 |
Page: 1 · 2 · 3
|
|
|
|
Breitling65
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: May 31, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 4994
|
|
Review Date: Jun 2, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, well build as any L, weathersealed, relatively small. Great L colors & contrast, fast AF. Focus on spot on both 5D mk II & 1D mk III since first shot, no microadjustments requared.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, heavier and slightly bigger than even 35L, hood seem big.
|
|
I own previous version of 24L lens and that was one of the best L primes I ever own and I own lots of L ...  Regardless to some bad reviews my copy was amazing. However I sold it (don't know why ) to get latest and greatest mk II model I waited about 8 month since I sold original 24L to get this lens and no disappointments at all! It is very sharp at any aperture, build as tank, weather sealed!
However please note: Lens become heavier and bigger than mk I, it is even bigger/heavier than 35L now. Huge hood, dono why Canon can't reuse one from 35L????
I am planning to take this lens to my next Italy trip and I hope to bring some good excellent back )
|
|
 Jun 2, 2009
|
|
John Daniel
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 6, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1265
|
|
Review Date: May 22, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, sharpness, 3D effect, great lens for landscape as well (what I am using it for)
|
|
Cons:
|
Pricey a bit
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 22, 2009
|
|
rolfy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 11, 2005
Location: Portugal
Posts: 4
|
|
Review Date: Apr 22, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
My copy is very, very sharp even wide open. Great improvement.wonderful lens!
|
|
Cons:
|
None for the moment unless vigetting wide open.
|
|
|
Sharper than my canon 24/70 2.8 at 24mm.
No distortion.
No CA
Nice colors
Good contrast
|
|
|
Apr 22, 2009
|
|
djcz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 19, 2009
Location: China
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 19, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,699.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great wide angle lens, lots improvement than version I
|
|
Cons:
|
Still not sharp enough at wide open
|
|
|
Sharpness: Wide open center slight better than the 35L and 50L, 85L or 14L II is touch better. wide open corner is acceptable, better than 24L I, stop down provide excellent sharpness
Color/Contrast: Wonderful, equal to 85L
CA: Excellent, better than 35L, similar to 85L
Vignetting: has some, better than version I, gone under f2.8
Distortion: Nothing there
Bokeh: Perfect for such a wide angle lens
|
|
|
Apr 19, 2009
|
|
Maggot
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 81
|
|
Review Date: Apr 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,699.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp wide open. Small and light. Color and contrast you expect from an L lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
none that I can find yet.
|
|
|
I just bought this lens less than 24 hours ago and have only started to test it, but from some very informal shots at f/1.4, I can say this lens is very sharp wide open. It appears to be just as sharp wide open as my 35L f/1.4. I'll have to do some serious comparisions between the two, but so far I'm impressed. On my 5D2, there's a very small amount of front focus, which will be no problem to dial in, but zoomed in all the way on the LCD, the focus point is quite sharp. Definetely a keeper. AF seems accurate and responsive as well.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2009
|
|
jhapeman
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1982
|
|
Review Date: Feb 26, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,650.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
F/1.4--need I say anything else? Very sharp (even wide open), virtually no CA, great contrast, fast AF.
|
|
Cons:
|
A little heavy and bulky, but its the price you pay for fast wide glass and professional-grade construction.
|
|
|
I wasn't sure how much of an improvement the Mark II would be over the original Mark I version of this lens, but as someone who does a lot of low-light and night photography, I wanted it to be sharper and have less than chromatic aberration. It does not disappoint. The center of the frame is much sharper below f/2.8 than the Mark I version (after f/2.8, they are very similar) and is particularly improved at f/1.4. It is sharper farther out to the corners at all apertures relative to the Mark I version. The Mark II has virtually no chromatic aberration, which is a substantial improvement over the Mark I lens. It has excellent contrast, even wide open, giving the images more "pop" than the Mark I version. A very worthy upgrade.
|
|
|
Feb 26, 2009
|
|
nickstills
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 3, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jan 20, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent colour, high contrast, sharp wide open, superb build quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
large and heavy with a huge lens hood that I will not be using.
|
|
|
I find that this is a noticeably better lens than my two year old Canon 24mm f2.8 lens.
For a start the build quality is superb and the optical performance is so much better that I can see the difference between the two lenses straight away on the screen of the camera (1DsMk3).
At the aperture of f2.8 it is sharper, has higher contrast and is much brighter around the edges than my old 24mm f2.8. Even at f4.5 I can see a difference between the two lenses. I have not tested the lens above f4.5.
At the maximum aperture of f1.4 the performance is very good indeed-though not quite as sharp as at f2.8 (which is as expected). The edges at f1.4 are pretty good too if a little darker (also to be expected) but this does not bother me and I am certainly going to work happily at full aperture with this lens.
After taking and looking at only a few frames I can see already that this is a great lens; one that I will be able to rely on at work to do it's best (so now I only have me to blame). And considering it's high optical quality and superb build compared to say a Leica or a Hasselblad lens, I think it is a bargain.
|
|
|
Jan 20, 2009
|
|
realmunseen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 127
|
|
Review Date: Jan 3, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,699.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
F1.4, water-resistant lens, CA well controlled, flare well controlled, solid build, holds sharp detail when wide open (F1.4) to the edges better than the first version, has modern electronics allowing easier and more precise AF calibration than the first version, and anti-reflective SWC (Sub Wavelength Coating) on the outer lens element
|
|
Cons:
|
none really... bigger and heavier (think 35L size) than the first version
|
|
|
This is my first choice for low-light atmospheric scenes. The 24L can be handheld down to 1/8-1/30 sec (depending how stable you are), which in combo with today's high ISO ceilings, can be used as a powerful photographic weapon to master dark environments without flash. I find the 24L can be used handheld in darker places than any other Canon lens made. A must have lens and glued to one of my 1DsIII's on every wedding I shoot.
Canon transformed the weaknesses of the original 24L into the strengths of the 35L in this second edition. Ironically, the 24L II even looks like a 35L as well as performs like one.
Also note that the minimum focusing distance is unchanged from the first version at 0.25 m or 0.82 feet (9.8 inches), and not the distance listed in the specs above, which is the filter size.
|
|
|
Jan 3, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
40
|
156839
|
Apr 27, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
90% of reviewers
|
$1,607.00
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.83
|
8.27
|
9.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
