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 897947 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:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next
          
cezars
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 1, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 137
Review Date: Jan 29, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,050.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: exceptional optics; not as heavy as I expected; worth the money
Cons:
price, but like I said, it's worth it :)

I'm glad I purchased this lens. I originally had the 18-55 kit lens (which is terrible) and then replaced it with the 28-135. I needed a bit more sharpness, and the 24-70 was my answer Smile

I did a few test shots and at f/8 and 28mm, the 24-70 was about 3 times sharper than the 28-135, which was 2 times sharper than the 18-55.

With the 18-55, I had to reject more than half of my shots because of lack of sharpness. With the 24-70, more than 90% of the shots are perfect.

Highly recommended!

[Note to myself: never buy another kit lens again]


Jan 29, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add cezars to your Buddy List  
uncleblog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 25, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 25, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Extremely versatile, solid, top quality images. It's a keeper! Worth the money, as it covers so many bases. Buy this lens first.
Cons:
None really. The reverse zoom feels weird at first and the hood is a bit unwieldy. Forget discreet shooting. Makes most of your other lenses redundant;) Stretches your pocket.

My regular setup is a 20D, battery grip, 580EX and this lens. Oh, and a tripod. This means you cannot carry it around on the off-chance of getting a candid snapshot; you have to commit to being a person carrying $4k's worth of kit around and hope to become invisible (flash excepted), as photographers should be. Trouble is, this lens spoils you for anything else digital. They say 'kit doesn't matter, it's what's behind the camera', which is true for vision, composition and photojournalism; but however inspired you are, this lens will raise your game big time. And you can always beat off muggers with it.

Jan 25, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add uncleblog to your Buddy List  
imeod
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 35
Review Date: Jan 24, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,129.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: sharp as a tack! f2.8 superfast on Canon's newer digital cameras.
Cons:
Reverse telescoping zoom. (24mm at full extension and 70mm fully retracted)

This is a great overall lens. However, I'm not a big fan of telescoping zoom lenses. The external moving back and forth tends to suck dust and dirt into the lens (even L series lenses). The reverse telescoping zoom makes it even more retardedly odd, but it didn't take long to get use to. I think that this is Canon's best cost-to-performance L series lens.

Jan 24, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add imeod to your Buddy List  
capitalK
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Apr 25, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 1026
Review Date: Jan 23, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,150.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, super fast AF on a 1-series body, MF is silky smooth, built solid, 77mm is almost a standard on a lot of L glass, makes it easy to share filter between lenses
Cons:
Size and weight, length with hood attached or at maximum wide-angle

I love this lens, I bought it about a week before I bought my 1D and was using it on the 350D. It was my first L and the AF and sharpness were faster than my other lenses but with the 1.6x crop it just wasn't wide enough for me.

Once I got my 1D, however, everything changed. The AF is lightning fast and with the 1.3x crop it seems much wider. I have a sharp copy, I have not been disappointed with it at any aperture and the colours are great. Instantly I understood why people spend the money on a pro body and L glass, the difference is night and day. I don't know if it'll make me a better photographer, but it certainly makes me a happy photographer.

One sneaky side benefit of this lens is that because it's so long it looks like a telephoto lens. That way when you are trying to shoot candids the people on the edges of the frame tend to assume they are not in the shot and you're able to capture them in a more natural stance.


Jan 23, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add capitalK to your Buddy List  
harryset
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 23, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 325
Review Date: Jan 22, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,149.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: SHARP, fast, good color rendition, nice hefty weight to it.
Cons:
None.

Replaced my Sigma 24-70 2.8 with the purchase of my 5D. With the full-frame of the 5D, the 24-70 2.8L acts like the lenses I was used to with my film cameras. This lens is tack sharp at every setting I have tried, so far. I can once again take reasonable shots in a small room without needing a super wide lens.

Jan 22, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add harryset to your Buddy List  
glazier
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 27, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 769
Review Date: Jan 21, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,100.00

 
Pros: None
Cons:
Image quality was quite poor. Over rated lens Heavy Costly

Very over rated lens.
Many photgraphers go thru several copies to get a good one.
If you really want this lens, I suggest buying it locally so you can exchange it until you get a good one.


Jan 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add glazier to your Buddy List  
voodoo72
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 17, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 126
Review Date: Jan 19, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,299.00 | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Wide angle, versitility, good build quality
Cons:
Expensive, not so sharp

Had the 85 1.8 and the 135 2L. Needed to cover the wider side and went looking for a zoom to handle it. The focal length fell into my setup perfectly. The 10-22mm was good and sharp, but i want to step up to full frame some day and don't want to toss half my lenses. This zoom has good picture quality, though on the soft side. Color rendition is not as good or as vivid as my 135 2L. Does the versitile focal length make up for inferior (to primes) picture quality? I already have a bag stuffed with good primes, so I really don't want to fit two more in there to cover 24-70mm. Besides, I don't do a whole lot of shooting in that range anyway. So for me the versitility wins out. Overall it is a good lense and worthy of the "L" lable. A definite step up from any other non "L" zoom in the range.

Jan 19, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add voodoo72 to your Buddy List  
tanglefoot47
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Oct 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 14816
Review Date: Jan 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,025.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, fast usm, 2.8, color, contrast
Cons:
None so far

I sold my 24-105 for this lens and I have no regrets what so ever. Some say it's big and heavy but I don't. I would recommend this lens

Jan 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add tanglefoot47 to your Buddy List  
incdigital
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 226
Review Date: Jan 11, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $999.99 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Build, Quick USM, Weather Sealed, Sharp @ 2.8, tack sharp @ F4, Smooth MF
Cons:
Heavy, Price, CA wide open

I've owned at one point almost all the fast standard zooms(F2.8 24-75mm range)...this lens is by far my favorite of them. MF is a breeze. AF is very fast compared to sigmas. Build is better than my old 28-70L. I get consistant sharp results from the lens...hasn't let me down unless its user error. Highly recommended!

Jan 11, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add incdigital to your Buddy List  
sino408
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 30, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 903
Review Date: Jan 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,124.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, robust, weather-sealing, very-fast focusing when used in good light, can be used as a blunt object for self-defense when you're in danger.
Cons:
Heavy, pricy

My copy of 24-70 is "significantly" sharper than my copy of tamron 28-75 that everyone raves about. The center sharpness of the canon at it's widest aperture rivals the center sharpness of the tamron 28-75 at F4. The difference fades once stopped down to about F8, but they are never the same sharpness, and the tamron never surpasses the canon.

The color rendition on the canon is very accurate and well-saturated. The contrast is also preferred over the tamron. I can venture to say that the two lenses are more different than they are similar, and the overall quality is better on the canon.

The lens is heavy, but VERY robust. I often wonder how tamron is able to build a very "similar" lens using much lighter material. I understand that the canon is made of metal (mount and barrel) while the tamron is made of plastic (barrel) and metel (mount), but I never imagined the difference to be THAT great. The canon zoom and focus rings are very smooth but well-dampened, while the tamron zoom ring is loose (but not cheap-feeling), and its focus ring is average in "feel" quality.

I would highly recommend the canon to anyone who is capable of spending the money; anyone who is looking for a bargain should consider the tamron, sigma, or tokina offerings.


Jan 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sino408 to your Buddy List  
David Lozoya
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 9, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 27
Review Date: Dec 31, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,149.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Build quality was superb, image quality (edge to edge) was very good.
Cons:
Not good at the corners on FF (5D)

The build of this beast is stellar, mechanics are second to none. I know there are some duds out there and I don't think mine is one of those. If a lens exhibits excellent contrast, bokeh, no front/back focusing issues, center/edge/corner sharpness...then keep it! Any lens that can achieve all of the above criteria is stellar in my book and hard to find. This lens met all but the corner criteria.

I see that a lot of folks highly rate this lens...some of these reviews are with 1.3 or 1.6 cameras...essentially masking the corner issue. Please go back and look very carefully at your 24-70 using a full frame camera and look at the corners. There you might see (I hope not) what I saw - fuzziness. After all its a zoom lens, a very good one I might add but one that does appear to have a flaw.

I compared the 24-70 to a Contax Zeiss 28mm 2.8. The 24-70 did very well in other regions of the frame and was close to the Zeiss in overall resolution (the Zeiss is slightly better) but the Zeiss ate it for lunch at the corners. Yes, I know that the Zeiss is a fixed focal length and 3 to 4 times cheaper. Even even without the comparison, the 24-70 is below average at the corners....unacceptable in my book. In another comparison to my 17-40 (a very good copy) the 24-70 was better in all categories...but my 17-40 also exhibited the same below average corners.

Again, a marvelous lens for 1.3 and 1.6 crop cameras. If I had one of those bodies I would not hesitate using it.


Dec 31, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add David Lozoya to your Buddy List  
Michael-M
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Apr 21, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 2698
Review Date: Dec 24, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: absolutely PERFECT! zoom ring is way smooth. flawless AF on the 20D.
Cons:
none

i've rated this lens in the past, gave it a 10 then, but would gladly give a 20 now. my first copy was what i consider sharp, but not wide open.
this copy i have recently purchased tells me that Canon must have tightened up on their QC for this lens. i can shoot any zoom setting at f/2.8 and get almost as sharp of a landscape scene as i can at f/8-13.
really nice to see what all the rave is about from some of the fellow members.
the bokeh is just plain awesome for such a zoom.......buttery sweet!


Dec 24, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Michael-M to your Buddy List  
W.Genger
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 10, 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 61
Review Date: Dec 24, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Build quality, image quality, low CA, good balance with 5D and BG-E4
Cons:
None I could think of.

I got the lens a view days ago. The decision to go for this one was not easy. I have been thinking a lot of getting either the 24-105 IS or the 24-70 2.8. Finally I'm absolutely pleased with the decision to go for the 24-70. This lens is a bit more bulky of course but the 2.8 makes the IS unnecccesary and the image quality is superb.

I highly recommend this lens to everybody who expects a maximum of image quality.


Dec 24, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add W.Genger to your Buddy List  
drzs
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 23, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Pure Quality of build and pictures
Cons:
Weight is a factor. Make sure you are okay with this

You can read all the reviews you want but they seldom really convey what something is like. I now own this lens for half a year and it has been in three different continents and I have taken a few thousand shots.

I had been looking for a long time at this lens before I got it. The reviews said it was good but heavy. Decided to check it out myself and went to the local dealer and asked to see one. In the store I realized that it is one quality piece of equipment and that indeed it is heavy. Paid for it and took the lens home.

Only when you actually start using it you understand what you have been missing. It is fast, silent and the results are stunning. Ofcourse the picture are still only as good as the photographer, which in my case is limited to amateur skills. So I still get a fair helping of OOF shots, blown highlights etc etc. But I never feel that the lens is to blame. It is just that the number of keepers is much higher for this one than my other lenses.

You can forget about discrete pictures and lugging the thing arund all day is a pain but still as a tool it feels right. My personal opinion is that optical physics are important in designing a lens but as a user I could not care less about what the MTF chart says if the results please me.

Today the choice seems to be between the f4 24-105 IS and the 24-70 f2.8. I have never owned the f4 and given the choice between the two lenses I would again take the 24-70 for the bokeh, color, contrast, sharpness and speed.

Now go buy one!


Dec 23, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add drzs to your Buddy List  
stelin
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 22, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4
Review Date: Dec 22, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp and fast, both in terms of aperture and speed of focus
Cons:
a little on the heavy and bulky side for a "walkabout" lens

Sharp, fast.
I have had superb results from this lens even wide open (where I use it quite a lot when I haven't a tripod and flash isn't an option).
My "standard" lens which I wouldn't swap.


Dec 22, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add stelin to your Buddy List  

Offline
Review Date: Dec 21, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp (for a zoom), well-build, best standart zoom for Canon mount.
Cons:
You have to choose carefully among 3-4 lenses to find a sharp one.

As I already told, I've tested 4 lenses when bying. 2 of them were not sharp at 2,8. Other one seemed to sound a little while focusing. Last one was completly fine.

Dec 21, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add  to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
534 897947 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:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next