 |
|
|
btjohnston
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 20, 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 1082
|
|
Review Date: Apr 23, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, contrast, colour
|
|
Cons:
|
weight
|
|
|
I also was hesitant about purchasing this lens after reading the problems with autofocus etc in other reviews here. However, I had no issues with the 17-40L f4 and the 70-200LIS f2.8 so I thought I'd give it a go. My only lens in the midrange was the 50 f1.8 MkII. Well, I must say that I'm not having any issues at all. Every image taken is tack sharp (but then I'm a landscaper so most of the time I'm using manual focus). On a recent trip to tasmania this lens was on the 10D for 90% of the time. The only time is wasn't was when it was being transferred to my EOS 300 for film. I love it, and don't regret buying it for a second. My 50mm has been rarely used since getting this beauty.
|
|
 Apr 23, 2005
|
|
canonjoe145
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 152
|
|
Review Date: Apr 16, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,500.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Once you know the ins and outs, it's a great lens to own.
|
|
Cons:
|
Takes some getting use to.
|
|
|
I purchased this lens because I wanted an all-around-lens in the L class. I read many reviews of it, and decided to go with it being my first good lens. At first I was disapointed, I wasn't getting the clear pictures everyone else was claiming to get, but after recieving some great tips and advice from users on the forum here at fredmiranda I have definetly improved, and I'm getting use to the lens.
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2005
|
|
fishrule
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 13, 2004
Location: Jamaica
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 16, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Contrasty, handles flare well for a zoom
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight, stiff zoom ring needs time to be worked in, you will never want to see any other lens again, expensive
|
|
|
This lens is simply amazing. I cannot say it has one fault. It is built like a tank and is sharp as hell. It blows away my 50mm F1.8 MkII and 24-85 F3.5-4.5 USM in all areas. Forget building a prime lens collection, this is the only lens you will ever need in this range. Get this and a 70-200 F2.8 IS or 100-400 IS and you will be in photographic heaven.
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2005
|
|
Chrispy29
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 85
|
|
Review Date: Apr 15, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,299.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Crystal clear, amazing detail
|
|
Cons:
|
heavy
|
|
|
I was worried after reading all these reviews of focusing problems, etc. but figured I'd take a chance since I already had the Tamron 28-75 which was decent. Well, after one day with the 24-70L I noticed things I have never noticed and I am thrilled with my copy. There are no focus problems and the amazing thing about this lens which is hard to describe is the rich deep contrasty colors that just are so much more than the Tamron's or any other lens I've ever had. It beats my 50 1.8, my 85 1.8, and even my 70-200 2.8L hands down. It also is sharper and has better color than my Tamron but I'll probably keep the Tamron when I don't want to lug the beast around. I can tell that I will be taking many more exciting pictures and I don't regret spending what I spent because I have never had a lens that had the colors and resolving power of this lens. I've had this lens for 2 weeks now and it rarely leaves my 20D. Thanks for all the good posts by everyone.
|
|
|
Apr 15, 2005
|
|
cdesperado
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 6, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10
|
|
Review Date: Apr 13, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,200.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Ummm.... it worked in half the range it was supposed to?
|
|
Cons:
|
At 24mm, F2.8-F4.5 were _horrifically_ soft.
|
|
|
I just finished testing my copy of this lens (it arrived this afternoon). The results were shocking and disheartening. I really wanted to like this lens, I really did, but the truth is what it is, and this copy is a dog.
F2.8 through F4.5 were horrifically soft from 24mm up to about 42mm.
Since this is marketed as a 24mm F2.8, I would expect it to be crystal sharp in that range. The facts are that the 24mm had an extremely noticeable blur up to F5.6, where there was a sudden and dramatic improvement. (The lens remained impressively sharp at 24mm and F5.6 on up - but this softness is NOT acceptable for a $1200 lens! A basic 28-90 was actually sharper than this lens was.)
I am returning this 24-70 lens and will request a second one, which I will test as well.
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2005
|
|
rossmehan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 9, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 9, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,400.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focus, very smooth zoom, good image quality, contrast and color at 50-70mm
|
|
Cons:
|
Softness at wide angles, heavy, bulky, Weird lenshade
|
|
|
I feel I'm the only one who's had a problem with this lens, but it has consistanly dissapointed me at wide angles. I bought it after all the glowing reviews I'd read about it, shot many events and weddings with it but started noticing the wide angle problem. I sent the lens to Canon to have it inspected, but it's come back in basically the same condition. Here's part of the letter I sent--
"This 24-70 mm f2.8 L lens is not sharp. It’s acceptable from about 50-70mm, but it becomes very soft at wide angles. It’s not an autofocus problem--I get the same results when I manually focus the lens. My $400 Canon IS 28-135 f.3.5 IS has better sharpness, wide and telephoto than this $1,400 lens."
I'm not one of those nitpickers that have nothing better to do all day than shoot lens test charts--this lens, for me, is just not sharp at wide angles in day to day shooting. The lens is a "L" lens and DOES have excellent color and contrast. It's just for the price I feel it should be "insanely great" at all focal lenghts--it isn't.
|
|
|
Apr 9, 2005
|
|
ignay
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: Japan
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 9, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Top built, ultra fast and accurate AF, great balance on a 1 series body, good color rendition.
|
|
Cons:
|
It took my 6 tries to get a good copy. Massive hood.
|
|
|
I am rating this based on the copy I currently have, not the 5 other copies I tried. First, the QC is awful. 1st copy was really blurry at 2.8. Then 2nd-5th copy had issues with the internal lens: Dust, scratch mark and mould. Well mould could be because of bad handling after it left the Canon factory. But dust and scratch most likely from Canon factory. But once you get a good one....
It rocks! Perfect zoom lens, so to speak. No, it's not that heavy despite it says it is 950g. Put on a 1 series body and enjoy. Perfect handling.
It is too expensive though. I've also tried Tamron 28-75 and that's a great lens itself. The pic quality is not too far off but the Canon feel is hands down superior.
Be patient, and find a good copy out there.
|
|
|
Apr 9, 2005
|
|
gerrit p
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 10, 2003
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Apr 4, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp from f4, weathersealing, fast AF.
Good alround lens for 1Ds
|
|
Cons:
|
weight, vignettes wide open.
|
|
|
This one I use when the weather and circumstances are bad for changing lenses. Still I prefer primes when I can.
All in all I'm very satified with this lens. Can stand rain, dust and bad environments like building sites.
|
|
|
Apr 4, 2005
|
|
Jakob D.
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 30, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 59
|
|
Review Date: Mar 30, 2005
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Well-built, Contrasty, Nice Bokeh
|
|
Cons:
|
MANY bad copies are out there -- many don't get what they pay for and instead, get very soft images for an L-glass. Not worth the risk, despite the many positive reviews here.
|
|
|
I confidently purchased one of these lenses after reading many of the reviews here. Needless to say, I was shocked and surprised when I received a bad copy that produced horrifically soft images. I began searching the web for information, and found that there are LOTS of people who are unhappy with this lens given the price and expectation of L-glass... and I hoped that this would be an isolated incident in my experience. I mean, with all of these positive reviews, there is probably only a 1 out of 10 chance that I could get a bad copy, right?
I ordered a second one, and when I took the first few shots, I noticed that it was sharper than the first, but not nearly sharp enough. The images were STILL soft, even at f/4. I did some more searching, and found that this is a highly regular experience. Infact, I have only come across three or four people who actually have sharp pictures produced from their copies of this lens. Many who believe theirs is a very sharp copy usually haven't run an extensive battery of tests on their lens, and I can only assume that is the case here.
While the lense is nice, it is not worth the price. Great copies are few, so instead of forking out $1100+ to get a potentially mediocre lens, get the 70-200 f/2.8 instead, and find something else to take care of the 20ish - 70ish range.
My second lens will be sent back as well... I don't want to give Canon the satisfaction of "fixing" a product of theirs that should have been working perfectly out of the box. And if you want Canon to change their quality control issues, than I suggest you do the same.
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2005
|
|
jmwhite1
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 29, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp as a tack, wonderful contrast and color rendition
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy as a bitch, but life always has a tradeoff in everything
|
|
|
This is a must have lens for any serious Canon shooter. Everything I have gone after with this lens has been special in its own way. For any portrait photographer, the 17-40mm L and this lens will take you anywhere you need to go. Every lens is special in some way but this is one of those lenses destined for greatness. Sharp, contrasty, punchy color. etc:
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2005
|
|
abargath
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Location: Iceland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 29, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp at all apertures, good colours, contrast and built like a tank. Balances very well on a 20D with battery grip, can carry it and a 550ex for hours without problems. Brilliant design to get the most use out of the lens hood.
|
|
Cons:
|
Uh... just to say something it usually draws attention to you (wether that be good or bad)
|
|
|
Hardly the best lens value for $ you can get, but if you want an all around "normal range" zoom that can do pretty much anything and you can afford it, go get this lens and don´t even think twice about it.
I have had NO problems with it and have had this lens for little over a year now and it always delivers, I have 6 other lenses and this is the one that does about 50-60% of my work and if I had to go with only one lens, this would be it.
As a side note on how well this thing is constructed i´ll tell you a little story. About a week after getting this lens I was taking shots around all around town in febuary in Iceland and we had snow everywhere. I saw an interesting statue I wanted to get closer too but underneath the snow there was rock hard marble and what do you know... I totally lost my footing on the staris beneath the statue and as a reflex I broke my fall with my brand new 24-70L. I landed on my lens straight on, the impact was right on the front end of the lens hood and you can imagine my anguish when I got up to check out the mess that I thought was once my dear beloved (and first I might add) L lens. There was not even a scratch on the hood!!! I am not saying I am a big guy but I am about 182cm and 82kg and the LENS HOOD broke my fall and didn´t even budge or scratch! NOTHING HAPPENED!
Nuff said, I can´t reccomend this lend highly enough.
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2005
|
|
Chatsphotog
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Sep 7, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 626
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, Contrasty, Bright
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy, $$$
|
|
What can one say? This is an L-lens, one of Canon's best. If you have this, and the 70-200mm in your bag of tricks, you are covered from 24-200mm and can get away with most situations. I agonized over purchasing this lens for a long time - now I am glad that I did.
http://www.chatterjees.com/portfolio/Canon%20EOS%2010D/Basilica/slides/IK4I6174.jpg
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2005
|
|
bagwis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 1, 2005
Location: Philippines
Posts: 30
|
|
Review Date: Mar 11, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,350.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast focussing, sharp wide open, wonderful color and contrast.
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit pricey.
|
|
|
I've had a Tamron and found it tad slow at focussing at not so ideal lighting situations like indoor basketball/volleyball. I sold it together with my 17-40L to be able to afford this lens, and wow! This is indeed one of Canon's best zoom lenses. I'm so happy with my decision and it indeed focusses faster than the Tamron. Sharpness wise, it's a little better, but not so far away from the Tamron. It's color and contrast though are better than the Tamron. I love the bokeh and the range of this zoom lens. It has become my favorite walk-about lens.
If you can afford one, don't think about it. Get it! You'll definitely love it.
|
|
|
Mar 11, 2005
|
|
Teg Miles
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 13, 2004
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 142
|
|
Review Date: Mar 10, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp Sharp Sharp!!! Fast, weight, zoom 2,8
|
|
Cons:
|
$$$ as "L"
|
|
|
Greatest zoom I ever had!
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2005
|
|
xintegrityx
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 22, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 29
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,160.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
build quality,bokeh,lightning quick autofocus, crystal clear images corner to corner
|
|
Cons:
|
weight, size (NOT A MAJOR ISSUE)
|
|
|
after months of reading reviews, comtemplating whether i should squander my money, and asking others i finally bought a copy of this "controversial" lens......i am thrilled.
the crispness of this lens from corner to corner is amazing. truly awesome detail.
i would wholeheartedly recommend this lens to whomever is thinking about or on the verge of buying.
when i was reading about this lens it seems everyone complains about 2 things first and formost: size and weight. now in my mind i thought, my god, with such a sharp lens i cant believe people are complaining about the size and weight. what babies.....haha. well let me tell you. this lens IS a beast its equally if not heavier than my 70-200 f/4 and has a HUGE lens hood. im almost afraid to leave this lens in the same room with my kit 18-55 for my 20d out of fear the 24-70 my gobble it right up and spit it out. i do recommend going to your local shop and getting a feel for it. otherwise you might be in for a work out.
all in all...the best lens i have ever laid hands on, i am so happy i made this purchase
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2005
|
|
florin_pana
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 8, 2005
Location: Romania
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 8, 2005
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, the best bookeh I ever seen, superb colors, L quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Heavy; overpriced.
|
|
|
I bought this lens recently to bridge the "gap" between 17 - 40/4L and 70 -200/4L. For those enthusiasts of 17-40/L, I would tell them: that’s a very good lens but 24-70 is the best. Honestly, if you do not acquire, by misfortune a dud, 24-70 will show you a new "dimension" of what it means quality photo. Indeed this is a “new lens generation” which offers astonishing results. If you do not believe me, try at least to rent this lens for couple of days and shoot some pictures; you will fall in love with it.
|
|
|
Mar 8, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
531
|
879610
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
