about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
536 907815 Nov 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
88% of reviewers $1,192.02
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.68
8.36
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:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next
          
torque22
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 6, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 51
Review Date: Jul 6, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: Good Build quality as expected.
Cons:
Back Focus issues!

What a nightmare.
I had heard about the backfocusing issues on this lense so when it arrived i tested it quickly in the garden, seamed ok.

Then did two weddings with it and had issues with 40% of pictures taken with it. an object just behind the subject was in perfect focus and the subject was soft focus, time and time again.

The 1st wedding was a 12hr day so did not have time to check on the PC, looked ok on camera.
Canon solution to their poor testing and generous tolerance on the focus circuit is to allow cameras from the 1dMKiii series on to recalibratre upto 20 specific type lenses.
They are def having a laugh.

Buy at your own peril


Jul 6, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add torque22 to your Buddy List  
justinvl
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 16, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 105
Review Date: Jun 30, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Great for Indoor Photography, Versatile, Perfect Build Construction, Good for indoor events & outdoor photoroams
Cons:
Heavy, Expensive, no IS

It was a toss-up for me to get this or the 24-105mm F4 L IS - I opted for this because I wanted the extra stop of light. Now, I don't necessarily use it at f/2.8 when doing events, but it's nice to know that it's an option, and stopped down a bit coupled with a good speedlight I'm taking some great event shots - both posed and candid.

I don't know if IS would add to this lens, but it certainly wouldn't take away (though undboutedly it would become almost too heavy to hand-hold with the added motor). I do use this lens outdoors, walking around, landscapes, portraits - it rarely comes off my camera body, despite the added weight.

After purchasing this I can easily say it's the best lens I've ever owned (also the most expesnsive) consistently producing wonderful shots - I recommend it to anyone considering this focal range.


Jun 30, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add justinvl to your Buddy List  
WHITECITY
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 9, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 29, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: very sharp, excellent colour and contrast.
Cons:
None.

i have used this lens for a year and 4 months now, and have found this lens to be very sharp, it renders excellent colour and sharpness, it focuses very quickly both on my 5d,and 30d, it is wide enough on a FF body and excellent for use in events, and receptions for close up work. for use on a crop body, i would recommend you
get the 17-55 2.8, because it might not be wide enough. The weight is not an issue, after all its a 2.8 with a lot of high quality glass and a well constructed metal body, i use mine with a fashgun bracket, and dont seem to notice i am carrying it, however this lens does take some learning to be able to get the best out of it, i will buy this lens again, and again i highly recommend this lens.



Jun 29, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add WHITECITY to your Buddy List  
meridian
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 27, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 110
Review Date: Jun 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Amazing IQ even wide open
Cons:
Not very wide on crop body, 17-40L better for tight spaces.

Love this lens. Indoors with or without flash this lens cannot be beat. Outdoors colours are incredible. Sharpness and IQ is bettern than expected. Only lens sharper is the 70-200 f4L or possibly the 400mm f5.6L which I use less frequently than the 24-70L.
The weight issue is something to consider. I am thinking about a battery grip so that I can use the handstrap. Wearing this lens around the neck (with strap) is really not an option.


Jun 28, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add meridian to your Buddy List  
RobertLynn
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 5, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 11658
Review Date: Jun 18, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,230.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent image quality. IQ is constant through FL. Fast aperture. Build Quality.
Cons:
High cost, weight.

I'm giving this lens 10's across the board. The images I get with this lens need very little sharpening. Yes, the price is a little high, but now that I've paid it and know what the lens gets me, I'd pay it again.

Please note, I'm not a pro, and this is a huge investment for me. Take my rating with that in mind.

I've read a lot of problems with L lenses, in particular the 2 I decided to go into debt to buy. However, I've had none of those problems. My copy of the 24-70 is sharp out of the box, even wide open.

I knew it was a heavy lens going into it, so i cannot complain about the weight. Another benefit for me is I usually have the 70-200 slung around me neck, so when I go to this, I feel a little relief.

Bottom line, this lens has excellent bokeh, focuses reasonably quick (not quite as quick as 70-200 2.8IS, but faster than a 17-85IS, 24 2.8, and 50 1.8, I only compare its focus speed to those lenses, because those are lenses I've owned).

If you're looking for this focal length, and fast aperture in a convenient zoom, this is the lens to get. Don't worry about it not having IS, and don't compare the 17-55 IS to this, because imho this is optically superior.


Jun 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add RobertLynn to your Buddy List  
FatBoyAl
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 670
Review Date: Jun 18, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: Almost everything
Cons:
No IS?

I've owned a brick before, having aquired it in a trade for my 24-105. After about 3 months, I decided I'd made a huge mistake and traded someone else for their 24-105. I'm very happy with the f4, 35mm longer focal length and IS.

But...

After another year, I realized not everything is about simply capturing the shot. In almost all circumstances, the 24-105 is going to be the go-to lens. My copy is nice and sharp and f4 is plenty for many shots and IS lets me capture what one extra stop (between f4 and 2.8) would never do. Plus, the 4x zoom is very usable.

However, the 2.8 of the brick is something that allows for more creativity. Many complain that the 24-105 also has poor bokeh, while the brick has a much smoother quality. I agree. After owning either owning one or the other, I realized there's a need to own both. I doubt I'll sell either ever again.


Jun 18, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add FatBoyAl to your Buddy List  
raychoi
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 12, 2008
Location: Singapore
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jun 12, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent lens, very sharp, a must have if you want to fill up the middle gap of your collections, like 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200. however, i do have one question, does it occur to you guys that it requires a bit more strenght to turn the zoom ring from 70 to 24? Mine is, hope thats normal.....
Cons:



Jun 12, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add raychoi to your Buddy List  
rhorta
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 11, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2286
Review Date: Jun 11, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,658.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: range, mfd, fast, sharp, built
Cons:
none

I've been a happy user of the 24-105/4 IS as it appeared, but the 24-70 has been drawing my attention for at least as long as that. However the mixed QC reports had me worried.

Although I've concentrated on slow zooms and fast primes, the idea of having a fast zoom set appealed to me. So I finally decided to match my 70-200/2.8IS with the famed 24-70/2.8 and I am not sorry!

Weight isn't an issue. I'm used to the 70-200/2.8IS and 85/1.2, both heavier lenses. Built quality is very good t excellent. The resulting images on my 5D are very satisfying (and better than expected and all I hoped for).

Don't ask me to choose between the 24-70 or 24-105, as each has its place. The first is near to prime quality, the latter a great general purpose zoom. I can see why some people choose this zoom over primes, as a capable alternative.

This EF 24-70/2.8 with batch number UW0312 is a keeper.

So to those who are despairing, those sharp copies are certainly out there!


Jun 11, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add rhorta to your Buddy List  
timbop
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Dec 29, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 6427
Review Date: Jun 3, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $980.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, reliable, fast, gorgeous images
Cons:
none worth mentioning

Obviously it is larger and heavier than the "ideal" walkaround lens, but it delivers the goods in every respect. Mine is sharp wide open throughout the range, with great bokeh, fast reliable AF, and great image quality. I even really like the reverse zoom mechanism - the hood is effective throughout the range which is nice.

For point of reference mine is mounted on my 1dm2 usually with a flash for the better part of the day during a wedding, and you really do get used to the weight. When I travel I put it on my 20D, and it feels pretty light. The only drawback is that it isn't wide enough for architecture in tight spaces, but other than that it performs flawlessly.


Jun 3, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add timbop to your Buddy List  
Maliketh
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Nov 6, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 67
Review Date: May 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,500.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Usually sharp - read review. Feels excellent on camera.
Cons:
Weirdest lens I have ever used when it comes to focus performance.

Not all that impressed with this lens.

I'd like to back up the users who have noticed issues with the 24-70's focus on subjects about 3 metres away.

I have 3 5D bodies and one 1Ds MkIII and the 24-70 behaves EXACTLY the same on all of these cameras, I have tested it. The 24-70 focuses well/is sharp when the subject is close (say, less than 1 meter). When focusing on objects about 3 metres away, it's like a lucky dip as to what you get. The AF in this lens baffles me. Not sure whether this is an optical flaw or an AF issue.

Here is how I discovered this:

I was shooting with two lenses, the 24-70 2.8 and the 85mm f1.8.

Subject is 3 metres away. 24-70 sharpness @70mm f/4 wasn't good at all. I shot heaps of frames, tried various focus techniques - nothing could get me a sharp shot. Was initially shooting on a 1Ds MkIII and thought maybe I had a defective body. Changed the 24-70 over to one of my 5D's - same problem - soft, soft, soft.

I put the 85mm on both bodies. EVERY shot is a winner. sharp as hell - and I mean every shot. Same aperture, same shutter speed, same technique, same everything. If the prime is sharp doing the exact same thing then there is something wrong with the 24-70. My lens at least.

Some people may think they have "perfect copies" of this lens - I did for many months, or so I assumed. Next time you work with the 24-70 at different AF distances and at f/2.8 - f/4, take a good look at your photos.

This lens is just not as reliable as I'd like. I'd really like to like this lens, because most of the time it is awesome but then lets me down - even when I'm doing everthing right - even in controlled/good lighting situations.


May 28, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Maliketh to your Buddy List  
devan40D
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 23, 2008
Location: India
Posts: 0
Review Date: May 23, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 4 

 
Pros: I recently bought a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens for my Canon 40 D and found that in bright sun light IQ was fantastic. Build quality was excellent, presence of the lens is unrivalled, you could walk in to a room full of photographers and get attention immediately. Pin point sharp pictures that could be blown uo to any size without loosing sharpness.
Cons:
But in low light and in Flash light photography the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM used in conjunction with either 40 D or 400 D gave images that were soft. Very disappointing and painfull after reading some rave reviews. I sold the lens at a loss to someone who did most of his photography outdoors.

I recently bought a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens for my Canon 40 D and found that in bright sun light IQ was fantastic. Build quality was excellent, presence of the lens is unrivalled, you could walk in to a room full of photographers and get attention immediately. Pin point sharp pictures that could be blown uo to any size without loosing sharpness.

But in low light and in Flash light photography the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM used in conjunction with either 40 D or 400 D gave images that were soft. Very disappointing and painfull after reading some rave reviews. I sold the lens at a loss to someone who did most of his photography outdoors.

I talked with several Canon owners and learnt that 20% of this lens was like this. It's a shame. The beuty of the lens make you expect a lot. In other internet forums there are similiar sufferers.


May 23, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add devan40D to your Buddy List  
Bert 1969
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 13, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: May 16, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: Build quality, colour, contrast, very attrative range of 24-70mm
Cons:
far too many bad (too soft) copies out there, still have not found a good sharp one.

I did own this lens for 6 months and it was very soft at f/2.8 and (too) soft at f/4.0. Sold it 5 months ago to a guy which wanted it to use from f/5.6 and up, so this was not a problem for him.

But I really miss the 24-70mm for my concert photography.

So today I went to the store and told the salesman my history with my previous 24-70mm and that I first wanted to take sample pictures to see if they had a good copy.

Got a new one out of the box and we took pictures outside and the same story again very very soft at f/2.8 and still soft at f/4.0. Then we took the demo lens which was behind the counter and this one even performed worse.

After he told me that he was not planning to go through his whole stock of 24-70mm lenses to find me a good copy I left the store.

So till now I've seen 3 copies of this lens performing bad.

Tomorrow I'm going to another store to try a (some if they let me) copie(s) there, if they still don't perform good, I'm going to give up on this lens. It feels a little bit like a having a winning ticket in a lotery when you can find a good copy but for what I can read here they must absolutly be out there..........somewhere.


May 16, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Bert 1969 to your Buddy List  
super_darker
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 5, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
Review Date: May 5, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,400.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Everything... it's sharp, solid as a rock, amazing color and contrast, beautiful bokeh, fast autofocus, accurate, all around amazing, heavy (this is a positive for me, i hate plastic lenses)
Cons:
make sure you have a good copy, my first one was crap.

All around a great lens (my current one), but just like it's been said before, make sure you have a good copy. My first one was actually really bad... soft at all apertures and focal lengths, jagged edges on everything, and worst of all, horrendous chromatic abberations (red, cyan, and bad magenta/green lateral abberations) everywhere. Honestly, it was actually worse than my old 18-55 kit lens!

And to top it off, the first one had aperture issues and connection issues (err01 faulty lens connection etc etc). In Av mode I would set the aperture to f8, and it would still use f2.8, even though it would calculate the exposure for f8. Result? Massively overexposed images.

So, all in all, my current one is AMAZING... sharp, fast, beautiful, solid, FANTASIC. Can't say enough good about it.

But the previous one (that I exchanged) was absolute garbage... soft, abberations, and connection issues etc. I make a lot of decisions based on experience... and I wouldn't recommend buying this lens second hand, and i'd only buy from somewhere that they would let you exchange or return within a few weeks just in case. But then again, that's my opinion on all lenses.


May 5, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add super_darker to your Buddy List  
kevinj909
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 29, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Review Date: May 4, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, 2.8, great color & contrast
Cons:
heavy

I just have to say... after owning the 24-105 L this lens takes the cake. As much as it's heavier... the IQ is much better. The quality is what an L lens should be.

May 4, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add kevinj909 to your Buddy List  
stopper
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 1, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
Review Date: May 1, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,270.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Build, IQ.
Cons:
None

1) A F2.8 L lens is going to be heavy, until they make a plastic that gives as good or better IQ as glass, don't complain about the weight. You know it is heavier than a cheap lens before buying, don't complain about the weight.
2) Don't post negative comment(s) when you don't own a lens or camera. If you have a gripe with a company take it up with that company.
3) You hear a lot about bad copies, what is the true percentage of bad copies. You can't use reviews to make that estimate, all people don't write a review.
What is a bad copy? A bad copy for one person may be acceptable for the next. Bad copy can be subjective.

I love this lens. I bought it new last month. I love the IQ I get from it and I expected no less. It performs exactly as an L lens should.
I didn't know about L lenses until I went into digital cameras. Now I know why my film images can't match my digital ones.
My wife has used it for my business and she has not complained in anyway. Therefore I also know it is performing as an L lens should. She is so picky about any pictures she takes or someone else takes. She says 'A soft lens is blurry'.
I highly recommend this lens if you need(want) the F2.8L.


May 1, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add stopper to your Buddy List  
vgopalk
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 2, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Apr 9, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Excellent Build. FAST Lens.
Cons:
Heavy (read long comment in Post)

Just returned from a 4-month trip to South America. I carried a 5D body, the 24-70/2.8 and an old 75-300/4-5.6 lens. The 75-300 was used when I needed the long range to shoot wildlife. 95% of the time the 24-70 was on the 5D. Much as I would have loved to get the 24-105/4.0, I wanted the speed this lens provided and it did not disappoint.

I would love to see canon come out with a 24-105/2.8. Assume it is of a good quality and costs less than $2000, that would be the SINGLE lens I would own.

After 4-months of having the lens in your backpack or on your neck, you develop a stoop! I dread to think what state I will be reduced to once I get the 70-200/2.8 lens Smile


Apr 9, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add vgopalk to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
536 907815 Nov 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
88% of reviewers $1,192.02
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.68
8.36
9.3
ef_24-70_28u_1_


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next