about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
44 75077 Nov 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $2,081.46
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.72
8.34
9.9
Screen_Shot_2013-11-16_at_5_30_13_PM

Specifications:
Name: Canon EF 24-70mm /2.8L II USM
Image Circle: 35mm
Type: Standard Zoom
Focal Length: 24 - 70mm
APS Equivalent: 38 - 112mm
Max Aperture: /2.8
Min Aperture: /22
Diaphragm Blades: 9 (rounded)
Lens Construction: 18 elements in 13 groups, including 1 Super UD and 2 UD elements
Diagonal Angle of View
(Based on image circle): 84 to 34 degrees
Focus Details: Inner focusing; full-time manual focus and USM
Front Element Rotation: No
Zoom System: Rotating, with zoom lock lever
Closest Focus: 0.38m / 1.25 ft.
Magnification Ratio: 0.21x / 1:4.76 (at 70mm)
Filter Size: 82mm
Dimensions
(Length x Diameter): 113mm x 88.5mm / 4.4 in. x 3.5 in.
Weight: 805g / 28.4 oz
Notes: Weather sealing protects against dust and moisture, while a fluorine-coated front and rear elements are easy to clean.
Online Price: US$2,300



 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next
      
aestiva
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 17, 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 12, 2014 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: Sharp, bokeh, Amazing AF
Cons:
Lenshood is terrible

The build quality of this lens is outstanding!

Only poor thing is the lenshood, it's ugly and fells of every time. This lens is sharper than mij 35 1.4L, 35 Art, 50 1.2 and even mij 85 1.2L II and 70-200 2.8L II! Only my macro 2.8L II can beat this one!
So the sharpness it better than primes!

The 35 art is my favourite lens and I only use this one on 24mm. Most pictures of my latest wedding on my page http://facebook.com/totaalfotografie are made with this lens.


Nov 12, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add aestiva to your Buddy List  
nick williams
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 11, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 284
Review Date: Oct 14, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp-Sharp-Sharp-Sharp
Cons:
I preferred the hood on the mark one

I owned the MK1 for many years shooting 50 weddings a year with it. This new lens takes it to a new level. It's so sharp right across the range. I was thinking of getting the sigma 35 F1.4 art before buying this and I'm so glad I did not. For weddings this is as good as it gets. The only down side is the lens hood is very shallow, i preferred the one on the Mk1. I own the 1DX and with this lens its like i have bought a new camera. LOVE IT

Oct 14, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add nick williams to your Buddy List  
petr vokurek
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 16, 2007
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 5
Review Date: Sep 14, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness, contrast, reliable autofocus
Cons:
none..maybe I liked the design of the hood on Mark I better...

Unlike the reviewer bellow me I do weddings every week and also lots of other stuff and this lens has changed the way
I shoot. I would agree that the price is rather high but if
I remeber correctly Mark I was the same price when it first came out. The Tamron is certainly a better value and the only option so far for videographers but the Canon is simply the better lens optically so I dont see the point of rating it 1...Anyway, back to the lens. If you are a proffessional and do any kind of shooting where this range is needed just dont look left or right and buy it. When I first tried it I was amazed at what I was seeing at the back of the camera- you can very clearly see the difference on the display (at least on 5d III, on 5dc you see nothing:-)) It has excellent levels of contrast and is edge to edge sharp at all appertures. These things are kind of well known by now but... what may not be so well known is how good it performs when shooting on white background! I do quite a lot of product shots on white background and this is extremely demanding on the lenses I use. The contrast of the subjet is greatly affected by the quality of the lens used. Until now the best lens in my arsenal for this was my antient Sigma 105 Macro. None of my other lenses could compare until now- the 24-70 II is way better. When I was shooting my first job after I got it I tried it just out of curiosity and it beat the Sigma like nothing. The white overlit background seems to do nothing to diminish the contrast of this lens. Only trouble now is I cant go back to the Sigma which can be a problem because the Canon is only 70mm at the long end and I can run out of background more easily. I have tried all my other lenses- 70-200 f 2,8 IS II-useless - great loss of contrast, 1,8/85mm- useless and the shorter lenses are useless for this because of perspective. Word of advice here- always take your UV filter off the lens when shooting in the studio on white background- it affects contract no matter how good it is. When I shoot weddings I hardly ever take this lens off the camera now. The range is perfect and I know I can always rely on the quality and also on the autofocus! The problem with Mark I (which is still a very good lens in good light) is it has very unreliable autofocus in poor light. In poorly lit receptions I could barely take a shot that was properly focused. I use a 5d III which is a great improvement in the autofocus department over the previous models but still that was a problem. Not any more. The new 24-70 has changed it and I can now use it all day long. Also, when you take a group shot of 200 people...you really need an excellent lens to be able to see all the faces properly. No problem with the new 24-70. It just makes me realize how weak in comparison my 2,8/16-35 II is...will have to upgrade to the new f4 version. To conclude, a very highly recomended lens that is worth the high price. Mark I is very good but not as good as the primes. Mark II is every bit as good as the primes and in many cases better. I tried it against my 2,8/28mm IS and the zoom is just as sharp and has much less vigneting. I now use primes solely for subject isolation at large appertures. For overall quality, the new 24-70 is the king. For some distortion can be a factor but not for me. Anyway, distortion is easy to fix in post. But I can see the reason why someone would use tilt-shift primes for achtitecture or serious lanscape work. For weddings, however, this lens is as close to perfect as it gets.


Sep 14, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add petr vokurek to your Buddy List  
Soulphoto2014
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 3, 2014
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 3, 2014 Recommend? no | Price paid: $2,000.00

Pros: Sharpest f2.8 CANON zoom
Cons:
Ridiculous price!

Ridiculous priced and even no IS. It's not the invention of the century of Canon to ask so much money for a standard f2.8 zoomlens.

It's not that I can't pay it (I have the expensive 70-200 2.8L II etc but this one is sharp wide open and worth the money).

If you really want an affordable f2.8 standardzoom, just buy the Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, I had it in past, it's really the best option, way better than the 24-70 2.8L mark I and very close to the 24-70 II at only half the price, now that's fair marketing by Tamron!

I'm more of a prime-guy so I sold the Tamron for the Sigma 35 1.4 Art. One step back and you have 24mm, 2 forward and 70mm. Think that the 24-70 isn't such a big zoomrange.

I like the advantage to be able to go to f1.4, great bokeh, the 35 1.4 is ideal for models with background, it's my walkaround lens and great in lowlight. F2.8 isn't so fast after all if you are used to primes.

I can imagine wedding photographers use the 24-70 II for comfort and the red ring, but my preference go to the creative Sigma f1.4 Art primes for modelshoots as I don't do weddings.

Even if I would do weddings I would opt for the half priced Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC, the VC is interesting for inside shots without flash.


Sep 3, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Soulphoto2014 to your Buddy List  
grueber34
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 10, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 11
Review Date: Jul 24, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Beautiful
Cons:
Kinda large-ish

The results are simply gorgeous. The lens is a bit large and lacks IS, but, hey, who cares?

Jul 24, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add grueber34 to your Buddy List  
mhoyt01
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 16, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 5
Review Date: Jul 13, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Perfect close range zoom
Cons:
None

I owned the 24-70 mark I for many years and it was my least favorite lens. It worked and I know so many love it, but my results were bland. Never exciting to my eye despite the focal length being ideal. I was much happier with my 35/85/135/16-35. I thought about it a lot and finally took the plunge on the 24-70 II. Everyone spoke so highly of it. It's my favorite lens. I barely even use the others. It's gold. The pictures have that feeling that you can't quite describe. I just use this and the 70-200 II now. I have a closet full of unused primes. Just buy it.

Jul 13, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mhoyt01 to your Buddy List  
John57
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 53
Review Date: Jun 21, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,350.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness stunning, weight, balance, size, contrast.
Cons:
Close focus distance. Build not as solid as Mk 1. Cost.

I have had a Mk1 version of this lens for over 10 years and it was used regularly at weddings but not elsewhere due to it's weight.
The Mk 2 version is now on the camera (5D III) all of the time and my 24-105L has been sold as it will not get used.
The Mk2 is far better balanced compared to the Mk 1 - it is not just that it weighs less, the balance is great.
The sharpness is simply stunning and you could not ask for more. Colour / contrast from the lens are a notch up on the Mk1 as well - and that was a great lens.
I am not in love with the cost - 1350 was a lot and that is less than many sellers in the UK offer it for.
I love the lens but notice at close focus it is not as good as the Mk 1 - it won't focus as close and at f2.8 is not as sharp. In all other ways though this lens is far superior.
The lens hood comes off easily and is much smaller than the Mk1. Canon copies of the lens hood are silly money but cheap copies can be had on ebay that are just as effective for only 10.
I had one copy of the Mk2 that was faulty .... so maybe build quality is variable but the 2nd copy was fine. FWIW the first one would not focus sharply at f5.6 let alone f2.8 !
I went away with the other half and we fought over use if this lens ... neither of us wanted the 24-105 we had taken as well !!
My tiny (and they are really) reservations apart ... Buy it, you won't regret it ! Possibly the best lens short of our 70-200 f2.8 IS we have bought over the last 15 years.


Jun 21, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add John57 to your Buddy List  
drzhao
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 17, 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 41
Review Date: Jun 12, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,999.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, awesome color, lightweight, solidly built.
Cons:
None

Image quality and color wise, this lens produces images as best as the digital slr format can take. Just as a comparison between the common 50mm 1.8, it's about the same in sharpness at f/4 (maybe a tad sharper) but much better in color. When I shoot digital (or 35mm), it's on my camera 90% of the time. Some people say that because it is plastic, the build quality is not as good as the mark i. But it's much lighter than the mark i, and I think it's definitely very solidly built. Didn't find the lack of IS a huge deal breaker, as I usually carry a tripod or monopod.

Jun 12, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add drzhao to your Buddy List  
tkchen
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jun 30, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 157
Review Date: Apr 13, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,599.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very nice photo quality
Cons:
None

I just came back from a trip to San Francisco and I only carry this lens with 5D classic. The lens delivery absolute very good quality pictures from landscape to portrait. I am so glad that I have bought it and take it with me. If you ever think about this lens, just buy it. You will not regret.

Apr 13, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add tkchen to your Buddy List  
Tom_W
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5428
Review Date: Jan 24, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,699.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp, corner to corner even at the wide end. Well built, smooth operation.
Cons:
A little pricey, but quality costs.

I had previously owned the 24-70 f/2.8 L and have shot many a picture with it over the years. It was a very good lens, but I found that after acquiring a very good copy of the 24-105 f/4 IS with my 5D3, I stopped using the old 24-70 so I sold it.

When I was able to purchase this lens at 1699 (including $300 rebate), I decided to give it a try. The reviews I had read were all very good, with none of the "good copy/bad copy" talk that had surrounded the previous version.

I was not disappointed. Gone was the CA in the corners at 24 mm, and the lens seems to be almost prime-like in sharpness and contrast across the zoom range. I didn't have to take many test photos to prove its ability to myself - I just mounted it on the 5D3 and it's stayed there most of the time.


Jan 24, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Tom_W to your Buddy List  
jrobichaud
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Feb 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 386
Review Date: Jan 1, 2014 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Absolutely the finest optics that I have ever used, including primes!
Cons:
82mm filter size, I guess no IS

At $2K this lens is a bargain! with high res full frame cameras like the 5D III, every flaw of a lens is magnified. Like many others, I have experimented with Zeiss, Nikon and Canon primes to achieve the best results possible. I often need to make images of large groups of people (over 200). Detail and lack of distortion is everything. I was blown away with the IQ and detail of this lens when it first arrived, and every time I use it, I'm blown away again! No more primes in this range!

The improvement that Canon made on the 70-200mm IS with the mkII (which were substantial) pale when compared to the improvement they made with this 24-70mm. It is spectacular in all regards. Now, is there any chance that Canon can do something about the 16-35mm mk II? It's miserable by comparison, unusable on the edges wider than 20mm.


Jan 1, 2014
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jrobichaud to your Buddy List  
Svenning
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 31, 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 40
Review Date: Aug 20, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Weight of lens balances very well with the Canon 5D Mk2. Sharpness and contrast of the Pictures are absolut excellent. Handles flare very well - you can shoot strait into strong light sources without major problems. Auto focus is fast and hits the focus-point right on.
Cons:
Weight of camera and lens make your log around with 1.855 grams which can be tiredsome on longer walks. The Price is high for a 24-70mm lens without any image stabilization.

Used my 24-70mm L version II on a trip to the Azor Islands this summer 2013. Perfect performance and I am very satisfied with the lens.

Aug 20, 2013
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Svenning to your Buddy List  
hagejsh
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 23, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Aug 1, 2013 Recommend? | Price paid: $2,299.00

Pros: Very sharp at all settings, even 2.8 wide open. The low light attributes of ISO up to 5000 are undeniable. Much lighter that the previous version--more importantly much sharper. Excellent Brokeh.
Cons:
I was afraid of the plastic components of this body, but after one year of significant abuse this has not been a problem.

Since my original review in October, 2012 I have had 10 months to work with this lens. I reiterate my original feeling. This lens more than adequately replaces the previous workhorse --the version 1. Lighter weight. Better Brokeh. Much sharper images. It has essentially replaced all of my primes in the 24-70 range. (I still like the 35 mm EF-L prime.) It has been through some significant abuse on several high altitude hikes. Stunning images make me again give this piece of glass a 10 rating.

Aug 1, 2013
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add hagejsh to your Buddy List  
slee915
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 368
Review Date: Jun 26, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,200.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Super sharp, fast AF, great for events & kids candids, weight reduction from v1
Cons:
price, no IS, lock button useless

This is the best and most useful zoom I owned. Prime quality contrast, color and sharpness.

I use this lens for multiple assignments for my kids school events. It nails focus quickly and produces awesome pictures for all events. Super sharp, high micro-contrast and awesome color.

I wish the lock button can be used at all zoom length so I can lock the lens at 1 focal length but it only works at 24mm.

At this price, it should have IS. But the weight reduction from v1 makes it much easier to carry.


Jun 26, 2013
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add slee915 to your Buddy List  
kunaal27
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 24, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 24, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Amazing Optics, Fast AF, Excellent Build, Extremely Sharp
Cons:
Price, No IS

Amazing piece of optics, it's extremely sharp, prime quality @ 2.8, bokeh is flattering, massive improvement over its predecessor very well recommended to enthusiast and wedding photographers.

Jun 24, 2013
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add kunaal27 to your Buddy List  
haringo
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 7, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 12
Review Date: Jun 7, 2013 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,099.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: sharpness all over the frame, better contrast at the wider end, $200 rebate :)
Cons:
There will be a mark III in 5 years and have to sell this

I broke down and bought it last week. There is a $200 rebate offered by Canon currently. So hurry...! Smile
better contrast and finally sharp all over the frame at 2.8!!! I love it. I can be more creative.

I was debating whether it is worth upgrading from the original version of this lens but I think it was worth it. I am a wedding photographer and a this zoom is our bread winner. It covers the focal length which we mainly use during weddings. Thus I was extremely excited when I found about this new lens. I have been hesitant to jump because the older lens is pretty awesome.
This lens is clearly better. Please note that most of your client's won't notice the difference but you and your professional photographer friends will!

I can repeat all what the reviews say but I think the bottom line is: the photo will look better! You will see samples here in the most recent posts: www.haringphotography.com


Jun 7, 2013
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add haringo to your Buddy List  




Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
44 75077 Nov 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
89% of reviewers $2,081.46
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.72
8.34
9.9
Screen_Shot_2013-11-16_at_5_30_13_PM

supersize


Page:  1 · 2 · 3  next