p.1 #1 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM has been analyzed by DxOMark and they categorized it as a "peerless performer". Currently priced at $2,199, the Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II achieves the highest rating yet for a professional high-speed mid-range zoom.
"With an DxOMark score of 26, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 MkII is the highest scoring professional fixed-aperture mid-range kit zoom of any brand in the DxO Mark database and comfortably outperforms rivals as well as the firm’s earlier Mark I version, particularly with regard to the sharpness levels across the frame. We’re used to seeing a noticeable deterioration in performance in the outer fields at longer focal lengths even with high-quality optics from the big-name marques but the new Canon bucks that trend."
p.1 #2 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
"With an DxOMark score of 26, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 MkII is the highest scoring professional fixed-aperture mid-range kit zoom of any brand in the DxO Mark database and comfortably outperforms rivals as well as the firm’s earlier Mark I version, particularly with regard to the sharpness levels across the frame. We’re used to seeing a noticeable deterioration in performance in the outer fields at longer focal lengths even with high-quality optics from the big-name marques but the new Canon bucks that trend. As for distortion and vignetting, it manages to hold its own against rivals even if it hasn’t quite managed to improve on those over the outgoing Mk I version. In spite of the complex optical construction, some chromatic aberration is visible in the corners that may require additional removal in post-production software but levels remain in line with the best of rival offerings. The main downside, however, is the very high price. At $2,500 the lens is far less accessible than the model it replaces, but the reduction in weight and size coupled with the boost in optical performance looks set to satisfy future demands from as yet unannounced high-resolution cameras."
p.1 #15 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
EB-1 wrote:
The 24-70 is a very good lens for a normal zoom, but hardly perfect.
EBH
Definitely not perfect. A little less sharp than the MK1 at 70mm and a surprise to see that amount of CA at that FL as well.
I never owned the MK1 but did own a 24-105 for 6 years. A good lens but brutal at 24mm. The IQ at 24 with my 24-70II just blew me away. I was upset IS was not included for that price but found I have not really missed it.
p.1 #16 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
Mine is just as good at both ends and the article referenced is pretty much spot on describing my copy. I don't shoot my primes above F2 now where I used to all the time for their improved sharpness stopped down. There is no noticible difference in quality between the 24-70 II and my overlapping L primes at f2.8 outside of vignetting and distortion. I usually leave the vignetting in in situations where I am shooting at 2.8 with hot lights or available light. The only time I don't want it is 5.6-11 for landscapes etc (and sometimes I still don't mind it). Love my primes for low light, but if it is not dark they just sit in my bag unless I am going for a shallow DOF effect.
p.1 #18 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
Zenon Char wrote:
Definitely not perfect. A little less sharp than the MK1 at 70mm and a surprise to see that amount of CA at that FL as well.
I agree that it is not perfect but it performs better at all focal lengths than the Mk I, for sure, at least mine does. I hate to tell you this but if yours doesn't, then there is definitely something wrong with it.
p.1 #19 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
I have noticed that too with my 5DII. I can crank up to 6400 and get the same quality I expected from my 5DII at 3200. 12800 is very usable as well and for most family events etc, I don't need my primes anymore (though I still bring my 50L). I have not felt comfortable shooting 6400+ for clients. I wonder how much better the 1DX is than the 5DIII?
.
.
