 |
|
|
condrup.eu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 21, 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 38
|
|
Review Date: Nov 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
L series quality, weathersealed, fast AF, great zoom area, build like a tank and it wont let you down!
|
|
Cons:
|
n/a
|
|
An amazing piece of equipment! I had the 17-40mm from Canon on my 1D Mark II N body, but i found myself in need of more in the tele area and not so much wideangle.
So, i decided to sell the 17-40mm and get the 24-70mm instead.. Let me put it this way, i was right about my choice!
This lens is amazing in every way. Yes, it is heavy as many point out, but its not a problem to me, at all.
It's fast, its solid, its weathersealed, its L series quality and the zoom area is great for all-round use.
I use this lens for just about anything, except when i need more zoom i switch to the 70-200. This lens sits on my body for 95% of the time. I mostly shoot portraits, fashion and weddings and its great for all areas. Great studio lens also.
Trust me, if you need a great all-round zoom, this is the right way to get it and you wont regret it!
As for the price, its actually not so bad, considering the value you get in return, so go, go, go 
|
|
 Nov 15, 2007
|
|
Joel Kern
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 14, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: Nov 15, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,140.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Amazing build quality, stellar optics. While I actually use my EF 70-200 f2.8L more (I apparently like that focal range better), this is the lens that is mounted on my camera at the start of every photo shoot.
|
|
Cons:
|
Yes, it's heavy... but it's a tank :)
|
|
I've owned this lens for some time now... recently compared it with a Canon EF 28-70 f2.8L because I was hoping to reduce the appearance of chromatic aberrations in my images without using software all the time. Found that the 24-70 has quite a bit less CA than the 28-70 does, despite some online reviews saying the opposite.
Looks like I'll be using PT Lens from now on.
Sharpness in this lens is incredible... perfectly matched with my Canon EF 70-200 f2.8L (non-IS). Build quality is incredibly good (it's a tank).
First copy I had of this lens started ERR 99-ing on me due to a faulty aperture control motor... which Canon replaced with another faulty aperture control motor (assuming they replaced anything at all the first time).
Second copy has been working great from day one.
|
|
|
Nov 15, 2007
|
|
leewoolery
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 27, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1105
|
|
Review Date: Nov 11, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,220.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp with excellent contrast and color...AF is super quick on 1 Series body. Build-quality is what you expect from L-
series lenses.
|
|
Cons:
|
No-IS or internal zooming.
|
|
|
Excellent lens for individual portraits, groups, sideline shots and close-up action for basketball.
Very sharp at f/2.8 but is razor-sharp stopped down to f/4- 5.6.
|
|
|
Nov 11, 2007
|
|
Mark Green
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 23, 2006
Location: Bahamas
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 8, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, contrast and amazing bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy but whaddya expect!!
|
|
|
My wife constantly tells me how great great her point-and-shoot is versus my XT and XTI with the expensive 24-70 lens. Well we've just been through about 1,500 photos from our latest trip and I've finally realised what this lens is all about. It is brilliant. Nearly all mine are keepers while hers lack quality, sharpeness etc. The 24-70's contrast is incredible and the bokeh beautiful. Granted it's heavy but it's to be expected when you see the results and you realise how much glass there is. So incredibly sharp and the colours are vivid. I wondered about whether I'd made the right decision on this until the last month when I reckon I've worked out how to use it. Buy this lens.
|
|
|
Nov 8, 2007
|
|
Peter Kotsa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 1, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 265
|
|
Review Date: Nov 1, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,980.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp @ f2.8, great colours
|
|
Cons:
|
bit heavy
|
|
|
have had this lens now for two years , its a bread and butter lens, very sharp and versatile. love it.
|
|
|
Nov 1, 2007
|
|
Daan B
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 16, 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 7405
|
|
Review Date: Oct 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
IQ, build, fast and accurate AF, versatility
|
|
Cons:
|
Build, high tolerances in AF, not as sharp as (L) primes
|
|
|
It seems these lenses leave the Canon factory with very high tolerances in the AF system. As far as sharpness / focus goes, I tried several copies that all behaved very differently. Some were even totally soft at all apertures. I'll write this review based upon my findings with this lens AFTER a calibration by Canon Service (both lens and body) and when used on a 5D.
On a 5D the 24-70L gives beautiful images. It produces that famous L 3D look with excellent contrast, colors and bokeh (=super smooth). It is definitely not as sharp as my (L) primes, but the excellent contrast helps creating an illusion of sharpness. Over the entire FL the lens is somewhat soft at f/2.8. At f/4 it is getting noticebly better. At f5.6 it reaches it's sweet spot. Sharpness performance on the wide end of this lens is a little bit better than on the tele end. The images take additional sharpening in PP very well. I didn't see a lot of CA or fringes(in high contrast areas). The lens showed a very good performance here. Flare is also well handled.
The 24-70L is made out of good quality materials. The downside: this makes the lens very bulky and heavy (about 1kg). Also, depending on the situation, the lens can be quite conspicuous. IMO the lens is not so well balanced on a 5D (with grip). I guess on a 1D body this is less of an issue. My sample had a bit of a stiff zoomring from 24mm to 35mm, but after little use the zoomring quickly became smooth. I am not very font of the external reverse zooming mechanism. But this makes it possible for the lenshood to be very effective during the entire FL. So in the end there's a slight trade off in design to get the best possible performance. I can live with that.
The AF is fast and accurate. It becomes slower (but remains accurate) when focusing in very poor light. I have had a few occasions though were the lens / body totally missed focus (used one shot with focus confirmation, static subject in good light). But I haven't noticed this behaviour anymore after the calibration. I like the close focusing possibility. I wouldn't call it macro, but the lens is capable of capturing a lot of fine detail. This adds to the versatility of the lens IMO.
I would recommend this lens as a general workhorse. For shooting landscapes, events, people and detail shots it is a very capable lens. I wouldn't recommend it for travelling because of it's size and weight. I also would like to recommend calibration as a standard routine after buying this lens (which is free of charge when under warranty).
|
|
|
Oct 31, 2007
|
|
sivrajbm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 15, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2772
|
|
Review Date: Oct 31, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,039.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Speed, handling, build, bokem, smooth operation, IQ with a good copy, weight and balance on a !-series
|
|
Cons:
|
Price compared to Tamron 28-75
|
|
|
After several tries I finally have a good copy of this lens. I had soft copies before but this one was as sharp and at some aps sharper (2.8) than my Tamron. I had a very good copy of the Tamron. I shoot weddings and special events and really wanted the focus speed of the Canon. The only fault to the Tamron is it can be a little slow to focus. if you can't get this lense get the Tamron save up your money and decide later. If you go for this one and get a good copy off the bat you'll be a happy camper indeed...Finally, I'm happy
|
|
|
Oct 31, 2007
|
|
Offline
|
|
Review Date: Oct 26, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 26, 2007
|
|
blue_streak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 25, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 35
|
|
Review Date: Oct 21, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Gread IQ, build
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing
|
|
|
With all the bad reviews of this lens out there I was very hesitant to buy it. I took the plunge and my fear of it being bad was somewhat realized. The optics seemed perfect to me, however, there was some type of metal shaving on the inside of the glass.
I sent it back and the dealer sent me another.
The optics were perfect as well. I have used two copies and have found the optics to be stellar. I like this lens and do not care about the reverse zooming, the weight or any other negative thing has been said about it. It performs amazingly, looks good and feels good. I am happy with my purchase and this is a keeper for sure!
|
|
|
Oct 21, 2007
|
|
Ilya Terentyev
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 29, 2007
Location: Russia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Colors, Contrast, Bokeh, Sharp, f/2.8, Build, Weight (Yes, I put weight in pros),
|
|
Cons:
|
No internal zooming.
|
|
|
The first thing I want to say, is that the WEIGHT is NOT a problem. Moreover, it's a good thing for me, because it allows me to take sharp images. If you are used to 300D/350D/400D with kit lens, holding it with 2 fingers, so yes - you will have the problem with weight and blurry images. But for me, owning 70-200/4IS, 5D with battery grip 24-70/2.8 was exactly OK.
I think, you already know about great colors, contrast, bokeh etc, so I won't waste your time. These are just great. The thing you have to pay attention to - is to choose from different samples. I've examined 5 copies of this lens in the shop, and they all were different. All different FFBF performance, all different overall sharpness, all different corner sharpness. But they all were great. If I just got the worse one of the best it will still be very nice. But picking best of the best - that's a good idea. Pay attention to all 4 corners. 3 can be very sharp, but 1 can be blurred. Be careful. FF and BF is not a big deal - just calibrate it in the service, but inconsistent sharpness in the edges is VERY hard (if possible) to correct. So, stay away from such samples. I don't miss IS on 24-70, but it comes very handy on my telephoto lens. Instead others complaining about weight/missing IS I can recommend them to improve their holding abilities/shooting pose.
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2007
|
|
Steve Krupa
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 16, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 39
|
|
Review Date: Oct 16, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,149.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great Color, Crisp Clarity
|
|
Cons:
|
None...
|
|
|
This lens is just flat out perfect.... The color, the clarity that comes out of this is sweet. I'm glad that I have this in my collection, I know that this is going to be my workhorse for most of my pictures. The Price is high, but you do get what you pay for, that's for sure. If I had to do it again, I would!
|
|
|
Oct 16, 2007
|
|
balje064
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 7, 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 7, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
great contrast, color
|
|
Cons:
|
heavy, bit soft at f/2.8
|
|
|
great lens but not as sharp as my Canon EF 17-40 f/4 L USM.
|
|
|
Oct 7, 2007
|
|
FatBoyAl
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 631
|
|
Review Date: Oct 5, 2007
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Design, hood, 2.8, bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS, short focal range
|
|
|
I reviewed this lens in July of this year, having just received it after trading my 24-105. No doubt the brick is a great lens and the debate about it and the 24-105 will rage until either the brick gets IS or the 24-105 becomes a 2.8.
That said, I recently traded my brick for my beloved 24-105. While 2.8 is nice, once you're at that aperture, and have used all the ISO range you can (or want to use), then there's nothing but slower shutter speeds. On the brick, with it's weight, that means blur. Sure, you can shoot at 1600ISO and 2.8 and get some really good shots even in low-light. But with the 24-105, you can take the same situation and move ISO up.
The difference is one stop - 2.8 vs 4.0, but with IS, the 24-105 wins. OK, let's be fair - there are two situations where 2.8 will beat 4.0/IS: portraits and low-light with moving subjects. Portraits benefit from the bokeh, no doubt. I won't argue that. And IS doesn't stop moving subjects, so concert shots are better done with the larger aperture. To tell the truth, of course, 2.8 isn't really enough for low-light anyway. Ask anyone shooting indoor highschool sports.
Then there's the 70mm vs 105mm. There's just too many times for me where that extra 35mm is needed. For a walkaround on my crop, the brick just wasn't long enough. Or short enough, honestly, tho the 24-105 shares that con.
Like my recently reaquired 100-400, I'll never again sell the 24-105.
|
|
|
Oct 5, 2007
|
|
ladki
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 30
|
|
Review Date: Oct 4, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast - SHARP - Awesome Color and Bokeh.... perfect for what I was going to do....
|
|
Cons:
|
none --- not even the weight
|
|
|
I used to have this baby before I got robbed and lost this and my 20D...... When I got my money back -- I bought this lens back but returned it... and got the 24-105L just because it was new had just been released..... biggest mistake of my life....
Now I have my baby back and I am never going to let go of it... :D
|
|
|
Oct 4, 2007
|
|
Chris Bunjamin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 289
|
|
Review Date: Oct 1, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
awesome build quality, sharp lens, good in low light.
|
|
Cons:
|
canadian price!, kindda slow focussing on fast moving objects.
|
|
|
This is my first L-lens and I was surprised on how heavy it was holding it the first time. Great colors, contrast, sharp pics, and nice bokeh! I shot it pretty dark environment without flash and the pics still turn out pretty good. The only thing im concerned about the lens, it focuses pretty slow when I was shooting fast moving objects at the track.
|
|
|
Oct 1, 2007
|
|
corny
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 16, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Sep 25, 2007
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Get a sharp one and there is little to beat it in terms of flexibility, colour and overall performance.
|
|
Cons:
|
Lens hood enourmous and prone to getting knocked.
|
|
|
Now on my third and this one is great on my 5D. Punchy colours, fast focus and 24mm wide angle.
The hood is prone to being knocked and dislidged the end ring on mine (now repaired) so be careful. Try before you buy although 1dmkIII lens calibration may help with the 'copy' issues.
|
|
|
Sep 25, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
531
|
879406
|
Mar 22, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
89% of reviewers
|
$1,193.60
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.70
|
8.39
|
9.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
