p.2 #2 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
I was able to borrow a copy from CPS. The lens is, hands-down, the best zoom lens IQ I've ever seen. Definitely rivals primes in that aperture range.
As everyone says, price is the only downside, but considering the lenses it replaces that can be sold to partially pay for the new lens, it's not such a catastrophe for an established photographer, pro or amateur.
Jim -- That is a gorgeous set-up there with the 1DX. I don't know how anyone looking at that combo can say Canon isn't competitive or innovative. You've got a near-perfect all-around camera/lens. It would cover 80% of all my shooting.
p.2 #3 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
I was just wondering where they, DXO that is, got the $2,500 price point from? I didn't pay that much when it first came out in September of last year . I understand if that's the price people in Europe pay for the lens but it wasn't that much in the US. If that's the European price, then they should just stated the actual price in Euros.
p.2 #4 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
Gunzorro wrote:
I was able to borrow a copy from CPS. The lens is, hands-down, the best zoom lens IQ I've ever seen. Definitely rivals primes in that aperture range.
As everyone says, price is the only downside, but considering the lenses it replaces that can be sold to partially pay for the new lens, it's not such a catastrophe for an established photographer, pro or amateur.
Same for me. My copy outperforms my expectations by a good way. I simply didn't expect a zoom to be this good.
It is expensive, but not ridiculous now the price has come down. For people making money from their photography and who want to shoot at f2.8 and want to take advantage of the improvements in focus, the lens should pay for itself over time.
Canon should be rightly proud and anyone saying Canon isn't being innovative should have a look. They may not be for low ISO DR on sensors, but for lenses (which for my photography is much more important) they're doing amazingly well.
p.2 #5 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
Gunzorro wrote:
I was able to borrow a copy from CPS. The lens is, hands-down, the best zoom lens IQ I've ever seen. Definitely rivals primes in that aperture range.
As everyone says, price is the only downside, but considering the lenses it replaces that can be sold to partially pay for the new lens, it's not such a catastrophe for an established photographer, pro or amateur.
Jim -- That is a gorgeous set-up there with the 1DX. I don't know how anyone looking at that combo can say Canon isn't competitive or innovative. You've got a near-perfect all-around camera/lens. It would cover 80% of all my shooting....Show more →
Thanks Jim. I think you're right. The 24-70/2.8L II and 70-200/2.8L IS II make a dynamite pair. Throw in the two TS-E lenses, 18 ZE, 300/2.8L IS, and 500/4L IS, and you've (I've) got it made. I should sell of a ton of other stuff, but...
P.S. My Contax Zeiss 28/2.8 and 35-70/3.4 are slightly sharper in the corners at f/5.6 and f/8 than the 24-70/2.8L II. Enough difference that I'm keeping them for dedicated landscape photography, but the difference is surprisingly small, even without considering that it's a zoom.
p.2 #6 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
AGeoJO wrote:
I was just wondering where they, DXO that is, got the $2,500 price point from? I didn't pay that much when it first came out in September of last year . I understand if that's the price people in Europe pay for the lens but it wasn't that much in the US. If that's the European price, then they should just stated the actual price in Euros.
I paid the CPS Canada before-tax price of $2130 CA last September. It`s going for $2330 CA retail now.
lateral chromatic aberration corrected in a worse way than that of the rivals,
huge vignetting on full frame,
weak performance against bright light,
exorbitant price.
p.2 #8 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
It is sold for 150 € less than the 70-200 2.8 L IS here in germany at reputable dealers.
Think it is okay if it only had IS. Compared to the 24-70 4.0 IS (1.999€ instead of 1.450€) it is cheap if you think about the 70-200 4.0 L IS compared to the 2.8 (at less than half price here). And while the 70-200 2.8 L IS is not better (except the one stop) the 24-70 looks better than the new 4.0 (except the IS).
If the 4.0 would serve 50mm better and cost about 900€ I would prefere and immediately purchase it. My opinion, of course.
p.2 #9 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
jcolwell wrote:
I paid the CPS Canada before-tax price of $2130 CA last September. It`s going for $2330 CA retail now.
Jim, assuming parity between the two currencies here, I paid 10% less than what was posted by DXO and I know for sure, I would pay even less than that now but I had to have it and took it on a photography trip in early October. The difference between the two prices, what I paid back then and what I would be able to pay now, was worth it for me. A friend of mine bought his recently for $2K in Singapore or was that in Bangkok ?
p.2 #10 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
Hi Joshua. Parity is a good assumption. In fact, you end up losing a bit when you exchange them either way; US > CA or CA > US. I'm glad I got mine early, too. I used it for photographing a series of indoor low light ceremonies with the 1DX, and it's awesome. We're very lucky to get special pricing through CPS in Canada. As for current prices, it partly depends where you (or DXO) looks. The Camera Store in Calgary has the $2330 price I mentioned, while Henry's (Canada's biggest chain store) is flogging it for $2500. Even Vistek (our other chain) has it for $2350.
p.2 #11 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
I have mulling on getting this. My use will be primarily landscape at f8 to f13 range. In this use case, how much better is this relative to the 24-105L. I am aware of the weakness of the f4 lens at the wide end. I also use the 24TSE as well as the 16-35 II to compensate at the wide end.
p.2 #12 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
It's a very good lens. Don't forget the apparent use of the new ultra-precision AF in it too (only works with 5D3 or 1DX).
Finally one that let me sell off my 24 1.4 II. Even better center frame 70mm than the 70-200/300Ls (although I don't think it quite matches those at the edges or especially corners, especially for a complex landscape type scene with complex depth of subjects).
(A little bit bad in that every copy seems to place the DOF at the edges and corners compared the center in a different fashion though, often to an easily noticeable degree. Wide open varies a bit too, although even the worst copies still seem better wide open than even the best of the best of the best of the older version. For the price you'd like it to have even stronger QC than average for L.)
p.2 #13 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
JameelH wrote:
I have mulling on getting this. My use will be primarily landscape at f8 to f13 range. In this use case, how much better is this relative to the 24-105L. I am aware of the weakness of the f4 lens at the wide end.
IMO a lot. Depends how picky you are though. I was just never satisfied with 24-105 near 24mm even at landscape apertures and used a 24 1.4 II instead. The 24-70 II performs basically the same as the 24 1.4 II at landscape apertures other than a bit more distortion (it actually has even less PF though when it comes to branches against clouds). So I'd say it is well worth a try if you are not entirely satisfied with what you are getting from your 24-105. I'm sure there are some who would say they seem basically no difference, but it seems clear enough to me at least with the copies of all of both that I've seen.
p.2 #18 · Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II: A Peerless Performer
It appears DXO may finally be getting the act together with lens reviews.
Maybe now they can update all the big prime reviews to reflect reality..
As for the 24-70II..love mine!
lateral chromatic aberration corrected in a worse way than that of the rivals,
huge vignetting on full frame,
weak performance against bright light,
exorbitant price.
Hmmm, from the copy that I loaned and tried, it didn't seem that chromatic aberration was an issue to me at all. Do I have low expectations?
Also, some of those samples in the lenstip gallery seems a bit soft to me.
. I understand if that's the price people in Europe pay for the lens but it wasn't that much in the US. If that's the European price, then they should just stated the actual price in Euros.
