24-70L

[Reservoir_Dog]

Hi all
Im new to this forum. So, hello!

I want to buy a canon 24-70L lens, but i am scared when i read all those negative copy threads!
Is the Quality control so bad, that the user must find out for themself if u have a good or bad copy?
I find it a little unacceptable, it is not a cheap lens....
Should i buy it or not?

Does someone here has some example pics made with that lens?

Btw: i have a 20D with kitlens.

Greetings!

[Jon]

Negatives on the 24-70 L? Sure you're not confusing it with the Tamron 24-75? I remember there were some QC concerns about that one.

[jbradc]

Ditto...I have never read a bad review of the 24-70L. I love mine, it is my #1 wedding lens.

[thomasrhee]

There are repeated reports of soft focusing with bad samples of the 24-70/2.8L. Personally, I've never seen the soft focus problem myself with several samples but like any lens, there are going to be bad ones floating around. However, the majority of people who buy this lens are 100% satisfied with the image quality.

Just buy from a reputable dealer where you can either test the lens before purchasiing or from a mail order company that won't give you problems with returns such as B&H Photo.

Here's a sample of a negative review on this lens.

http://www.grumpysworld.com/photoguide/review.htm

tyr

[Reservoir_Dog]

No, just do a search on DPREVIEW forums about that lens.....

[DReb-MO]

...Here's a sample of a negative review on this lens.

http://www.grumpysworld.com/photoguide/review.htm

tyr

That review is for the older 28-70mm.

[who me?]

I have heard almost nothing negative abotu this lens except that it is big and heavy for it's focal length. Haven't heard of any optical problems. I just looked at one last weekend and the lens was larger than I thought and looked pretty awesome though..
I was all ready to buy it but UNFORTUNATELY, I had a couple of $$ emergencies right before the weekend. So I looked at the Tamron, which was my second choice then, and didn't like it. Since I needed this focal length range for the next weekend and couldn't be without a lens, I bought the 24-85 f3.5-4.5 USM for now. :(
So the 24-70 is my next to buy after I save back up for a while. Some day it will be mine....

[Mills]

Never had a problem with mine. Spends most of it's time on my MK II. Awesome lens.

[SeanH]

I don't really like mine, seems like the focus is off. I can put it on a tripod and focus on something.....then focus again, and watch the lens move like it's trying to re-focus. After about 3 times I can push the shutter botton and the lens will not move and stay locked on the subject. None of the other 2 L lenses I have do this. And this is the second lens, I took the first one back because of the same issue. Also this was the case on my 10 & 20D. I shot some motocross photo's with it and they came out blury as hell. I need to do some more test with it, but I can't be bothered......I just seem to avoid it. I did test it on a stuffed animal where I focused on the eye and the eye was not sharp, however right under the eye was. I think I am going to have to send it to Canon and have them check it out.

For those of you that have this lens I would be interested to know if your does this jumping back and forth thing when you focus on the same point.

[CyberDyneSystems]

No, just do a search on DPREVIEW forums about that lens.....

We don't tend to agree much with that forum....

[blackviolet]

24-70L - rocks! :D

28-70L - dirt :(

[gwphoto]

I have a Canon 24-70 f2.8L and I love it..

[steibeldj]

This lens is big, it is heavy, but wow it takes fantastic pictures!

The autofocus is fast, smooth and silent.

I still like the reach and size of my 28-135 IS, but when the light is low this lens gets the job done.

[Steve Parr]

The 24-70mm L is going to be my next lens, period.

I simply like too much of what I've seen shot by it...

Steve

[mbze430]

Yeah, the 24-70 is pretty nice. I don't use it much, but I should.

Here is a shot with a 24-70

http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/album/Nature/Landscape/slides/Griffith%20Park%20+%20Downtown%20LA.html

http://mysite.verizon.net/turbo2/album/Nature/Landscape/slides/Lake%20Tahoe%20Beach.html

[MediaMagic]

My 24-70L is damn near perfection in glass. It is only surpassed by my 70-200L IS. Those are the two "best" all around lenses in my bag. I understand that there are bad copies of lenses that just happen to fall on the negative side of tolerances, but, if I had to venture a guess, I would say that most, not all mind you, but most of the complaints about the 24-70L begin with user error and snowball from there.

One complaint I *DO* have with the 24-70 is the hood mounting ring. I've snapped mine loose twice. I know I haven't handled it roughly, but, that sucker has come loose twice. I do think the hood ring is an extremely stupid design for a lens that is supposed to handle the daily grind of the pros.

[raylks]

Actually EF28-70mm L does not suffer from bad copy variation, at least mine is not. Both 24-70 and 28-70 are decent lens. If you go for value option, you can get a good bargain from 28-70mm used lens. I cannot see visually the difference between these two lens.

[mdr]

Negative reviews are all written by N***n owners ;) .

[Tom Barnett]

I heard so many good things about this lens, and the few times I've been able to use one I've loved it. With a 20D you'll have no problems with sharpness, speed and quality.

[SeanH]

Negative reviews are all written by N***n owners ;) .

Sorry.......but I have to kill that idea, I have been a die hard Canon guy since I picked up a camera........about 24 years ago.........and I really wish I had never bought that lens. I rate my lenses in this order-

70-200 2.8 L
17-40 4.0L
18-55 kit lens......LOL...j/k
24-70 2.8 L

[jbradc]

Sorry.......but I have to kill that idea, I have been a die hard Canon guy since I picked up a camera........about 24 years ago.........and I really wish I had never bought that lens. I rate my lenses in this order-

70-200 2.8 L
17-40 4.0L
18-55 kit lens......LOL...j/k
24-70 2.8 L
You should return your 24-70 then, you got a bad copy.

[SDK^]

Sorry.......but I have to kill that idea, I have been a die hard Canon guy since I picked up a camera........about 24 years ago.........and I really wish I had never bought that lens. I rate my lenses in this order-

70-200 2.8 L
17-40 4.0L
18-55 kit lens......LOL...j/k
24-70 2.8 L

With so many happy owners clearly something is up with your lens. Do you really think Canon could continue to sell it if the 18-55 Kit lens was better ?!?!

[Tom W]

We don't tend to agree much with that forum....

That forum doesn't agree much with that forum - lots of debate there, but not much accomplished. Kind-of like Congress.

[Tom W]

My 24-70L is damn near perfection in glass. It is only surpassed by my 70-200L IS. Those are the two "best" all around lenses in my bag. I understand that there are bad copies of lenses that just happen to fall on the negative side of tolerances, but, if I had to venture a guess, I would say that most, not all mind you, but most of the complaints about the 24-70L begin with user error and snowball from there.

That is a very winning pair. My 24-70 is by far my most used lens. The 24 end is so useful that I rarely want anything wider.

One complaint I *DO* have with the 24-70 is the hood mounting ring. I've snapped mine loose twice. I know I haven't handled it roughly, but, that sucker has come loose twice. I do think the hood ring is an extremely stupid design for a lens that is supposed to handle the daily grind of the pros.

Haven't had that problem, but I've heard of it. I am inclined to think that it was an issue on the earlier production copies, but was rectified on more recent runs. Could be wrong though.

[Tom W]

Sorry.......but I have to kill that idea, I have been a die hard Canon guy since I picked up a camera........about 24 years ago.........and I really wish I had never bought that lens. I rate my lenses in this order-

70-200 2.8 L
17-40 4.0L
18-55 kit lens......LOL...j/k
24-70 2.8 L

Wow - My 17-40 was very good, but my 24-70 is better. I still have the 24-70, and won't part with it easily. Perhaps yours needs some tweaking from Canon.

[eosster]

My favorite lens period, it's like my body cap for my camera.

[SeanH]

Wow - My 17-40 was very good, but my 24-70 is better. I still have the 24-70, and won't part with it easily. Perhaps yours needs some tweaking from Canon.
I agree.

Sucks that the lens with the most usable focal length I avoid using.

Does anyone elses lens (24-70) jump back.......like it is trying to re-focus after you have already locked your focus? This is the reason I believe I am having problems. Like I said early in this tread, this is the reason I took the first on back......it did it much worse than this one. Bought the lens at the same store as all my others......Calumet.

[steibeldj]

I agree.

Sucks that the lens with the most usable focal length I avoid using.

Does anyone elses lens (24-70) jump back.......like it is trying to re-focus after you have already locked your focus? This is the reason I believe I am having problems. Like I said early in this tread, this is the reason I took the first on back......it did it much worse than this one. Bought the lens at the same store as all my others......Calumet.

Go to any local camera store that has another copy of this lens and try it out. I do not experience anything like what you experience. Even in low light, no hunting. No jumping. Just a cybersonic zip clear into focus. Any chance AI Servo is on?

[Bob_A]

Does anyone elses lens (24-70) jump back.......like it is trying to re-focus after you have already locked your focus?

I have never seen this problem with mine. It's a great lens, but is indeed heavy ... so I'm hoping my new POTN neck strap helps a lot! :)

Maybe a bit off topic, but when carrying around something like the 24-70L, what are others doing to avoid neck and shoulder strain? I heard someone mention that they use a type of harness instead of a neck strap ... does anyone have a link to a good one?


Regards,

Bob

[mbze430]

I use a hand strap.

[Bob_A]

I use a hand strap.

Thanks mbze430.

Can you provide the make or model that you like? I've carried my camera around by the hand (wrapping the neck strap around my wrist) for a few hours and it felt pretty good.

It would also be nice to have an alternative to using a handstrap that is still comfortable.


Regards,

Bob

[Monito]

Don't go by the numbers of squeaky wheels posting. A high percentage of disgruntled users will post, compared to a tiny fraction of satisfied users.

[mbze430]

There are 2 that I like. The Canon E1 is really comfortable, the softness. Highly recommended.

There is another one, a generic one that I found on Ebay, which attach one of the side to the tripod adapter, that one is really nifty.

[HKFEVER]

Sorry.......but I have to kill that idea, I have been a die hard Canon guy since I picked up a camera........about 24 years ago.........and I really wish I had never bought that lens. I rate my lenses in this order-

70-200 2.8 L
17-40 4.0L
18-55 kit lens......LOL...j/k
24-70 2.8 L

Wow... You have a bad copy.
Mine one is almost perfect, expect 70-200 f2.8L IS.
These 2 are my love. No no no, also 85 f/1.2L, 50 f/1.4 & 135 f/2.0L.

But not 16-35 f/2.8L, because 24-70 is already good enough..

[ed2day]

It's true--You look on dpreview and you'd think it's almost impossible to find a decent 24-70L. I think groupthink has something to do with it. I think one guy went through 8 copies looking for one( that says something about the mentality). You come to this forum and most everyone is thrilled with theirs. I have to admit a slight concern as I'm looking at getting one someday, but this is what I know: As I look through galleries of pictures, certain shots stand out for their excelent technical quality and I make it a habit to check what lens they were shot with. More often than not that lens is either 24-70L or one of the 70-200 line.

[HKFEVER]

That's depended on what and why they post those pictures.
You may see more pictures with tele & wide than mid range lenses.

[Bob_A]

There are 2 that I like. The Canon E1 is really comfortable, the softness. Highly recommended.

There is another one, a generic one that I found on Ebay, which attach one of the side to the tripod adapter, that one is really nifty.

Thanks mbze430!

I found the Canon one at B&H and added it to my ever-growing "wish-list" :lol:

Bob

[SeanH]

Go to any local camera store that has another copy of this lens and try it out. Any chance AI Servo is on?

Did that today, they took a brand new one out of the box.........did the same thing, but only at 24mm. Even the sales person was saying that didn't look right. Store manager said bring it back and he will "make it go away". I am bummed out, I really want it to be a good lens..........don't have a clue as to what to replace it with, it's just might have to be a 28-135 IS. But I hate having a non L.......lol. Any Ideas?

And BTW, servo is off, and it wasn't my camera they tested the new one at the store on.

[cc10d]

I tried 2 different copies of the 24-70 and they were both soft focusing. The only lens from Canon I have thought did not perform to expectations for the price. It was OK stopped down, but I got it for the f2.8. My 28- 135 works good stopped down too. I use the Tamron 28-75 2.8, is as good optically as the copies I had and did not cost anyting near as much. Not the build quality, but... All my other lens are Canon. Generally Canon is the very best.

[steibeldj]

Did that today, they took a brand new one out of the box.........did the same thing, but only at 24mm. Even the sales person was saying that didn't look right. Store manager said bring it back and he will "make it go away". I am bummed out, I really want it to be a good lens..........don't have a clue as to what to replace it with, it's just might have to be a 28-135 IS. But I hate having a non L.......lol. Any Ideas?

And BTW, servo is off, and it wasn't my camera they tested the new one at the store on.

Could you post your example of a shot in common lighting (outsind/inside) with say f2.8 @ 50mm? Just want to get an idea of what soft means to you. I can reciprocate.

BTW I own the 23-135 IS, which I like and is lots cheaper. I wanted lower light, non-flash, hand-held performance.

[steibeldj]

PS At some shops, reject lenses go right back on the shelf where the next guy possibly may not know it is a bad copy. (Shop owners who run things on the up and up, please do not roast me, I said some shops!)

[SeanH]

Could you post your example of a shot in common lighting (outsind/inside) with say f2.8 @ 50mm? Just want to get an idea of what soft means to you. I can reciprocate.

BTW I own the 23-135 IS, which I like and is lots cheaper. I wanted lower light, non-flash, hand-held performance.

Not a issue of "soft", as you will see. My issue is just missed focus, and in servo it is worse.

This is a test I did on a tripod and I focused on the light reflecting off the black eye of one of my Daughters stuffed animals.......you tend to shoot whatever is laying around.....lol. But notice how it is sharp below the point I foucused at........THAT"S THE PROBLEM.

File Name
IMG_1277.JPG
Camera Model
Canon EOS 20D
Shooting Date/Time
4/3/2005 9:37:05 AM
Shooting Mode
Program AE
Tv( Shutter Speed )
1/80
Av( Aperture Value )
3.2
File is cropped at "actual pixels"

[KenE]

I've been going through this with a new 17-40f/4L ..

Let me say it was immensely helpful to "document" the lens to find it's sweet spots. I still haven't decided whether the lens has a problem or if I'm just not using the aperture and focal lengths that are more "accurate" (I maybe stupidly assumed that L lenses are supposed to be accurate throughout the ranges?).

I used this site ultimately(see end of paragraph). To get there within these forums, I went to the Canon EOS forum, FAQ, Things to do when bringing your camera home, Andythaler's post with links to threads on front/back focus and lens sharpness wide-open, to the front/back focus thread, and finally arriving at http://www.photo.net/learn/focustest/.

It should really be linked in the lenses forum faq.

Anyways, I setup the test pattern as described in the above link, and took shots at 3 or 4 lengths at 1/3 f-stop increments from f/4.0 to 13.0. I got quite a range of variance, but at least know now where the accurate points are if I want to be dead on. My 70-200mm f/4L seems to be more dead on, but I've more testing to do.

HTH, Ken

[MediaMagic]

I have found that if I allow the camera (the 10D) to do all the focus for me, that the tolerances acceptable at the factory and the tolerances for my photography do not always line up. Sometimes it simply misses the focus within its margin of error that throw off a shot. If you use AF all the time, perhaps the 20D has a bit of that same issue. Try focusing manually for a series of shots. If it still looks off, make sure that the diopter is set correctly for your vision, and try manual focus again. Try this with different lenses.

I've noticed that in MF, all my mysterious lens focusing problems seem to disappear, so in my case, it's definitely the camera's AF system throwing off some shots rather than the lens. I hope the 20D doesn't suffer from this as well.

[SeanH]

Thanks guys for your ideas. Took the lens back to the store and they handed me a new one.......they have my business for life......this is why I don't buy(big ticket items) on the internet. Also cleaned my sensor while I was waiting. I'm good to go now....LOL

[steibeldj]

I said I would post a sample image with focus on one point to show a comparison from my copy of the lens. Here is the whole picture plus a crop of the focal point. Look at the threads in the teddy. 68mm f3.5 1/100 ISO400

[Eugene.S]

20D -(24-70L) Tripod.

[Wren]

The Canon EF - 24-70L f/2.8L is the best standard zoom lens. Period. Nothing else like it. I love mine-- each time I download a picture, I'm in awe at the almost 3D images I see on the screen.

[malla1962]

Love mine.:D:D

[craigsinclair]

Canon's 24-70L is a fantastic lens. I'm very happy with mine.

[chtgrubbs]

There have been several posts by members on this forum who have been unhappy with the quality of 24-70L lenses that they have had. See the posts by Petkal and Ray Petri on this page:
http://www.photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=100307&page=3

On the other hand some reviewers like William Castleman have 24-70L lenses that equal or outperform prime lenses: http://www.wlcastleman.com/equip/reviews/index.htm

My best guess is that Canon makes so many of this lens that there is more and greater sample-to-sample variation with this model than with their other "L" lenses.

[rklepper]

I think you would find more that like it than do not. It is just we shout the loudest when we fell we have been wronged, even if it is our fault. I would not hesitate to guess that most issues with this lens are people not taking the time to learn their lens or camera.

[malla1962]

I think you would find more that like it than do not. It is just we shout the loudest when we fell we have been wronged, even if it is our fault. I would not hesitate to guess that most issues with this lens are people not taking the time to learn their lens or camera.I can relate to that,Allso you will find if one has a good experiance you will tell 1 person and if bad tell 10 LOL.:D:D:D

[drookie]

Is there a good way to test this lens in the store?

[PetKal]

I'd say that the 24-70, 17-40 and 70-200F4 have probably been the three best selling L-lenses. I have owned all three.

*I have yet to read about anyone deploring the purchase of a 70-200.
*The 17-40 has had some isolated disappointing owner...a few thought the lens was not wide enough on 1.6 FOVC, so they should have gotten a 10-22, etc.
*I have come accross a number of instances of people disappointed with their 24-70.
The issues have been fundamental such as poor resolving power and flawed AF. However, even the lens affecionados often concede to the excessive weight as well as a steep price. The lens "defenders" often suggest that the unhappy 24-70 owners have not mastered the fine art of using the lens.

*Although Photodo does not rate the 24-70, its 28-70 precursor got an MTF rating of 3.9 which is not all that bad for a zoom. The 70-200 f4 rating is 4.1.

*Of the three lenses in question, the 24-70 has the lowest FM users'rating although not by much compared to 17-40. (Incidentally, if I remember properly, the EF-S 10-22 also got a higher rating on FM than 24-70.)

* Some people, including myself, believe that the 24-70 may suffer from a higher than usual copy-to-copy quality variability. It also quite possible and not unreasonable that purchasers' expectations go up in proportion to the lens price, which expectations the 24-70 has not been able to meet on a consistent basis.

* My guess is that the 24-70 will soon be sidelined and relegated a "specialty" lens status, perhaps something akin to 16-35 f2.8, under the onslaught of a more modern, leaner, more useful, sharper 24-105 f.4. The future will tell, it will not be long though.

[richardho11]

I love my 24-70 too!!! Mine is TACK SHARP! And focuses perfectly! This lens is on my camera at least 80% of the time! Its fast and sharp! What more can you ask! I think the weight and size is perfect! :D

[malla1962]

And I love mine!The weight does not bother me in fact it fells just right on my 1dmk2.:D

[grego]

* Some people, including myself, believe that the 24-70 may suffer from a higher than usual copy-to-copy quality variability. It also quite possible and not unreasonable that purchasers' expectations go up in proportion to the lens price, which expectations the 24-70 has not been able to meet on a consistent basis.

* My guess is that the 24-70 will soon be sidelined and relegated a "specialty" lens status, perhaps something akin to 16-35 f2.8, under the onslaught of a more modern, leaner, more useful, sharper 24-105 f.4. The future will tell, it will not be long though.

To answer the first point, one poster recently thought he had a problem. His problem seemed to be trying to do handheld with the heavier lens at like 1/60 of a second and expecting things to be sharp. Even at 1/125, it could be tough unless you hold very still.

And to the second one, if the 24-105 has a decent price difference then, it should pull a lot of the people who want a good midrange that is good for walking around, although the Sigma and Tamron already have that down for more affordable lens right now that are good for walking around.

The 17-40 is very popular because its good for walking around for a wide angle, but its also a good amount more affordable than the 16-35.

[PetKal]

I also suspect that 24-70 might have contributed some to the demand for 3rd party mid focal range 2.8 lenses, at least in the EOS community, although it is perfectly normal for people to be on a lookout for better value/$ one way or another.

[dmstraton]

Mine rocks...on my camera 80% of the time...no issues except me , the king of User Error! :)

[grego]

I also suspect that 24-70 might have contributed some to the demand for 3rd party mid focal range 2.8 lenses, at least in the EOS community, although it is perfectly normal for people to be on a lookout for better value/$ one way or another.

Well, most people don't need the L lens version. That's why the Tamron and Sigma offer the better values, these days with the boom in digital.

[malla1962]

Mine rocks...on my camera 80% of the time...no issues except me , the king of User Error! :):lol::lol::lol:

[scottbergerphoto]

There are repeated reports of soft focusing with bad samples of the 24-70/2.8L. Personally, I've never seen the soft focus problem myself with several samples but like any lens, there are going to be bad ones floating around. However, the majority of people who buy this lens are 100% satisfied with the image quality.

Just buy from a reputable dealer where you can either test the lens before purchasiing or from a mail order company that won't give you problems with returns such as B&H Photo.

Here's a sample of a negative review on this lens.

http://www.grumpysworld.com/photoguide/review.htm

tyr
That's a review on the 28-70 f/2.8, an older version of the lens.
http://www.fredmiranda.com/24-70/