backup
Photoshop actions
 
 

Search Used

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
533 966887 Nov 9, 2022
Recommended By Average Price
88% of reviewers $1,189.84
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.67
8.34
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:  10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20>  next
      
lextalionis
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 28, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1076
Review Date: Mar 10, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp and Fast AF. I like to use this lens for environmental portraits (good flexibility). Clever hood design too.
Cons:
Gets heavy after awhile

Another quality "Red Stripe" from Canon. Very useful for environmental portraits where fast AF is necessary.

Only drawback is its weight.

Here are some sample shots taken with a Canon 30D:

Sample Photos

-Roy


Mar 10, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add lextalionis to your Buddy List  
cmorris
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 15, 2004
Location: N/A
Posts: 2
Review Date: Mar 9, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Versatile. Enables the photographer to work with one body and one lens. Image quality is superb. Almost all my work is at 2.8, Which provides a very smooth, creamy tonal range. But still retains great sharpness
Cons:
Size. Build quality. Lens is quite fragile. Read below.

This is the lens that I do 95% of my photography with. What people have to understand here is that there is some sacrifice when you have a lens that provides you such versatility. I have used this lens since 2003, basically traveling the world with it. What I have discovered, the key to keeping this lens in top notch working order. The day I open one out of the box, I totally tape up the top half of the lens with a strong gaffers tape. This is done to structurally keep the lens taught. This helps eliminate any torquing that takes place with day to day walking around with this on your shoulder. By doing this ad hoc tape job you will have to give up your manual focus option. I know this sounds bizarre, but its true. Also I never and I mean never, do I walk around with the lens extended to 24mm focal length, for this really adds stress to the lens. If you want you lens to maintain critical sharpness for years to come and if you use the lens daily, almost year round like I do. This will keep it sharp. I know many of my colleagues who after 1 or 2 months of heavy use complain that it is no longer sharp. I can actually keep mine going for up to 3 years with out having to have the lens serviced.

To view my work with this lens go to VIIphoto.com and look at my work. Like I said earlier 95% of it is done on this lens. Also my book "My America" was almost shot entirely with the 24-70, 2.8.

We do not live in a perfect world. But for me this lens comes quite close to being perfect. Minus the tape job.

Yours Truly,

Christopher Morris



Mar 9, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add cmorris to your Buddy List  
ScottTomlinson
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 3, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 54
Review Date: Mar 6, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,050.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, Build Quality is a 10, Hood Hides Protruding Element and has a reverse zoom mechanism so at wide angle it's fully extended and on full zoom its fully recessed, taking full advantage of the hood. Versatility.
Cons:
None. This is as good or better than my 70-200L 2.8 IS.

Sharp as anything when used correctly. I too agonized over whether or not I would get a "good copy". I ordered one from B&H 2-2008 and have not regretted it at all. I would not have been satisfied with the 24-105 at f4.

Some complain of the size and weight, but I like the heft - it helps keep the camera steady.


Mar 6, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ScottTomlinson to your Buddy List  
bluefox9er
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 10, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 361
Review Date: Feb 26, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Image quality, build, great hood,
Cons:
Cost..all lenses are way to overpriced if you ask me!

Ok, I have watched the ratings on this lens dip recently on this forum. I remember when it was a 9.5, but as a pre-emptive purchase of a canon eos 5d MKII( if it is ever released), I was torn between the 24-70 F2.8 and the 24-105 mm F4 IS.

I already have the 70-200 mm F4 and felt that the 24-70 might be a better fit for me.

I brought this lens for 600 from an ebayer, it is literally brand new and it had a filter..bargain.

Took some test shots with it this morning, and whilst it can be a teeny bit soft at 2.8, I found the images absloutley stunning at around 5.6.

I'm sure it gives awsome images at 2.8, but I have never used a lens like this before,so maybe i'll learn as I go.

Took some indoor shots in my kitchen, they were fantastic and even with ISO 400 the noise was hardly noticable.

Yes this lens is heavy, and no it hasn't got IS, but what it does provide to me are images that are absloutley fantastic, well in line with my 70-200 mm F4 (non IS).

IS is a great feature, but at the focal lengths of this lens, perhaps it isnt that important,esp with f2.8 available at all focal lengths.

I know from the pianstaking research I did prior to buying this lens that a lot of people cant decide between this and the 24-105 mm F4 IS..I was one of them, but I am so pleased that I have chosen the 24-70 2.8 L. I am using it on a canon 400d, but I am also making my purchases knowing one day i will switch to a Full sensor canon, so the 17-55 mm IS wasn't in my list, even if it does have wonderful reviews.

I was also mindful that on FM reviews a lot of people had managed to get 'bad' copies of this lens, so I am relieved that mine seems ok, esp as it was an ebay purchase, which would have been an absloute nightmare to resolve if i wasn't happy with it.If you are thinking of buying this from ebay, it might be an idea to make sure the seller feedback is not less than 99% on at least 1000 transactions and they are willing to accept returns, but you are going to have to pay for return shipping both ways :-(

If you are really torn , please try this lens out..in the Uk we dont have a culture of try before you buy and renting a lens is more expensive sometimes than actually buying it ( not to mention that when we do buy it we usually pay anywhere from 30 to 50% more than people in other countries), so do protect your purchase if you need to return a 'bad' coppy.

otherwise, put it on your camera and go out and have the most fun you can with this lens...it really is a terriffic piece of kit.!!!


Feb 26, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add bluefox9er to your Buddy List  
TonyMelt
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 27
Review Date: Feb 23, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 2 

Pros: Fast
Cons:
Poor build/quality control by Canon

I have had a very disappointing experience with this lens. I have been a Canon user since the 1970s beginning with the FTBn and I have several L series lens, all of which work flawless. I ordered it from Dell and as soon as received it I took several test shots with my 40D at various focal lengths using autofocus. I was surprised to find none of them were sharp. I then put the lens on both an XTI and an old Digital Rebel and got the same results. I called Dell and they sent a replacement, taking two weeks as they had none in stock. I was shocked to find the same problem with the replacement lens. I then decided to put the lens on a tripod and take some shots of the fine print on a small bottle at a distance of about five feet. I first to a shot with autfocus on and the switched it off and move the focus ring slightly to the right taking 3 shots and the reset autofocus and then took three shots while turning the focus ring in small increments to the left. When I looked at the shots on the PC I found the autofocus shot very blurry, but the shot I took in manual focus turned just slightly to the left from the autofocus point it was considerably sharper. I have sent the replacement lens to the Canon repair facility in New Jersey and hope they are able to fix it. What I can understand is how two lens, with non-sequential serial numbers, have a common defect. I can only assume that Canon is having a problem with quality control. I hope Canon recognizes they have a problem and takes corrective action. As I said, I am a long time Canon user but this kind of problem makes Nikon look better and better.

Feb 23, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add TonyMelt to your Buddy List  
performant
Offline
[ X ]

Registered: Feb 17, 2008
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 20, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: useful zoom-range, decent aperture, build quality
Cons:
none



Feb 20, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add performant to your Buddy List  
briandaly
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 23, 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 41
Review Date: Feb 14, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Solid, weather-sealed, wide 2.8 aperture, fast USM autofocus, substantial hood included, resistant to flare, sharp even wide open all through focal range, works well with extension tubes for macro work
Cons:
Weight, size can be intimidating when hood attached, not wide enough on 1.6 crop

I've only used this lens on a 30D but found all the "Positive aspects" listed above to be true.
Would like to try it on full frame body.
It is my most used lens (ahead of 10-22 EF-S and 70-200 f4 IS).


Feb 14, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add briandaly to your Buddy List  
drisley
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Jul 12, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1527
Review Date: Feb 13, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Beautiful bokeh, sharp at all apertures, weather sealed, fast/accurate/silent autofocus, better optically and built than the new nikon 24-70
Cons:
none

This lens has prime image quality written all over it, the bokeh is smooth and creamy, and it's sharp at all apertures. Focus is silent, fast and accurate.

I've compared 100% images taken with the new, much more expensive nikon 24-70, and my copy whips it for image quality! Not bad for a lens that costs 50% less. I also had a chance to hold the new nikon, and it felt cheap by comparison to the L. Personal preference I suppose. (the nikons apparently have some focus and distortion problems).

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!


Feb 13, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add drisley to your Buddy List  
StephanSchwind
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 12, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 12, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1.06 | Rating: 10 

Pros: f/2,8 and USM, a L lense, indoor with available light. does fit on my 35mm Cam and on the digitals.
Cons:
First I thought price and weight but as it turns out NONE.

I wanted a lens with f/2,8 on total focal length to fit my wifes 40D because of the cross field AF sensor in the middle and second because she does not like flash photography.

Finally I was down to the EF-S 17-55mm IS USM and the EF 24-70mm L USM.

I rented the lens before buying it because a plus 1.000,00$ lens is not what you buy every day.

First I thought the missing IS would be the downsite of the L but IS does not stop motion and my son is a fast one. So skip IS and compare the rest. We have the EF-S 10-22mm so there is not really a need for 17-24mm on your evereyday lense. I did a check of the pictures taken in the past and most of them where between 30 and 75mm (about 85%)

After holding both lenses and mounting them on the camera the decision was clear and we settled for the L lense.

So if your looking for your every day lense and your pocket can afford it - look no further.



Feb 12, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add StephanSchwind to your Buddy List  
apeq
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 11, 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 9, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Solid built.
Cons:

This was the Lens that started me on the L envy when I started out with dSLR. Because of the built quality and the ratings it got everywhere I started saving for it and took me a year. In between I had had nifty 50,the 85 f1.8 and the fantastic 70-200 f4IS. All these lens gave me the WOW factor. My everyday lens was the 28-135 mm but I thought I could consolidate and use just the brick and my 70-200. I got rid of the prime and zoom to get my brick even though there are plenty of good copy/bad copy post going round. I'd figured for an L the chances of me getting a good copy rather than a bad copy will still be very much higher to worry about. But to my dismay the brick didn't quite live up to my expectations. Why? First of all,I got it brand new from a major store online and just after 5 days the AF went dead! Since I am from overseas the store did not offer free return shipping. I have no other option but to sent it to my local Canon which took 4 weeks to replace the AF unit. So it;s like getting a factory refurb for a full price and a whole lot of waiting. Second, after the IQ I got from my 70-200 F4IS I am not impressed with ones from the brick especially wide end at 2.8. It needs plenty of light to nail it. It can only match the longer zoom at F4 and above and without IS not many keepers there. To me it's practically a F4 lens that can do acceptable 2.8.A bit of USM helps. So most of the time I need bounced flash in order to keep ISO down. Normal output it seems it's underexposed and I have to apply +1 exposure. When I do, I am thinking I should have gotten the 24-105 F4IS instead. Well I am learning to cope with this lens and to know it's sweet spot and what kind of exposures it can handle. Hopefully it can regain some of the shine it has loss in my views.

Feb 9, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add apeq to your Buddy List  
TonyMelt
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 12, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 27
Review Date: Feb 6, 2008 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,215.00

Pros: None yet, have not received a good copy.
Cons:
Poor quality control

After many long hours of deliberation I finally took the advice of many of you here in this forum and ordered this lens. I purchased it from Dell, whom I have always had good service from in the past. I paid for next day shipping. Unfortunately they chose DHL to deliver it. After misrouting the package and 6 days later then lens arrived. Anxious to get the last few minutes of sunlight I quickly mounted it to my 40D and took a few shots off the back patio. When I loaded them on the PC I was amazed, but not for a good reason. Every photo seemed a little out of focus. I then took some indoor flash shots and got the same result. I then took several comparison photos using an old 18-55mm (non IS) lens that came with my old Rebel. It was hard to believe but in every case the shot taken with the cheap 18-55 lens was noticeably sharper. I called Dell and of course got an RMA. Of course they will send a replacement lens and the paperwork to return the defective one, but it takes up to 8 days to process the paperwork and then they said they ship it overnight. I just hope its not DHL again. I caution anyone buying this or any other Canon to make sure to get it from a reliable with a good reputation for returns. It looks like Canon also needs to start doing a better job with quality control.

Feb 6, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add TonyMelt to your Buddy List  
Robb Davidson
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 16, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 6
Review Date: Feb 3, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,052.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Incredible color, contrast, flexibility, durability, and overall awesome quality!!!
Cons:
I know everyone says weight, which is kinda true, but what do you expect with all those awesome elements in the build?

My first L lens that I owned, but not used. I'm super impressed with how well this lens handles all sorts of different situations. When it comes to shooting snowboards, this lens is nice and fast focusing with the aid of the USM, and 2.8 helps stop motion. If you're debating on 2.8 or f4 with IS, figure if you shoot action go for the 2.8, otherwise chew it on the IS.

I have also the cheap 50mm 1.8 (cheap as in price), and i used it to shoot crowds at my college's basketball games. It was super dark in there, so it sucked shooting 400ISO, 1/60 shutter speed, at 1.8. Then I bring this bad boy in, 400ISO, 2.8, 1/60 shutter speed, and theres LESS image noise from the 24-70L.

Its tough to hold it after about 3 or 4 hours if you don't give yourself a little 5 minute stretching break. Then its real tough to shoot in low light and hold the camera steady for a sharp and crisp shot.

I swear to whoever's reading this....you will never regret buying this lens...especially if youre a tool that can get this lens cheaper than me cuase I would've gladly paid 1300 for this guy knowing NOW what it can do, and I've only had it for nearly 2 weeks! I'm shooting a wedding next weekend, so we'll see how that goes.


Feb 3, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Robb Davidson to your Buddy List  
G Wolsey
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 14, 2007
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 7
Review Date: Feb 2, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $964.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: f/2.8 | Build Quality | Excellent Hood Design | Macro capabilities
Cons:
Tight Zoom Ring | Close focus distance is poor at 24mm

As my first L lens, I don't really have anything exceptional to compare this lens to, however compared to 'consumer' glass, it's in a league of it's own. Sharp at f/2.8, all the way through the focal lengths.

Feb 2, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add G Wolsey to your Buddy List  
ruben1992
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 1, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 1, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Image Quality, very sharp, build quality,
Cons:
-



Feb 1, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ruben1992 to your Buddy List  
Hoan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 3, 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 27, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: IQ, solid build, fast focus, f/2.8
Cons:
none

I bought mine 1 year ago to replace my EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM. So this was my first L lens. What a huge difference!

I was between the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8, the Canon EF 24-105 f/4, and the Canon EF 17-40 f/4 at that time; but finally went for the 24-70 since I needed a general-purpose lens and preferred to have f/2.8. With this one lens I could shoot both landscape and portrait without changing lenses.

My copy is very sharp, even at wide open. The color, the detail, the contrast and the saturation of the pictures from this lens are excellent. The 24-70 lens focuses very fast, quite, and accurately even in dim light. For portrait, this lens is very capable of making the subject stand out due to its pleasing bokeh. Highly recommended.

http://dongchay.smugmug.com/gallery/3795025#218972478


Jan 27, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Hoan to your Buddy List  
N.B. Tran
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 15, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 22, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: Sharp with good light conditions, AF is good too with good lightcondition, heavy, nice strong build. beautiful DOF with the blur thing.
Cons:
Bad AF in very low light condition, it always overfocus the front object and make the background sharp. I use a 5d and can i put on a laser beam or something so it knows i want the subject in front sharp??? But i can imagine ofcourse that its hard for most of the Camera's to do a good AF in almost no light condition. any suggestions?

I use a 5d and can i put on a laser beam or something so it knows i want the subject in front sharp??? But i can imagine ofcourse that its hard for most of the Camera's to do a good AF in almost no light condition. any suggestions?

But beside that i love it :P i can recommand it.

Gr. Binh


Jan 22, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add N.B. Tran to your Buddy List  




Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
533 966887 Nov 9, 2022
Recommended By Average Price
88% of reviewers $1,189.84
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.67
8.34
9.3
ef_24-70_28u_1_


Page:  10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20>  next