Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM - The Brick

[Spazzmodicus]

I think i posted it somewhere else on POTN...But i'll add to the 24-70mm fun...



Heh heh...this is funny. You posted it in this thread a couple pages back or so. The good news is that I read on an internet news site that there may a cure for Alzheimer's in "pill" form very soon.....but I forgot where I read it.


(Just kidding - Drudgereport.com)

[Spazzmodicus]

I really need to get my rump in gear and learn how to really shoot with this lens. There definitely is a learning curve, but when you nail it you know it! :p It's so darn easy to blame equipment though lol

I think you said a mouthful there. I mean, who would think there is a learning curve to a freakin' zoom lens? But you're exactly right.....or at least, what you said matches my experience. One of the things I noticed with my lens is that it flares ultra easy. You've got to become conscious of light sources and your positioning around them. I always shoot with the hood on the lens and with either a cir polarizer or a UV filter....so that might actually be the source of my flaring issues.

But I would caution any new 24-70 owners about thinking "I got a bad copy" (which I thought I did) just because you don't get razor-sharp pictures minutes after popping it out of the box. Just keep shooting with it.....get to know it's "personality".

[NAisBEST]

"Personality" is spot on! haha.

When you get a keeper with this thing, its a KEEPER. The potential is definitely there, but it does take some time it seems. I just hope after using this lens so much and mastering it's sillyness, I can use another lens and successfully bend time. 'Cause you know, after driving a Ferrari for so long, you could probably drive the heck out of a Geo metro :p

[Spazzmodicus]

"Personality" is spot on! haha.

When you get a keeper with this thing, its a KEEPER. The potential is definitely there, but it does take some time it seems. I just hope after using this lens so much and mastering it's sillyness, I can use another lens and successfully bend time. 'Cause you know, after driving a Ferrari for so long, you could probably drive the heck out of a Geo metro :p

I didn't even take my 24-70 out of my backpack this weekend. I disparately wanted to since I was vacationing in the Gatlinburg, TN and Cherokee N.C. areas.....but I wanted to focus on shooting with my Tokina 11-16. Guess what? My 24-70 habits didn't translate over at all. I was over-exposing everything. The 11-16 is a f/2.8 light-gathering monster. I don't want to stray too far off the topic of this thread, but just wanted to agree with you again, and offer the experience behind the "agreement". It's like mastering "Karate". Everything is great as long as you're at a Karate tournament....but t's just not quite the same if you show up at a Tae-Kwon-Do tournament with your Karate chops. Gotta' learn new "chops" with each lens.

[madhatter04]

Another from me. This lens is totally awesome. Coming from the 17-40L, it's different in many ways, but I feel I'm able to exercise such an incredible amount of creative flexibility with this lens. At f/2.8, it's razor sharp and the colors are breathtaking.
http://img300.imageshack.us/img300/7227/tatinamz0.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

Another from me. This lens is totally awesome. Coming from the 17-40L, it's different in many ways, but I feel I'm able to exercise such an incredible amount of creative flexibility with this lens. At f/2.8, it's razor sharp and the colors are breathtaking.

Yeah...I must say I've been real happy with what I've shot at f/2.8, in terms of "sharpness". I'm glad you got a good copy of the lens (are there really any bad ones?)

[madhatter04]

Yeah...I must say I've been real happy with what I've shot at f/2.8, in terms of "sharpness". I'm glad you got a good copy of the lens (are there really any bad ones?)
Yeah, thank our lucky stars we didn't end up with "bad copies." The date code on mine was traced to June 2008, so it's pretty darned new.
More!
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3132/2752863396_6ce5852ed7_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3150/2752862854_b02810bcce_o.jpg

[GetOnMyLevel]

just wondering.
would the ew-83f ( for the 24-70 ) fit on any canon lens with a 77mm filter size and not have vignetting if its around the same focal lengths?
i kinda like the HUGE hood :D

[Spazzmodicus]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3150/2752862854_b02810bcce_o.jpg

OK...so quit playing with your new lens already and put your groceries away.....heh heh.

[Radiohead369]

just wondering.
would the ew-83f ( for the 24-70 ) fit on any canon lens with a 77mm filter size and not have vignetting if its around the same focal lengths?
i kinda like the HUGE hood :D

This might help.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hangingpixels/2124204276/


Who doesn't love the hood right? I pretty much love everything about this lens:p

[madhatter04]

OK...so quit playing with your new lens already and put your groceries away.....heh heh.
LOL that's not my kitchen, thank golly!! Was at a friend's house yesterday evening.

[ALaS]

Alex, your lens looks a little soft. I think you should bang it around a bit. ;)


JK!! keep shooting! I expect to see a waterfall or something within this month.

[madhatter04]

^ LoL or ask a friend to drop it for me? ;)
I think I'm going back up to the Sierras for my annual fall colors trip but not until late September. Gotta take the WPE at school! Testing ruins lives.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/2752863168_cec931c5db_o.jpg

[ALaS]

^^ that's sharp.. Testing does ruin lives. Testing your lens so much you look for minute detail and when it's not there you go whine like a baby. Oh and the WPE is easy, you'll do fine, you well spoken fluffy man peach.

[saralee]

To everyone: Does the soft focus problem usually happen at the wide or the long end at f/2.8? I've had mine for less than a month and like to know how to find out if I've got a focus problem or not. What's the best way to find out? I know I shouldn't worry about it too much and just keep taking pics but I can't help to feel that I should get a good copy after laying down more than $1000.

[NAisBEST]

I find myself to be the soft focus problem more often than not. This lens' operation is in a league of it's own.

[madhatter04]

^^ that's sharp.. Testing does ruin lives. Testing your lens so much you look for minute detail and when it's not there you go whine like a baby. Oh and the WPE is easy, you'll do fine, you well spoken fluffy man peach.

LoL yeah, it's just a matter of spending a Saturday doing it. I just realized I should have taken it like two semesters ago according to the guidelines...ooops.... luckily, no holds have been placed yet so I'd better take it before they notice! :lol:

To everyone: Does the soft focus problem usually happen at the wide or the long end at f/2.8? I've had mine for less than a month and like to know how to find out if I've got a focus problem or not. What's the best way to find out? I know I shouldn't worry about it too much and just keep taking pics but I can't help to feel that I should get a good copy after laying down more than $1000.

I've HEARD the problem affects the long end, but you really should just take it around to shoot for a day and judge by your pictures. If they come out soft, consider sending it in for calibration (the turnaround time is about a week) If you are satisfied with the pictures, no worries. Mine is sharp at any setting, it seems, so I guess that would be considered 'normal' for this lens.

[saralee]

Thanks, I figured that would be the best way as well.

When I take the test shots for focusing problem. Should I set the focus point to centre, half press the shutter to focus the centre, and just snap away at 24mm and 70mm, at f/2.8? At f/2.8, I should expect the centre of the image to be in focus and slowly gets soft towards the border right?

I've HEARD the problem affects the long end, but you really should just take it around to shoot for a day and judge by your pictures. If they come out soft, consider sending it in for calibration (the turnaround time is about a week) If you are satisfied with the pictures, no worries. Mine is sharp at any setting, it seems, so I guess that would be considered 'normal' for this lens.

[wimg]

Thanks, I figured that would be the best way as well.

When I take the test shots for focusing problem. Should I set the focus point to centre, half press the shutter to focus the centre, and just snap away at 24mm and 70mm, at f/2.8? At f/2.8, I should expect the centre of the image to be in focus and slowly gets soft towards the border right?
You've got it right, partly anyway.

For focusing tests you need to put it on a tripod, MLU, remote switch. Handholding for focusing tests, when you suspect a problem, is not going to prove much, unfortunately.

Kind regards, Wim

[saralee]

Got you! You are talking about the test with the printed chart and shooting at 45 degree angle right? That is actually one of tests I was going to try. Thanks, and I will post some pics here (not test charts) for you all to see.

You've got it right, partly anyway.

For focusing tests you need to put it on a tripod, MLU, remote switch. Handholding for focusing tests, when you suspect a problem, is not going to prove much, unfortunately.

Kind regards, Wim

[wimg]

Got you! You are talking about the test with the printed chart and shooting at 45 degree angle right? That is actually one of tests I was going to try. Thanks, and I will post some pics here (not test charts) for you all to see.
Yes, that's it indeed. Again, only if you think something might be amiss.

Focus charts don't tell you all. If a lens is slightly off, like a very little backfocusing (e.g., 1.5 or 2 mm), it will very likely work well in real life.

Kind regards, Wim

[ten1437]

Oh my gosh...I just got this lens and it is a beast! I am going to get a workout. It seems like it is little slower zooming in and out...its a slower when I turn it...is that normal for this lens since it is heavy?

[drisley]

If you have the lens pointed downward at all, and zoom to 70mm, it will be more difficult because you are physically pulling the lens element up against gravity. This is normal.

[TooManyShots]

Water on Leaf

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3154/2752299018_2b16d8a43d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/vracing/2752299018/)

[Spazzmodicus]

Water on Leaf

Gotta' love the "round aperture" blurries.............

[madhatter04]

My younger dog:
http://img174.imageshack.us/img174/4006/scootygj6.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

In light of some of the conversation recently about wide-angle Tokina's.....and the fact that there's been a lot of portraits I've enjoyed in this thread lately, I just wanted to invite you all to look at a funny portrait I shot with a Tokina 11-16 f/2.8. (Handful of Cicada's)The link is directly below. But in keeping with the topic at hand....below the link is my latest 24-70L contribution. (CMA!) I thought about Photoshopping out the tree branch, but I would rather spend the time doing something more worthwhile.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=6097604#post6097604

http://www.all-event-photos.com/img/v1/p225302582-4.jpg

[madhatter04]

Love both shots!! Hah! The portrait is awesome! I'm thinking of getting either the 11-16 or 12-24 Tokina to go along with this Canon 24-70.

[ALaS]

11-16 rocks, i can't wait to get it.

[ieatstars]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3050/2758434239_e57dc5d39a_o.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

Love both shots!! Hah! The portrait is awesome! I'm thinking of getting either the 11-16 or 12-24 Tokina to go along with this Canon 24-70.

11-16 rocks, i can't wait to get it.

I haven't heard as much fanfare or the difficulty of obtaining the 12-24 as I have the 11-16. The 12-24 may be just as good a lens as the 11-16, but currently all the noise is being made over the 11-16 from what I can tell. The 11-16 does vignette a tad at the 11mm end of the range. I would venture a guess and say that a good deciding factor between the two depends on whether the user intends to use the lens with crop bodies (1.3, 1.6) or a full-frame body. The vignetting would naturally be worse on a full-frame body.

[i_am_hydrogen]

Sharp enough for ya? This was actually taken with the 40D.
http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/2/pinkrose3ll1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[texaskev]

Trigger Gumm prior to crashing on a world record jump attempt. 1 D MIIN with 24-70 L 2.8

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg266/texaskev/KJH_0459.jpg

Post crash - this was not taken with glass of topic but with a 70-200 L IS 2.8 / just posting because I love the before / after pics of the day! He had some cracked bones but healed up fine.

http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg266/texaskev/KJH_0656.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

Trigger Gumm prior to crashing on a world record jump attempt. 1 D MIIN with 24-70 L 2.8

Post crash - this was not taken with glass of topic but with a 70-200 L IS 2.8 / just posting because I love the before / after pics of the day! He had some cracked bones but healed up fine.

Wow...did you post-process the two differently...or have a cirpol on one lens and not the other? I would expect the 70-200 to be better than that compared to the 24-70.

Edit: Or should I say: "I would expect the latter image to be more vivid"?

[madhatter04]

Sharp enough for ya? This was actually taken with the 40D.

Nope! Not nearly. Work on yer skillz! Just kidding, of course. Outstanding clarity!

[Spazzmodicus]

Russia, Romania, Ukraine, Yugoslavia or Disneyland ieatstars?

[Spazzmodicus]

Sharp enough for ya? This was actually taken with the 40D.

That's so sharp I can smell the flower...heh heh.

[texaskev]

Wow...did you post-process the two differently...or have a cirpol on one lens and not the other? I would expect the 70-200 to be better than that compared to the 24-70.

The first one was with great full light. And he was all clean and fresh. Yeah in post I just corped a bit and jacked the color. The second one he was covered in dirt, the light was fading and I was way far away so the crop was huge. As you might guess, that 70-200 is even sharper than my 24-70 in most cases.

[Spazzmodicus]

that 70-200 is even sharper than my 24-70 in most cases.

Now you're talking.....the 70-200 is a bad mamba-jamba, hard to beat.

[S7000]

Heh heh...this is funny. You posted it in this thread a couple pages back or so. The good news is that I read on an internet news site that there may a cure for Alzheimer's in "pill" form very soon.....but I forgot where I read it.


(Just kidding - Drudgereport.com)

Haha...I haven't been shooting much of late, long nights, lack of sleep...My heads neither here nor there... :p

[Radiohead369]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3071/2761379449_669c3ebe68.jpg http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3214/2762227062_72927fcfe8.jpg

Second one wasn't taken with the 24-70, I was just happy with the portrait my bro took of me.

[Kristy]

Something new from last weekend... I love my 24-70 most of the time....

http://ksnyderphoto.smugmug.com/photos/349735930_FXsPB-XL.jpg

[madhatter04]

Grilled Eggplant! Yeah!
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/2847/eggplantjq4.jpg
One of my dogs playing tricks on me. Horrible composition, but so darned cute.
http://img237.imageshack.us/img237/7176/renotrickscn0.jpg

[borneoeye]

Sharp enough for ya? This was actually taken with the 40D
Very sharp!

I love my 24-70 sometimes!
This is middle of nowhere!Water is so crystal clear and warm,so inviting!
http://lh6.ggpht.com/borneoeye/R-yEiezU2hI/AAAAAAAACU4/wJwuTcSUIh8/s800/Img360copy.JPG

[trailstar]

Here's my contribution, from a mtb-ride outside Oslo, Norway

5D + 24-70 + 580 II

Focal Length 24 mm
Flash manually zoomed to 105mm
Exposure Time 1/100 sec
Aperture f/6.3
ISO Equivalent 200

http://www.pbase.com/trond/image/101656390/original.jpg

[madhatter04]

^ NICE!!! I've always wanted a picture of me mountain biking or something! Sometimes it sucks to be the one constantly BEHIND the lens. That's why I'm glad a friend of mine just ordered a 40D! ;) Love the scenery, as well. Sometimes, I think I was meant to live somewhere that is not Southern California!

What's with all the "I love my 24-70L .. sometimes.." comments? Lighten up, buttercups! ;)

[Radiohead369]

I love mine all the time;)

[Paul Tinworth]

I'll love mine when it arrives.

I hate you lot for convincing me to buy it! :lol: :D

[Radiohead369]

"Sarah Cawnah?"

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3282/2759023538_4d2f872cfa.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

"Sarah Cawnah?"

BAHHHHHHHRR HAR HAR...LOL! That was funny. Still a neat shot. BTW...what kind of bag are you packing there?

[Spazzmodicus]

I'll love mine when it arrives.

I hate you lot for convincing me to buy it! :lol: :D

I really loved mine when it arrived and everything was rosy....but then when some of the other lenses arrived....my 24-70 got jealous. So now I have a 24-70 with an attitude problem. It doesn't help that some of the bigger lenses "rub it in" with comments like "My element is bigger than yours" and stuff....

[Radiohead369]

Haha thanks spazz:D

It's a lowepro nova 5 AW

[Spazzmodicus]

Haha thanks spazz:D

It's a lowepro nova 5 AW

I just pickd up a Canon EG1 gadget bag. I'm gonna try the side-bag thing for a while now. By backpack is getting too friggin' big and heavy to be practical.

[Paul Tinworth]

I really loved mine when it arrived and everything was rosy....but then when some of the other lenses arrived....my 24-70 got jealous. So now I have a 24-70 with an attitude problem. It doesn't help that some of the bigger lenses "rub it in" with comments like "My element is bigger than yours" and stuff....

:lol:

Mine will have to compete with its older 70-200 cousin, but I'll make sure they both get equal attention. I'm far more excited than I should be! :D

[Tareq]

Great that i bought 24-70 as first L, so my love to this lens will be eternal [unless canon will produce 20-100 f2L IS].

[Spazzmodicus]

Great that i bought 24-70 as first L, so my love to this lens will be eternal [unless canon will produce 20-100 f2L IS].

F/2.0? It would probably cost $3000

[Mycroft]

Great that i bought 24-70 as first L, so my love to this lens will be eternal [unless canon will produce 20-100 f2L IS].

HAH! Don't hold your breath. :D Although I suspect the next revision of this lens will add IS, and THAT will piss me off, 'cause then I'll have to upgrade!

[Tareq]

F/2.0? It would probably cost $3000

So? we got many gear over $3000 anyway, sure at that time if this dream will be true then dumping that $3000 will be usual habit.

[Tareq]

HAH! Don't hold your breath. :D Although I suspect the next revision of this lens will add IS, and THAT will piss me off, 'cause then I'll have to upgrade!

Yes, but can't we dream just to get something more, why should i upgrade if Canon will produce new 24-70 with IS? i will keep 24-105 in this case, and if you said 2.8 & IS, then i don't feel it is a big improvement in the lens, this should produce 24-105 f2.8L IS or 20-80 f2.8L IS or even f2 instead of f2.8.

I am still happy to use my 24-70 as it is now and i never feel i need IS anyway.

[dtngo]

My younger dog:

Gorgeous! I love Collies!

[Swann1]

Gorgeous! I love Collies!
Are they Collies or Shelties? They look like Shelties to me.

[madhatter04]

Swann1 gets the award... they're Shelties! ;)

[Wakahuna]

Just got this lens last week. Here are a few of my first shots.

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k424/Wakahuna/Backyard/LizA.jpg

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k424/Wakahuna/Balloon%20Fest/19Group5.jpg

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k424/Wakahuna/Balloon%20Fest/30Fire3.jpg

http://i326.photobucket.com/albums/k424/Wakahuna/Backyard/BlueDrag.jpg

[Swann1]

Swann1 gets the award... they're Shelties! ;)
:D We used to have a Shelty as a family pet, that's how I knew. I can post pics later.

[KillerBlackbird]

Ordered mine yesterday, it will be here tomorrow, I can't wait!!!! This thread convinced me to buy it.

[re_guderian]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3050/2758434239_e57dc5d39a_o.jpg
Church of the Spilled Blood in St. Petersburg?

[madhatter04]

Ordered mine yesterday, it will be here tomorrow, I can't wait!!!! This thread convinced me to buy it.
You'll love it!! Just don't be discouraged if it takes a wee bit of 'getting used to.' :P

[goodolimack91]

^^ what do you mean by that? i just got mine today after selling my 17-55

[Spazzmodicus]

^^ what do you mean by that? i just got mine today after selling my 17-55

Until he answers, please allow me to step in with my own two cents and I'll add that two cent with this picture:

http://www.all-event-photos.com/img/v1/p505900197-4.jpg

I may have posted this photo before....I can't remember. But anyways, I was less than thrilled with it. It's a portrait of my niece at a family get-together. I wasn't pursuing the "soft focus" look. Was it the cameras angle in relation to the light source? Was I using the lens hood this day? Did I just miss the focus? Was I too far within the "minimum focus" distance? Did I open up the aperture too much? It's stuff like this that you have to get used to with a lens because sometimes these elements change whenever you switch lenses. This was like the very first or second shot I took with the lens after getting it. It regularly takes shots that are sharp enough to make your eyes bleed. But a few good habits are needed to get shots like that. As far as I know...nobody is born with these particular photography habits, so THIS is what was meant by "just don't be discouraged if it takes a wee bit of 'getting used to".... I did get discouraged after viewing this shot and just knew I had a bad lens but I now know this simply was not the case.

[madhatter04]

^^ what do you mean by that? i just got mine today after selling my 17-55
I mean that some people seem to have a little trouble getting the hang of this lens and immediately blame the lens rather than exploring it. I'm not saying there aren't bad copies out there, but definitely take a day to shoot with it and get used to it a bit!

[mizouse]

man seeing all these photos kind of makes me want to dump my 17-55..

[muscleflex]

i just got this lens for the weekend. tested it last night and wow! the colors are nice! but i can see why they call this 'The Brick'! it's huge and heavy! i'm surprised it's bigger than my 16-35 II!
i'm very impressed and i want one to keep now!

[Tareq]

i just got this lens for the weekend. tested it last night and wow! the colors are nice! but i can see why they call this 'The Brick'! it's huge and heavy! i'm surprised it's bigger than my 16-35 II!
i'm very impressed and i want one to keep now!

Thats happened to me when i bought 100 macro, i felt it is a bit heavy than my another lenses [kit lens and 4 sigma lenses], but when i bought 24-70 after this lens i said "OH MY", how i can hold this thing? later i bought 100-400 and 70-200 and so, i feel 70-200 and 100-400 as toys, and 24-70 is so light now and i don't feel the weight at all, i hope you can test 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8, then i am sure this "Brick" will be 0KG.

[Alejandro Sandoval]

From my camping trip

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3078/2763087944_8aa88f674b_o.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

Thats happened to me when i bought 100 macro, i felt it is a bit heavy than my another lenses [kit lens and 4 sigma lenses], but when i bought 24-70 after this lens i said "OH MY", how i can hold this thing? later i bought 100-400 and 70-200 and so, i feel 70-200 and 100-400 as toys, and 24-70 is so light now and i don't feel the weight at all, i hope you can test 300 f2.8 or 400 f2.8, then i am sure this "Brick" will be 0KG.

My story is similar. I started with the 28-80 f/2.8-4.0L. Then after shooting a few pics with the 70-200 "heavyma"...along with the tripod mount attached, I realized that the 28-80 wasn't so bad. So when I got the 24-70 I already had built up giant muscles from carrying the 70-200.....heh heh. But with both lenses, or any lens for that matter....if image quality(IQ) is the primary objective then weight doesn't really matter. If it's heavy, then get a monopod or something.

BTW Tareq, I tried to PM you but your inbox is full.

[egordon99]

Great shots everyone! I'm looking to buy this lens, but quick question - My two "primary" primes are the 30mm and the 85mm, but I hate having to switch them. If I get the brick, would I be dissapointed comparing them to those two lenses? I usually shoot them at f/2, so I would have to shoot the brick at f/2.8, or should I just buy another 40D so each lens gets its own body? ;)

[Spazzmodicus]

Great shots everyone! I'm looking to buy this lens, but quick question - My two "primary" primes are the 30mm and the 85mm, but I hate having to switch them. If I get the brick, would I be dissapointed comparing them to those two lenses? I usually shoot them at f/2, so I would have to shoot the brick at f/2.8, or should I just buy another 40D so each lens gets its own body? ;)

That may depend on a few factors, for example: Just how "used" have you got to shooting at f/2.0? Will your style (hand-held, tripod, scenic, photojournalism, ect.) allow you to be comfortable with a 1 stop loss when switching to the 24-70? Plus..going from 85mm on the long end to 70mm may leave you wanting more length. In your case I would say the 24-70 may be a sacrificial trade-off. Comparing f/2.0 primes to a f/2.8 zoom isn't all that fair and balanced. From my perspective, I love zoom lenses and hate switching lenses. Primes are not my friend. It may be wise for you to do like one of the previous responses and rent a 24-70 before dumping your primes and regretting it later.

[egordon99]

Thanks for your thoughts Spazzmodicus (interesting name :) ), I tend to shoot pictures of people, indoors and out but inside I use my 580EXII so the light loss isn't an issue and I still can get decent blur at f/2.8 (although f/2 is better) and I figured the difference between 85mm and 70mm just means a step forward (can confirm with my 17-85) and the zoom gives me a little wider which could help as sometimes 30mm is a bit too close.

Not concerned about lack of wide angle as I have my Sigma 10-20mm for W-I-D-E, so I'm not looking at the 17-55 (I've been bitten by the L bug, and I'm not too fond of the flare issues with the 17-55)

When I was with Pentax, I had the Tamron 28-75 and I loved the range and speed, so I have a fair bit of experience with a zoom of that range/speed, but I do want something that focuses as fast as possibly (why I switched from Pentax)....

I guess my main questions are more about sheer image quality @f/2.8 (wide open for the zoom, ~two stops down for the primes) as opposed to useability.

Keep those pictures coming!

[egordon99]

Oh, don't think I'll be dumping the primes, as when I can't/don't want to use flash, they are indispensible. I'm starting to get more paid work, so I am seeing if I can swing this purchase (would probably dump the 17-85 though)

[Tareq]

My story is similar. I started with the 28-80 f/2.8-4.0L. Then after shooting a few pics with the 70-200 "heavyma"...along with the tripod mount attached, I realized that the 28-80 wasn't so bad. So when I got the 24-70 I already had built up giant muscles from carrying the 70-200.....heh heh. But with both lenses, or any lens for that matter....if image quality(IQ) is the primary objective then weight doesn't really matter. If it's heavy, then get a monopod or something.

BTW Tareq, I tried to PM you but your inbox is full.

Exactly, i care about the IQ, not the weight.

I am sorry, i've got many PMs and i didn't delete most of them, i deleted few now and i can receive now, send it again.

[egordon99]

Final thought (for now), I'm starting to shoot weddings/Bar Mitzvahs, so I need a good fast "standard" zoom lens as I don't think I'll have a chance to switch between my two primes, and I'm not crazy about the 1 7-85 (it gives me good images, but the primes give me WOW, OMG!!!!! images)....Can you tell I'm trying to convince myself to get the brick? :lol:

[Tareq]

I advise all people not getting the "Brick", it is not a good lens, it is soft and the IQ is not good as we expect, i will not sell mine but i will not use it again at all, bad lens, bad bad bad.

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/3955/daughter1dl8.jpg

http://img380.imageshack.us/img380/5377/daughters2sa7.jpg

[Paul Tinworth]

I believe you, Tareq. ;)

[stathunter]

I believe you, Tareq. ;)

He sells used cars. :)

[Tareq]

I believe you, Tareq. ;)

Yeah, you should, i have enough experience with this "Brick". :lol:

[Tareq]

He sells used cars. :)

If so then i will get a camera that i dream about all the time and i will complete my gear list with more lenses. ;)

[Swann1]

:D We used to have a Shelty as a family pet, that's how I knew. I can post pics later.
Here's a photo. Not taken with this lens and is a scan of a negative. I think this was taken with a Minolta I used to have.

[Spazzmodicus]

Final thought (for now), I'm starting to shoot weddings/Bar Mitzvahs, so I need a good fast "standard" zoom lens as I don't think I'll have a chance to switch between my two primes, and I'm not crazy about the 1 7-85 (it gives me good images, but the primes give me WOW, OMG!!!!! images)....Can you tell I'm trying to convince myself to get the brick? :lol:

I hope I don't step on anybody's toes with this, but I think it would be ridiculous to shoot events like that with primes, or two cameras strapped to you. Your feet would be moving far more than the shutters. In a busy environment like that, being able to zoom and format the image instantaneously is pretty much a requirement. You'll most likely have to step into the realm of "Flash" though, but again that depends on the customers expectations, preference the amount of freedom they allow you.

[Rehuel]

I hope I don't step on anybody's toes with this, but I think it would be ridiculous to shoot events like that with primes, or two cameras strapped to you. Your feet would be moving far more than the shutters. In a busy environment like that, being able to zoom and format the image instantaneously is pretty much a requirement. You'll most likely have to step into the realm of "Flash" though, but again that depends on the customers expectations, preference the amount of freedom they allow you.

I half agree with you on this one. I would not shoot with primes as they just limit you too much in these type of events. But, I would use two camera bodies, one would have the 24-70 attached and the second the 70-200 attached (f/2.8 of course). I've never had a problem switching between the bodies and it's a lot faster then switching lenses.

[egordon99]

You're not stepping on my toes....Pretty much my thinking in going for the 24-70. At home in my living room, I'm fine with spending 10 minutes with my 30, and then switching. It works well for me (or just go on a walk with only one of them mounted). My first wedding is in October, and as of now not sure what I'd do. The 70-200 f/4 IS would be great (with flash) but the 17-85 lacks the WOW factor.

I do know a guy who has shot weddings with only Pentax primes (even some old manual focus M42 ones!) and he does a great job, so it can be done.
Thanks again for chiming in!

Tareq - Nice shots!

I hope I don't step on anybody's toes with this, but I think it would be ridiculous to shoot events like that with primes, or two cameras strapped to you. Your feet would be moving far more than the shutters. In a busy environment like that, being able to zoom and format the image instantaneously is pretty much a requirement. You'll most likely have to step into the realm of "Flash" though, but again that depends on the customers expectations, preference the amount of freedom they allow you.

[Tareq]

Thats why i like to have more than one body, for sports i use 2 or 3 bodies, for events i use also 2 bodies, for outdoor i always carry 2 bodies, and about lenses i am always going out with minimum 3 lenses, MINIMUM.

[ZekaG]

Got it this month and love it:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/2754100408_f9f63c1487.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3270/2746262378_455099b2f6_b.jpg

[Tareq]

Got it this month and love it:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/2754100408_f9f63c1487.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3270/2746262378_455099b2f6_b.jpg

Congrats!

Nice shots though, i love the 2nd :)

[Spazzmodicus]

"....I do know a guy who has shot weddings with only Pentax primes (even some old manual focus M42 ones!) and he does a great job, so it can be done.
T......"

Yeah, but I bet he didn't attempt that on his first wedding...heh heh.
I shot my first wedding with a 28-80 f/2.8-4 and a 70-200 f/2.8 non-IS. The f/4 end of the shorter zoom was a pain in low light sometimes. The 70-200 f/2.8 is almost mandatory for weddings IMO.

[kepople]

The cake flower is fantastic...

k

[Spazzmodicus]

I half agree with you on this one. I would not shoot with primes as they just limit you too much in these type of events. But, I would use two camera bodies, one would have the 24-70 attached and the second the 70-200 attached (f/2.8 of course). I've never had a problem switching between the bodies and it's a lot faster then switching lenses.

Well...you've got the equipment to do that with. I must admit, I was thinking in terms of my own equipment limitations, or to be more specific, my "lack of" equipment. Do you use flash brackets, diffusion or mostly available light?

[Rehuel]

Well...you've got the equipment to do that with. I must admit, I was thinking in terms of my own equipment limitations, or to be more specific, my "lack of" equipment. Do you use flash brackets, diffusion or mostly available light?

I use a Custom Brackets Digital Pro M with the 580EXII mounted on top and connected with an OSC-3. I have a Stofen Omni-Bounce on my flash 90% of the time as I believe it works very well even if i'm not bouncing it off of anything. Unfortunately, for Church weddings, the time you can use a flash is limited and most of the time I have to use available light. If you are using a bare flash, I would recommend turning the head 90 degrees and use the built in panel on the flash head and it will give you pretty good lighting that's not too harsh.

Btw, you have plenty of equipment to get that done your self.

[Spazzmodicus]

Btw, you have plenty of equipment to get that done your self.

Yeah, I thought about editing my comment earlier. The "lack of" remark was solely about camera bodies. I pretty much have everything else covered. I'm looking for a 1DsMkII so I can retire my 10D. Also, I'm not sure about going the pro-strobe direction ala Alien Bees or something like that. I've had good success with my speedlites and current umbrellas but sometimes more power would be better.

As far as flash, I prefer "camera-mounted" with Gary Fong diffusers. I use the Whaletail, the Reporter and the Lightsphere II. They've got a little bit of learning curve but once you learn each diffuser's "personality" then they become a "must have". I tried flash brackets but found them cumbersome....especially when you're chasing little kids through the playgound tubes at McDonald's or Chuck E. Cheeses.....heh heh. But in 'all of the above' the absolute "must have" without any debate whatsoever is the 24-70.

[rooftopsuicideclub]

my first official photo project with this lens ( just got it yesterday!!)
i'm quitting smoking, so it's titled 'Stand Fast'.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3099/2769061960_e95881e3b1_o.jpg

[Radiohead369]

Very sharp^

"Canon, where are ya?"

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3060/2767329910_26f4b66029_o.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

my first official photo project with this lens ( just got it yesterday!!) i'm quitting smoking, so it's titled 'Stand Fast'.

Alternate Title: "The Broken Camel"

[Dorman]

Nice first project Rooftop, lens looks like a fine copy.

I'm getting very close to picking up my 2nd copy of the brick, I shouldn't have let it go for a 17-55 but it was necessary for this seasons wedding work. Alas, I'm looking to trade for a sharp 24-70 or maybe even the 24-105, though I'd greatly miss F/2.8 methinks.

[madhatter04]

Nice first project Rooftop, lens looks like a fine copy.

I'm getting very close to picking up my 2nd copy of the brick, I shouldn't have let it go for a 17-55 but it was necessary for this seasons wedding work. Alas, I'm looking to trade for a sharp 24-70 or maybe even the 24-105, though I'd greatly miss F/2.8 methinks.


I don't represent them or anything, but I got my copy new from www.buydig.com. A friend of mine also got hers from them, and both of our lenses are as sharp as tacks and the date codes are from June 2008. So, if you're looking for a new one, I'd recommend them for sure. :)

[Dorman]

Thanks for the heads up!

[rooftopsuicideclub]

I don't represent them or anything, but I got my copy new from www.buydig.com (http://www.buydig.com). A friend of mine also got hers from them, and both of our lenses are as sharp as tacks and the date codes are from June 2008. So, if you're looking for a new one, I'd recommend them for sure. :)


i picked mine up from b&h.
i just love that i ordered it thursday at 9am, and it was in my hands friday at 10am....

it was tack sharp too. BH never lets me down.

[madhatter04]

i picked mine up from b&h.
i just love that i ordered it thursday at 9am, and it was in my hands friday at 10am....

it was tack sharp too. BH never lets me down.

Excuse me, sir, but Buydig has never let ME down! :lol::lol:
LoL kidding, of course.

[rooftopsuicideclub]

Excuse me, sir, but Buydig has never let ME down! :lol::lol:
LoL kidding, of course.

you TOTALLY work for them!!

;)

[Spazzmodicus]

you TOTALLY work for them!!

;)

Probably got the lens as a free bonus because of all the solid leads he generates....heh heh.

[shayb]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v731/_shay/IMG_1649small.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v731/_shay/IMG_1247small.jpg

[drisley]

Ok just to show how well this lens performs, I took this image as part of a 3 bracket HDR combo.

100% F2.8 (http://www.mts.net/~lftbrain/pics/ctv_f28.jpg)

This was the image that was overexposed by 2 stops, and recovered in Camera Raw and was taken WIDE OPEN. Not only is it sharp, but considering the overexposure, there is remarkably little CA/fringing.

[Tareq]

Ok just to show how well this lens performs, I took this image as part of a 3 bracket HDR combo.

100% F2.8 (http://www.mts.net/%7Elftbrain/pics/ctv_f28.jpg)

This was the image that was overexposed by 2 stops, and recovered in Camera Raw and was taken WIDE OPEN. Not only is it sharp, but considering the overexposure, there is remarkably little CA/fringing.

Send the 3 bracketed shots and let's see what we can do for HDR

[drisley]

Send the 3 bracketed shots and let's see what we can do for HDR
Oh, I'm way ahead of ya ;)


24-70, F2.8
http://images2.fotop.net/albums2/isp/miscellaneous/cky03.jpg


24-70, F4.0
http://images2.fotop.net/albums2/isp/miscellaneous/cky002.jpg

[Tareq]

Oh, I'm way ahead of ya ;)


24-70, F2.8
http://images2.fotop.net/albums2/isp/miscellaneous/cky03.jpg


24-70, F4.0
http://images2.fotop.net/albums2/isp/miscellaneous/cky002.jpg

ok ;)

[2Future4U]

some really old stuff i found on my external
circa 20D days

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3221/2729971902_e3a54b7150_b.jpg



more recent stuff with the 5D

ghetto Home Depot tungsten lights

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3006/2574769862_a9323c01db_b.jpg



available light

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3175/2420712360_5ac8a69799_b.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2063/2508699793_e11301a421_b.jpg

studio shots with Esprit Digital 500DX



http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3024/2380761251_030f78965a_b.jpg





runnin around Los Angeles with the Elan II 35mm film dinosaur

and an off camera 430ex

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1020/1146565439_964752257a_b.jpg



http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1239/1410393010_6c21312ca8_b.jpg



http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2155/2433992232_288e53a3bd_b.jpg

whew

[Radiohead369]

New member of the fam.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2008/2772123807_3c51b30e13_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3095/2772124077_633da3bb1b_o.jpg

[KillerBlackbird]

I think I found my new favorite lens. I can't wait to pick up a 5D or 5DMarkII with this thing now...wow.

1. No post processing, just a resize, border, and logo added.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/4-65.jpg

2. Un-sharp mask applied.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/2-76.jpg

3. Un-sharp mask applied.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/3-66.jpg

[Spazzmodicus]

I think I found my new favorite lens. I can't wait to pick up a 5D or 5DMarkII with this thing now...wow.


Nice photos. Looks like I'll have to visit Vermont on my next trip North.

[Franko515]

I think I found my new favorite lens. I can't wait to pick up a 5D or 5DMarkII with this thing now...wow.

1. No post processing, just a resize, border, and logo added.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/4-65.jpg

2. Un-sharp mask applied.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/2-76.jpg

3. Un-sharp mask applied.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/3-66.jpg

For your logo, on darker photos (well the at least the bottom, since thats where u place your logo) you may wanna change the color to white or gray. Something more visiable, I realyy didnt see it until the last photo then I went back and looked at the others and can just barely see it.

Oh yeah, nice shots :p

[KillerBlackbird]

Thanks guys!

A couple more just because this lens is awesome:

1.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/5-65.jpg

2.
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/1-86.jpg

3. Taken through my front windshield:
http://i240.photobucket.com/albums/ff80/killerblackbird/6-59.jpg

[echo]

Since tweaking the focus on the 1DmkIII I'm starting to use this a lot more but I think I have a tad of tweaking to go yet, maybe it's 1 notch backfocusing. Anyhow, here's some:

http://recordproduction.smugmug.com/photos/339811049_KFceM-XL.jpg
f/2.8 at 59mm

http://recordproduction.smugmug.com/photos/351089137_ovKf6-XL.jpg
f/4 at 24mm

http://recordproduction.smugmug.com/photos/351085392_hRiFn-XL.jpg
f/6.3 at 24mm

[madhatter04]

^ Love the last one!
Here's a photo I took yesterday. I simply adore the way this lens renders depth and dimension.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3161/2780388694_20b39237f3_o.jpg

[BKGInc]

Mmmmmnnn! Looks tasty! Nice shot too!

^ Love the last one!
Here's a photo I took yesterday. I simply adore the way this lens renders depth and dimension.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3161/2780388694_20b39237f3_o.jpg

[ALaS]

^ Love the last one!
Here's a photo I took yesterday. I simply adore the way this lens renders depth and dimension.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3161/2780388694_20b39237f3_o.jpg


Ummm... Those burgers are definitely too sharp to eat. ;)

[Tareq]

Nice shots people, the last shots here are truly lovely and fantastic, keep going people, i like to see your shots always.

[Spazzmodicus]

Since tweaking the focus on the 1DmkIII I'm starting to use this a lot more but I think I have a tad of tweaking to go yet, maybe it's 1 notch backfocusing. Anyhow, here's some:

http://recordproduction.smugmug.com/photos/351085392_hRiFn-XL.jpg
f/6.3 at 24mm

Nice shot. Is the lens vignetting or is this a product of post-processing. I know that some lenses are fine on crop bodies but vignette on full-frame bodies...but then again, the 1DmkIII isn't a full-frame body.

[echo]

Nice shot. Is the lens vignetting or is this a product of post-processing. I know that some lenses are fine on crop bodies but vignette on full-frame bodies...but then again, the 1DmkIII isn't a full-frame body.

I used LR to add a bit of vignette for creative effect. On the 1.3 crop you see very little drop off even at f/2.8 :)

[elysium]

Nice shot. Is the lens vignetting or is this a product of post-processing. I know that some lenses are fine on crop bodies but vignette on full-frame bodies...but then again, the 1DmkIII isn't a full-frame body.
I have no had much issues with vigetting just yet. I suppose I have not studied the edges properly but I know it definately does with a Cokin P filter system. Will try and have a sample tonight.

[fiveFPS]

i wish the 1DIII was a full frame =) ... at least the 1.3 is better than 1.6

[drisley]

OMG, I'm hungry after seeing those burgers!:shock:

The one furthest away from the camera looks like that's the one that fell on the ground... that's the one you give to your mother-in-law :D

Spazzmodicus, fantastic colour in that picture.

I love the 1.3x crop btw, you get the best of both worlds imho... nice DOF control nearly as good as FF, and extra reach which is handy in sports. It's also more forgiving for lenses in the corners :)

[madhatter04]

OMG, I'm hungry after seeing those burgers!:shock:

The one furthest away from the camera looks like that's the one that fell on the ground... that's the one you give to your mother-in-law :D

LOL! The one problem with making your own burgers with extra lean ground beef is they're not as picture perfect as your typical fast foodies, but they taste so good. I teased my mom about that burger because she grilled them after I pattied them by saying, "Great. How am I supposed to test my lens if you've deformed one of the burgers?!?" I got smacked, but at least it made ME laugh. :lol::lol::lol:

[Tareq]

i wish the 1DIII was a full frame =) ... at least the 1.3 is better than 1.6

Why you wish this? you always can think about 1DsIII ;)

[echo]

I love the 1.3x crop btw, you get the best of both worlds imho... nice DOF control nearly as good as FF, and extra reach which is handy in sports. It's also more forgiving for lenses in the corners :)

I agree. I love the 1.3 crop. Only very occasionally I need full frame and I've got the 5D for those occasions :)

[Spazzmodicus]

Spazzmodicus, fantastic colour in that picture.:)

Thanks man, I appreciate it. That made my day!

Now for the bad news, I was just responding to "echo" who is the one that actually shot the pic. But it's good news for Echo.....heh heh.

[Kristy]

So many awesome shots here... The burgers are making me hungry for junk food! And ECHO... I LOVE that beach shot of your kiddo with him/her facing the ocean! Superb!

Recent Favorite..... ;)

http://ksnyderphoto.smugmug.com/photos/354974909_6Dkap-L.jpg

[drisley]

Thanks man, I appreciate it. That made my day!

Now for the bad news, I was just responding to "echo" who is the one that actually shot the pic. But it's good news for Echo.....heh heh.
DOH! Multitasking foils me again!

[drisley]

So many awesome shots here... The burgers are making me hungry for junk food! And ECHO... I LOVE that beach shot of your kiddo with him/her facing the ocean! Superb!

Recent Favorite..... ;)


Great eyes!

[Kristy]

The one furthest away from the camera looks like that's the one that fell on the ground... that's the one you give to your mother-in-law :D



LOL..... :lol:

Great eyes!

Thanks... She's a living doll with the most amazing eyes!

[elysium]

Right, most of the topics across various forums was about this lens usability wide open and how soft it was! Mines just awesome wide open and even better stopped down a touch. LOVE IT!

SP
http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/1371/img9376sx5.jpg

100% crop for pixel peepers
http://img151.imageshack.us/img151/7686/28py5.jpg

[Radiohead369]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3292/2788525466_50edd5578a_o.jpg

[S-S]

awww lol cute! might want to crop out the bright patch on the right? detracts from the kitten who is properly exposed

[elysium]

Heres some from yesterday

1
http://img149.imageshack.us/img149/6742/img9437bo8.jpg

2
http://img368.imageshack.us/img368/6613/img9447dj1.jpg

3
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/1392/img9450xa3.jpg

[mrpibb]

My friends daughter, the expert frog hunter!!!

http://sandhillaviation.com/huntress.jpg

[Tareq]

My friends daughter, the expert frog hunter!!!

http://sandhillaviation.com/huntress.jpg

WOW, sure my daughters will never be a frog hunter, neither my wife or sister ;)
Nice shot

[saralee]

Finally gotten around to doing this test. How do I do? I used a protractor to measure the 45 degree angle as I don't have a super duper tripod yet. Maybe off by 1/2 degree :oops:.

http://i34.tinypic.com/2cn6rfl.jpg

[saralee]

Freaky shot! The frogs are giving me goosebumps.

My friends daughter, the expert frog hunter!!!

[elysium]

@ saralee

Looks fine to me. Have fun with the lens. I would save the focus charts for times when you drop your lens. I have yet to use one and has put my mind at rest. :)

[mrpibb]

Freaky shot! The frogs are giving me goosebumps


YES!! very scary, both daughters have no fear!!!

Here's the younger one




http://sandhillaviation.com/huntress1.jpg

Both photos were filled with the on camera flash (40D), tried to have the fish stay still for the shot, but he wouldn't have anything to do with it ;)

[BKGInc]

Let me ask you experts.......do these pics look sharp to you? I am still un experienced and am not sure.
Below is a standard view and a 100% view crop. EXIF data is avail.
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g165/BKGInc/CanonPicture08-26-08015.jpg
http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g165/BKGInc/CanonPicture08-26-08015100Crop.jpg
Thanks,
Brian:cool:

[saralee]

No, it isn't sharp at all. However, I think you took the shot wide open and focused on the wrong thing - you focused on the shadow under the one ball. Taking your shot at f/2.8 with the wrong subject focused will often result in out-of-focus looking shots like this.

Let me ask you experts.......do these pics look sharp to you? I am still un experienced and am not sure.
Below is a standard view and a 100% view crop. EXIF data is avail.


Thanks,
Brian:cool:

[BKGInc]

No, it isn't sharp at all. However, I think you took the shot wide open and focused on the wrong thing - you focused on the shadow under the one ball. Taking your shot at f/2.8 with the wrong subject focused will often result in out-of-focus looking shots like this.
I checked my focus points and used center point focus and I focused on the one ball right above the white circle with the number one. Any other suggestions?