add lamontsanders to your Buddy List  
ComairCRJ700
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 14, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 14, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,249.99 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, Versatile, Low Distortion
Cons:
Heavy

I have been looking for a replacement from by beloved EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens since upgrading to the 5D Mark II. The 24-105 f/4 L is sharp enough on the short end but suffers from distortion and a lack of bokeh. It's an attempt to do too much with a single lens. I sold it and purchased the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L and what a difference. It is very sharp across the entire zoom range, adds an extra stop, and has a very pleasing bokeh. Definitely L quality and a worthy replacement to the 17-55. If only it had IS! A great travel, people, and all-around general purpose lens.

Oct 14, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ComairCRJ700 to your Buddy List  
theMAGE
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 14, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 189
Review Date: Oct 13, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent colors and contrast. Good low-light capabilities. It zooms.
Cons:
Heavy. Not properly calibrated from the factory. Zoom ring not very smooth and some play in the focusing ring.

I bought the lens new from an online retailer. As soon as it came in, fired some test shots at f/2.8 and f/4 - the images had nice colors but were soft. At f/4 were on par or softer than my 24-105. Ran the batteries test - the lens was backfocusing about half to two thirds of an inch. Took the lens to a party and used it with flash at f/6.7 and got some nice shots, but not great.

Pondered for about five minutes whether to play the dealer roulette or send it in for calibration. The very next day I sent it in to Canon (New Jersey) and in a day they calibrated it and sent it back overnight. Now, that is a lens to have. Outstanding sharpness and macro ability. Wow!

It simply boggles the mind that Canon would ship out the lenses so mis-calibrated, unless it is a secret plan to show us how good its repair centers and customer service really is.

The problem is that now I need to improve my technique, as I won't be using the IS crutch anymore.


Oct 13, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add theMAGE to your Buddy List  
buddyRoland
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Oct 30, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 195
Review Date: Sep 20, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,249.00

Pros: Sharp across the whole range; large aperture reduces blur; low light performance; build
Cons:
Heavy; price, but got mine for a steal; nothing else

I took some pics yesterday. Some landscapes and potraits for my goddaughter's birthday. I used my 10-22 first because it's an ultra wide. I was very impressed with the 10-22 because you can't beat it the 1.6 cropped bodies. On my 50d it gave me a range I never had. Then I used the 24-70 for comparison. Wow! The 10-22 does its job as a landscape master with beautiful colors but for sheer color and sharpness, the 24-70 is king. It doesn't have the true lanscape capturing ability (width) but for the landscape that you capture, the sky, land and colors of vegetation are perfect.

I kept the 24-70 on my 50D body and went to my goddauthers birthday party. Took so many photos in the house and outside, low light, running kids, etc. This lens is the zoom to have. After taking a plethora of photos I replaced my 24-70 with my 17-40. The 17-40 took some sweet shots, many quite sharp. The one difference I noticed is that the 17-40 lacked the consistency shot-to-shot of the 24-70. If I stood still and took a shot the 17-40 it was super, but on the move, the 24-70 simply produces better, sharper shots. In low light, the 24-70 was a better, but with a little light, the 17-40 produces nice photos. The weight of the 17-40 was a clear advantage and with proper lighting, it is an excellent choice. However, for normal unforseen circumstances, the 24-70 is the go-to lens.


Sep 20, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add buddyRoland to your Buddy List  
Haring
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 11, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Review Date: Sep 11, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp
Cons:
not as good as my prime lenses

The 24-70 I mostly use it for real estate photography on a 5D. I also use it for aerial pictures although it is a bit heavy for it.
For interior shots it is not the best, I use my 17-40.
I mainly use it for real estate photography and wedding photography. If you want to see samples: www.haringphotography.com Look for the interior pictures.
Image quality is also good.




Sep 11, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Haring to your Buddy List  
rjenson
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 344
Review Date: Sep 7, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,199.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Great color, contrast and sharpness. Much less barrel distortion at 24mm than the 24-105 4 L. Very nice background at f2.8. Fast and quiet focus. Balances nicely on the 1D bodies.
Cons:
It is a relatively large and heavy lens.

Have owned several copies over the years. Mine is the newest UX date code. It is very sharp at f2.8 at both 24mm and 70mm. +7 focus adjustment per lens on my 1D3.

Sep 7, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add rjenson to your Buddy List  
dealaddict
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 11, 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 31
Review Date: Sep 4, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: very sharp, fast and accurate AF, build quality, can do some macro shots
Cons:
heavy

I have tried out the Tamron 17-50 and 28-75, but both of these doesn't make me happy. I usually take portrait pictures of my family, so, the range of 35-70 is the most useful for me. Despite of all the good reviews, the Tamron 17-50 is a bit short, and it is soft at 50mm. The 28-75 basically is the same, soft from 50-75. So, I eventually bite the bullet and get this Canon and I am amazed. This lens is sharp at 2.8 at all ranges. And the AF is accurate and fast. Another big plus is it has macro capability that it has very short minimum focus distance.

This lens is definitely expensive, but it really has good quality .. so .. I think it's worth it.


Sep 4, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dealaddict to your Buddy List  
abam
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 25, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 4201
Review Date: Aug 29, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: F2.8 for low light, very fast af, really is built like a tank, nice general zoom range, IQ is near the top end of what general zooms can do, peace of mind that it will work with all of my canon gear and future bodies (as opposed to 3rd party) - don't underestimate that last part
Cons:
price is maybe 150 above what it should be for something that really isn't able to take advantage of the new high-resolution 21MP sensors, heavy piece of kit to lug around (although i'll happily 'suffer' this in the name of photography), it really is a long lens when one considers the hood, hood takes up inordinate amount of space in the bag (nitpicking now)

just bought this lens recently, and have been putting it through its paces. i'll make this brief:

+
very nicely put together.
very useful range. versatile.
very useful max aperture.
very fast af, if at times inconsistent.
can replace the non-L 24mm prime, 28mm prime, 35mm prime, 50mm prime, and nonexistent 70mm prime. (from f2.8 up, that is.)...and all focal lengths in between.

-
in europe, price might be just a tad high for something that is due for an upgrade in the next couple of years.
af sometimes not exactly on the focal plane you want. (from tripod testing with MLU and cable release.)
some might find 70mm a tad short for portraiture, but you know the focal range before you buy, right?

fazit: no lens is perfect. this lens is in my experience sharper than the 24-105, but it lacks IS and the extra reach. it's expensive, and for many, the tamron 28-75 has comparable IQ in a much less pricey package. you have to ask yourself, if the build quality, af speed and future compatability with all canon gear is worth the extra money. if you don't mind shelling out the dough, this is the sharpest general zoom canon makes. for many (especially those that make their living with the 24-70L), it's worth every penny. couple this with a 70-200 2.8L and you're set to take on the photographic world.


Aug 29, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add abam to your Buddy List  
UsaFromAbove
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 11, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 23, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $800.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: good overall quality
Cons:
heavy!

Excellent Lens!

The 24-70 I mostly use it for real estate photography on a 5D. I also use it for aerial pictures although it is a bit heavy for it.

For interior shots it is not the best, I use my 17-40.

Image quality is also good. It is a little bit bulky though.

I mainly use it for real estate photography and wedding photography. www.usafromabove.com If you want to see samples.

Look for the interior pictures.

I would recommend it.


Aug 23, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add UsaFromAbove to your Buddy List  
prostudio
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 12, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 146
Review Date: Jul 2, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

Pros: nice photos, nice looking, massive
Cons:
heavy, expenssive and slow focus! on the MKII even slower and heavyer



Jul 2, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add prostudio to your Buddy List  
Gert-Jan Maas
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 12, 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 119
Review Date: Jun 25, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: In combination with 5dII, Reliable, good image quality
Cons:
none

It's only a little more expensive than 24-105 but boy an I glad I bought it.

I the past I never left home without the primes but now I can.

I never liked the idea "walk around zoom" because on a crop camera you always end up with a p&s-look to the pictures.

But with this lens on a 5DII you can do it all!
- perfect group pictures in almost any lighting
- beautiful portraits
- great atmosphere and colours


Only for model shoots, where distance is important, I will get out the primes now.



Jun 25, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Gert-Jan Maas to your Buddy List  
Daniel Yee
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 3, 2009
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 3, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,295.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Perfect focal length range for portraitures and street photography on APS-C format (~38 - 112mm). It is heavy and huge, but it balance well on my 40D with grip. Sharp and contrasy colors, constant f/2.8.
Cons:
easy to get smudges on lens hood.

My perfect lens lineup for my 40D is EF-S 10-22, EF 24-70L, EF 70-200 IS. This lens is huge and heavy but it balance very well on my 40D + BG-E2N.

The lens hood is BIG, but it offers full protection to the lens. It serves as a 3rd leg when mounted on my 40D. Due to the fact that it has a HUGE lens hood, it is very easy to get smudge marks on the hood.

IQ is superior compare to the EF-S 18-55 IS that I own. Very contrasy, creamy bokeh, pleasant colors. My copy is very sharp at all focal length (lens code UX, manufactured in 2009). I have tested 2 copies (lens code for both are UX) and both perform similar... both are sharp wide open. I guess Canon has tighten their QC on newer 24-70Ls.



Jun 3, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Daniel Yee to your Buddy List  
slide
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 31, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 16
Review Date: May 24, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,079.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Good L quality build and feel, images sharp, fast, quiet focusing, nice bokeh.
Cons:
None except my personal beef with some lenses that the objective element isn't recessed at all. This leaves the lens, IMO, too vulnerable unless you fit the enormous shade or add a filter. I only add a filter when I want to filter - not as armor.

I was going to get the kit 24-105L with my new 5d2 but a pro I respect who shoots 5d's urged me to not try to save a few bucks and instead get this, the much better lens. He has both. I'm glad I went ahead and followed his advice because the 5d2 as well as the other new top Canons with 16 mp and up really are incredibly demanding on their lenses. Only the best will do or you may as well stick to using your old 30d body.

I really like the way this lens feels in use. It oozes quality which gives me a good feeling everytime I use it. The output is as good as you can ask for in a zoom. After all, this isn't a 200 f 1.8 8 pound monster. It's an extremely high quality lens with no shortcomings except I find it sad that we need to pay this much to get something we need on the newer bodies.

It balances on the 5d2 well so it works as a walk around lens. OK, it's not nice and light like a 50 mm but it's tolerable for an all day hike about.

I would urge those buying a 5d2 to reconsider the kit lens. The 24-105 is an L designation but I dont' see it nearly the quality of this lens. It may seem silly to some to give away a few mm at the upper end to get one more stop but also pay a lot more than the 5d2 w/kit, but if you wish to get your money's worth out of the 5d2, you need to feed it right.

Ditto, of course, those other higher end cameras such as the 1ds III and IV.


May 24, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add slide to your Buddy List  
musclepics
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 4, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 848
Review Date: Apr 30, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp even wide open, L build, great hood design, AMAZING BOKEH... on par with best primes, fast AF
Cons:
none really, a little expensive

I've used some of the best primes out there... 135L for example, and some of the best zooms. The 24-70L really shines when it comes to bokeh. It's actually buttery smooth, much like the 135L (but not quite as much blur because of focus length). The bokeh is even better than the 70-200L's.

I've used the new, much vaunted Nikon 24-70, and I personally prefer the Canon. The Canon is not quite as sharp wide open, but is in fact optically better than the Nikon from F5.6+. Also, I prefer the build on the Canon.



Apr 30, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add musclepics to your Buddy List  
Dennis K
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 13, 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 19
Review Date: Apr 15, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,190.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Contrast, colors, bokeh, sharpness, mechanical properties are all excellent
Cons:
Expensive (but worth it), had to get it adjusted

Like many others I got my 5D together with the kit lens (24-105). Since I shot a lot at the wide end I very soon had to get rid of it because of the vignetting and extreme distortion. The IS was nice but not a real substitute for speed.

The 24-70 is a whole another story. It has a wonderful bokeh, especially for a zoom lens. It is sharp across the frame and throughout the entire zoom range, although not as sharp as my 135L or 24L - but that's to be expected. It IS sharper than my 16-35L II, for wht it's worth. The most valuable optical properties would have to be the colors and contrast, though. Overall, I prefer the images from the 24-70 a lot over the ones from the 24-105 and also a bit over those from the 16-35L II.

The weight was something I had to get used to and for the first few days I though it'd bother me. But now it feels just right on my 5D II even without a battery grip. The 16-35 almost feels like a toy now by comparison.

One word of caution though: My copy was slightly decentered and had a backfocus at the wide end and front focus at the long end, so it coudn't be properly calibrated with microadjust. I sent it in to CPS and it came back in perfect condition. I see a lot of example pictures of this lens on the net and many are unacceptably soft to me even though people seem content. Don't put up with that, get it repaired or calibrated! It's really worth it, the lens is extremely sharp for a zoom once it's up to spec.

Verdict: Get this lens and get it set up to optimal performance. It's an extremely capable and versatile workhorse.


Apr 15, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Dennis K to your Buddy List  
rk-d
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 25, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 109
Review Date: Mar 19, 2009 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp. Color, contrast, build, speed, quiet/fast AF, fixed hood
Cons:
No IS

I recently owned a 24-105 and sold it to buy this lens. Since most people vacillate between these two, I wanted to compare..

I've used a number of lenses in this range, and this lens is essentially as sharp as any I've ever used. Using the AF microadjustment on the 5d2 really honed the lens down to excellent sharpness with +1. I suspect many of those who complain about sample variation use this lens on unadjustable bodies. The 24-70 is sharper than the 24-105, but it's definitely not a huge difference. I think this probably speaks to the excellence of the latter.

Color and contrast are excellent. The 24-105 may have a slight edge with contrast.

The lens is heavy, but it's no different than most other 2.8 zooms. That said, the 24-105 balances better on the 5d2 body.

Build is identical to the 24-105, with the exception of the reverse extension of the zoom with fixed hood. I personally like the idea of a fixed hood that doesn't move when you zoom, but the flip side is that the hood becomes necessarily huge. When mounted, this lens becomes fairly imposing.

If this lens had IS, it would be perfect.

Bokeh is truly excellent, IMO. This is a subjective thing, but from what I've seen, it is smooth, calm and creamy. I'm actually fairly impressed with it -- most zoom lenses tend to have nervous, edgy out of focus areas, but this lens has prime lens quality bokeh, IMO.

Vignetting performance is excellent -- there is essentially none to speak of with a FF sensor. The 24-105, in comparison, has massive vignetting at the wide end.

Highly recommended.






Mar 19, 2009
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add rk-d to your Buddy List  




Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
534 903778 Mar 26, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $1,192.24
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.69
8.38
9.3
ef_24-70_28u_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next