I've never been happy with the version I of the 24-70L. After owning four and using at least half dozen more the lens has never impressed me. Also the AF is the most inconsistent of any high quality lens I've used.
It has always stood out as the weakest lens on the job. I'm no sharpness freak but the 70-200L II changed my tolerance for weak zoom lenses.
I expect the new model II will be a big improvement since the bar isn't very high on it's predecessor.
Just kidding. Apart from that corner the rest of the frame looks pretty good.
You mentioned you will not be buying one. Please can you elaborate. Are you mainly a landscape shooter?
photomadnz wrote:
Hi, Yeah I thought that was the case too until I tried several copies. What your seeing is field curvature. The old one had it quite bad too apparently.
I mainly shoot landscapes but also do some travel photography. I expected more from this lens based on price, the MTF graphs and their recent lens designs. There is quite a bit of resolution falloff on the outer of the image and even the center cant compete with my 20 year old Contax Zoom. For this price I would expect versatility and the ability to use it in a wide variety of situations. Id also expect the same sort of snap that the 70-200II upgrade gave.
photomadnz wrote:
I mainly shoot landscapes but also do some travel photography. I expected more from this lens based on price, the MTF graphs and their recent lens designs. There is quite a bit of resolution falloff on the outer of the image and even the center cant compete with my 20 year old Contax Zoom. For this price I would expect versatility and the ability to use it in a wide variety of situations. Id also expect the same sort of snap that the 70-200II upgrade gave.
