Size Matters!

[drisley]

I've been pondering the purchase of the Canon 24-70 F2.8L as a walkaround lens. One thing I am concerned about, however, is it's size and weight.
We only really have 1 large camera store in this city, and they almost never carry stock of high end lenses, so you have to order and wait a week. I'm so jealous of you people who can go into a local camera store, try out a lens, take some pictures, etc, before you buy.

Anyway, would somebody be able to post a picture of the 24-70L beside a lens that I have in my list so I could compare size? It would be quite helpful.
I've googled and havent seen any good comparitive images.

TIA 8)

[WestFalcon]

I don't have a picture but my 28-70 2.8 is a heavy sucker and I wouldn't like to carry it around with my 10D on vacation. I lug it at weddings but for pleasure, give me the 28-135IS or the 17-40 L if telephoto is not important. I have a BG-ED on my 10D and the 24-70 just adds a lot more weight than I would like as an everyday lens but I will say that it is a fantastic lens from what others say.

[drisley]

Ah yes thanks for the input.
I do have the 70-200F4L which doesnt bother me as far as weight is concerned. It's more the length and white colour that is annoying as it attracts alot of attention.
I'm surprised that the 24-70L actually weighs more! :shock:

I've really been eyeing the 17-40L, but I'm not a landscape type of person. I'm more of a candid people in a tight crop/zoom type of person.

[sGu]

I have 24-70mm and 70-200mm IS, and i have to say those two lenses weight pretty much the same, and i feel 70-200mm is somewhat lighter, maybe it's the comparison of its size, but i have to say that 24-70 is quite "fat" and heavy

[PacAce]

Whenever I want to do a weight comparison I go to the B&H Photo website and check out the specifications of the lens in question and compare the weight with a lens that I already have.

According to the specs found there, the 24-70 f/2.8 L weights 2.1 pounds. The 70-200 f/4 L weights a mere 1.56 pounds by comparison. However, the 70-200 f/2.8 IS L is a real heavy-weight at 3.3 pounds!

Lengthwise, th 70-200 f/4 L is 6.8 inches. The 24-70 L is only 4.9 inches.

[drisley]

Thanks, yes, that is what I do too.
But I think I heard somebody say once "a picture is worth a thousand words". :wink:

[Mike H]

You might want to check out the 24-85/3.5-4.5 as a walk around lens if you like the 24-70 focal length. It costs and weighs a lot less than the lens you are considering. And while it's not an L, I've heard that it's fairly sharp.

Mike H

[Andy_T]

Drisley,

you certainly have heard about the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI.

Apart from being hailed as 'as sharp as the 24-70 L', but considerably less expensive, it is also considerably lighter and smaller.

Of course, you'll lose the 4 mm on the wide end, but that should be ok if you mostly do portrait-style photography.
Also, with the price difference, you could buy a 17-40 as carry-with-you-in-addition-to-your-walk-around-lens-lens :twisted: .

Best regards,
Andy

[who10]

Drisley,

I think this is what you were requesting...

http://www.haskellct.com/photos/Lenses.jpg

24-85f3.5 16-35Lf2.8 24-70Lf2.8 70-200Lf4

Hope that helps...

David

[msvadi]

I'm seriously thinking about Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI myself. My only concerns is shrapness at f/2.8. I have seen some conflicting reports.

[drisley]

Thanks Who10. That really helps indeed! 8)

MSvadi, my thoughts are exactly the same as yours.
I really like everything about the Tamron 28-75/2.8, but my concern is also with sharpness at f2.8 since that is the aperture I will use most of the time.
And exactly like you, I've heard many conflicting reports about this....

[msvadi]

drisley:

I think that I'm going to order the Tamron on Tuesday, when B&H re-opens after the holidays. I want to see if they can match 17th street price.

I'll probably post some test shots by the end of the next week.

In the mean time, may be somebody else can post a couple of comparison shots? Say, Tamron 28-75 at 50mm, f/2.8 vs Canon 50mm f/2.8? It would be interesting to see how bad Tamron can be

[WestFalcon]

I've asked B&H to match prices and they will not get involved in that practice. You can try, but unless policy has changed, they will not match anyone else's price.

[msvadi]

I've asked B&H to match prices and they will not get involved in that practice. You can try, but unless policy has changed, they will not match anyone else's price.

I called B&H a couple of hours ago. They did match the 17th street photo price. I paid $20 less than the price on their web site. I expect to receive the lens on Thursday or Friday.