 |
|
|
drzhao
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 17, 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 52
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,999.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, awesome color, lightweight, solidly built.
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Image quality and color wise, this lens produces images as best as the digital slr format can take. Just as a comparison between the common 50mm 1.8, it's about the same in sharpness at f/4 (maybe a tad sharper) but much better in color. When I shoot digital (or 35mm), it's on my camera 90% of the time. Some people say that because it is plastic, the build quality is not as good as the mark i. But it's much lighter than the mark i, and I think it's definitely very solidly built. Didn't find the lack of IS a huge deal breaker, as I usually carry a tripod or monopod.
|
|
 Jun 12, 2014
|
|
tkchen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 30, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 251
|
|
Review Date: Apr 13, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,599.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very nice photo quality
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
I just came back from a trip to San Francisco and I only carry this lens with 5D classic. The lens delivery absolute very good quality pictures from landscape to portrait. I am so glad that I have bought it and take it with me. If you ever think about this lens, just buy it. You will not regret.
|
|
|
Apr 13, 2014
|
|
Tom_W
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Jan 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7275
|
|
Review Date: Jan 24, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,699.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp, corner to corner even at the wide end. Well built, smooth operation.
|
|
Cons:
|
A little pricey, but quality costs.
|
|
|
I had previously owned the 24-70 f/2.8 L and have shot many a picture with it over the years. It was a very good lens, but I found that after acquiring a very good copy of the 24-105 f/4 IS with my 5D3, I stopped using the old 24-70 so I sold it.
When I was able to purchase this lens at 1699 (including $300 rebate), I decided to give it a try. The reviews I had read were all very good, with none of the "good copy/bad copy" talk that had surrounded the previous version.
I was not disappointed. Gone was the CA in the corners at 24 mm, and the lens seems to be almost prime-like in sharpness and contrast across the zoom range. I didn't have to take many test photos to prove its ability to myself - I just mounted it on the 5D3 and it's stayed there most of the time.
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2014
|
|
jrobichaud
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 21, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1032
|
|
Review Date: Jan 1, 2014
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Absolutely the finest optics that I have ever used, including primes!
|
|
Cons:
|
82mm filter size, I guess no IS
|
|
|
At $2K this lens is a bargain! with high res full frame cameras like the 5D III, every flaw of a lens is magnified. Like many others, I have experimented with Zeiss, Nikon and Canon primes to achieve the best results possible. I often need to make images of large groups of people (over 200). Detail and lack of distortion is everything. I was blown away with the IQ and detail of this lens when it first arrived, and every time I use it, I'm blown away again! No more primes in this range!
The improvement that Canon made on the 70-200mm IS with the mkII (which were substantial) pale when compared to the improvement they made with this 24-70mm. It is spectacular in all regards. Now, is there any chance that Canon can do something about the 16-35mm mk II? It's miserable by comparison, unusable on the edges wider than 20mm.
|
|
|
Jan 1, 2014
|
|
Svenning
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 31, 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 48
|
|
Review Date: Aug 20, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Weight of lens balances very well with the Canon 5D Mk2.
Sharpness and contrast of the Pictures are absolut excellent.
Handles flare very well - you can shoot strait into strong light sources without major problems.
Auto focus is fast and hits the focus-point right on.
|
|
Cons:
|
Weight of camera and lens make your log around with 1.855 grams which can be tiredsome on longer walks.
The Price is high for a 24-70mm lens without any image stabilization.
|
|
|
Used my 24-70mm L version II on a trip to the Azor Islands this summer 2013. Perfect performance and I am very satisfied with the lens.
|
|
|
Aug 20, 2013
|
|
hagejsh
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 23, 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 1, 2013
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $2,299.00
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp at all settings, even 2.8 wide open. The low light attributes of ISO up to 5000 are undeniable. Much lighter that the previous version--more importantly much sharper. Excellent Brokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
I was afraid of the plastic components of this body, but after one year of significant abuse this has not been a problem.
|
|
|
Since my original review in October, 2012 I have had 10 months to work with this lens. I reiterate my original feeling. This lens more than adequately replaces the previous workhorse --the version 1. Lighter weight. Better Brokeh. Much sharper images. It has essentially replaced all of my primes in the 24-70 range. (I still like the 35 mm EF-L prime.) It has been through some significant abuse on several high altitude hikes. Stunning images make me again give this piece of glass a 10 rating.
|
|
|
Aug 1, 2013
|
|
slee915
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 533
|
|
Review Date: Jun 26, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Super sharp, fast AF, great for events & kids candids, weight reduction from v1
|
|
Cons:
|
price, no IS, lock button useless
|
|
|
This is the best and most useful zoom I owned. Prime quality contrast, color and sharpness.
I use this lens for multiple assignments for my kids school events. It nails focus quickly and produces awesome pictures for all events. Super sharp, high micro-contrast and awesome color.
I wish the lock button can be used at all zoom length so I can lock the lens at 1 focal length but it only works at 24mm.
At this price, it should have IS. But the weight reduction from v1 makes it much easier to carry.
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2013
|
|
kunaal27
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 24, 2013
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 24, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Amazing Optics, Fast AF, Excellent Build, Extremely Sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, No IS
|
|
|
Amazing piece of optics, it's extremely sharp, prime quality @ 2.8, bokeh is flattering, massive improvement over its predecessor very well recommended to enthusiast and wedding photographers.
|
|
|
Jun 24, 2013
|
|
haringo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 7, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 12
|
|
Review Date: Jun 7, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,099.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharpness all over the frame, better contrast at the wider end, $200 rebate :)
|
|
Cons:
|
There will be a mark III in 5 years and have to sell this
|
|
I broke down and bought it last week. There is a $200 rebate offered by Canon currently. So hurry...! 
better contrast and finally sharp all over the frame at 2.8!!! I love it. I can be more creative.
I was debating whether it is worth upgrading from the original version of this lens but I think it was worth it. I am a wedding photographer and a this zoom is our bread winner. It covers the focal length which we mainly use during weddings. Thus I was extremely excited when I found about this new lens. I have been hesitant to jump because the older lens is pretty awesome.
This lens is clearly better. Please note that most of your client's won't notice the difference but you and your professional photographer friends will!
I can repeat all what the reviews say but I think the bottom line is: the photo will look better! You will see samples here in the most recent posts: www.haringphotography.com
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2013
|
|
aestiva
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 17, 2009
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 2, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, clean bokeh, fast AF, build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
filter size, rough zoom
|
|
This lens is a revolution. After doing a lot of wedding photography in Holland with mij 24 1.4, 35 1.4, 50 1.2 and 85 1.8, I bought this lens.
This lens is as sharp as my primes (maybe sharper). Even the bokeh is almost the same as my primes (on 2.8).
The only negative aspect is the rough zoom. This lens doesn't have the smooth zoom's like the 70-200, but it's still oke.
The price?
Believe it or not, but this lens is to cheap for the quality it delivers. In Holland we have a Canon Cashback till 31 july. My last two weddings I made a lot of pictures with this lens. You can see some on http://totaalfotografie.nl and a lot of other pictures on my facebook http://facebook.com/totaalfotografie
I already sold my 24 1.4 and now I'm also going to sell my 35 1.4
|
|
|
Jun 2, 2013
|
|
Stephen Cooper
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 14, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 22, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very, very sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Cost - but decent glass will always cost
|
|
|
Super sharp lens across the range. Coming from a 24-105 f/4 L the operation of the lens wasn't a problem. Lens hood is similar to the 24-104 with the addition of a release button. Cost wasn't great in the UK at £1749, but I purchased it with £235 cash back.
Overall very early days with the lens, but I'm really pleased with the performance.
|
|
|
May 22, 2013
|
|
tuantran
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 25, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 491
|
|
Review Date: Apr 17, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,049.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharper at all focal lengths and apertures vs Ver. I
More popness vs Ver. 1
Very close in IQ vs my 35mm L
|
|
Cons:
|
Plastic feel
Hood not as effective as Ver. I
|
|
|
This is a great upgrade vs Ver. I of this lens in terms of IQ, ie, sharpness, contrast, popness but it also vignettes more, hood stinks and feels more plasticy.
I feel confident using all focal lengths and at all apertures and very similar to my 35mm L at similar FL and apertures.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2013
|
|
szinski
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 13, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Apr 15, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,045.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, sharp, sharp!
Great contrast, great color!
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
|
I have been shooting with my 5D Mark II since 2008. I've shot with a lot of different non-L lenses plus two copies of the 24-105mm f/4L lens and all were unimpressively sharp (or impressively un-sharp). :-)
Because of that, I always felt that it was my 5D Mark II that was at fault.
Then, last year, my amazing wife bought me the infamous EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II and WOW was I impressed! Now that I know it's not my body that's at fault, I had to replace my 24-105mm with the same quality lens.
Enter the new EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM II. Holy cow this thing is sharp! My 100% crops look stunning! I took quite a few side-by-side shots using both the 24-105 and the 24-70 and there just isn't any comparison! The new lens is simply amazing and now I feel vindicated in spending over $2000 for the lens!
|
|
|
Apr 15, 2013
|
|
snow14
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Mar 7, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 173
|
|
Review Date: Apr 11, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,049.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Price but you get what you pay for
|
|
|
I did not think that zoom lenses can be this sharp and I am saying this after owning 70-200 2.8II just wow
|
|
|
Apr 11, 2013
|
|
Ulan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 14, 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 236
|
|
Review Date: Mar 23, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Optically outstanding, excellent and fast AF, decently built
|
|
Cons:
|
no IS (but you know that), expensive expensive...
|
|
|
Love at first sight after opening your box and start shooting...
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2013
|
|
Whaler
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 20, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 493
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2013
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $2,099.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Everything, color, contrast, and very very sharp.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
|
I think the last review I posted was for the original 24-70 f/2.8. The original, was my Clydesdale for the past 8 years. The MK II is exactly what I was hoping for, a mid range zoom that is every bit as good as my 70-200 f/4 IS. The only experience with primes was a short but sweet ownership of a 35 f/1.4 L. The MK II easily stands up to the aforementioned prime. I really do not notice the 100 gram weight difference in the MKII. It still feels like a brick attached to a 5D MK II. About the only thing that is lighter is my wallet, as we all know the lens is expen$ive. Is it worth it? Unequivocally, YES!!!!!!! The color, contrast, and sharpness is wonderful. One other thing I have noticed is there seems to be a slight reduction in noise/grain but then again it could be my imagination. In closing I highly recommend this lens.
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
53
|
117968
|
Jan 12, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
91% of reviewers
|
$1,946.60
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.75
|
8.36
|
9.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
;)
