24-70L questions

[Chris G]

I thinking of getting Canon's 24-70L but have a few questions.

I'm going to use this as my "walk around" or everyday lense. Will the weigth be an issue?

I've read that there have been some returns when buying this lense. Would you be concerned about buying the lense on Ebay? And how much would you spend (includes lense hood and uv filter)?

What are your other options besides this lense?

Thanks,

Chris

[tim]

Have a look at the sticky (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=56752) in this forum, look at the Tamron 28-75 in particular.

[ayotnoms]

The 24-70mm is not a light lens by any means but it's not like carrying a 10lb dumbbell either.

At first I balked at buying one because of the reported weight but after walking around for a few hours lugging a 70-200mm, I figured a 24-70mm couldn't be that big a deal to carry.

I've read complaints of bad copies here and on other forums. Don't really know about that. All 4 of my Canon lens are great. If I get a bad capture, I write it off as an IO problem (Ignorant Operator).

I think it's entirely possible to get a good, used copy. Not sure about eBay though. I've bought and sold a few items on the Fred Miranda (Buy/Sell) forum so I wouldn't have any qualms about buying there. Just make sure the seller has good feedback and has been a member for some time.

If you want an excellent lens without spending the "L" money, try a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 I had one for 3 months before I caved and bought a 24-70. I was very pleased with the image quality I got with the Tamron. Many argue that the marginal quality advantage the 24-70 has over the Tamron is not worth the extra bucks, but then again, I'm kinda stupid that way. :-) :-)

[mvonditter]

The 24-70mm is not a light lens by any means but it's not like carrying a 10lb dumbbell either.

At first I balked at buying one because of the reported weight but after walking around for a few hours lugging a 70-200mm, I figured a 24-70mm couldn't be that big a deal to carry.

I've read complaints of bad copies here and on other forums. Don't really know about that. All 4 of my Canon lens are great. If I get a bad capture, I write it off as an IO problem (Ignorant Operator).

I think it's entirely possible to get a good, used copy. Not sure about eBay though. I've bought and sold a few items on the Fred Miranda (Buy/Sell) forum so I wouldn't have any qualms about buying there. Just make sure the seller has good feedback and has been a member for some time.

If you want an excellent lens without spending the "L" money, try a Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 I had one for 3 months before I caved and bought a 24-70. I was very pleased with the image quality I got with the Tamron. Many argue that the marginal quality advantage the 24-70 has over the Tamron is not worth the extra bucks, but then again, I'm kinda stupid that way. :-) :-)

Duh, me too boss, duh:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Grainy]

I got the 24-70 2 months ago and it has not left my camera. I love it. It's big but not too bad. Sharp!

[garyhun]

Ayotnoms

I see you have the 17-40 as well as the 24-70. I purchased a 20D 2 days ago with the 17-40 which I love. However as I love doing landscape work and love the effect of wide angle I also want to get a 10-22 soon. If I did then I was going to exchange my 17-40 for the 24-70 so I have 2 lenses to take me from 10 right through to 70.

The issue is the 17-40 is such a good walkabout lens would the 24-70 be just as versatile? I guess I'm wondering do you have the 17-40 on your camera most of the time, or the 24-70 and do you find them a good combo even though there is a far bit of overlap?

Thanks, Gary

[jnevin]

I already have the 17-40 and hope to buy the 24-70 shortly. I think the two lenses serve separate needs. I love nature and landscape photography. The 17-40 is ideal for this. However I find it a little short for other areas like family portraits, birthday parties etc.
I have the 70-200f4L also. It has been suggested to me that the 24-70 will be redundant given my current lenses.
However trying to cover a kids party or a wedding with the 17-40 and 70-200 would involve a huge amount of lens swapping....and I would still be confined to f4!
The 24-70 seems to me to offer a huge range of flexibility as an everyday or walkabout lens. Maybe I'll feel differently after carrying it around for a few days!
Good luck

[ATI058]

I carry my 20D with the 24-70 2.8L attached most of the time and have no real problems with its weight. I purchased this lens in January and it is now my primary lens for weddings and everyday use.

I like the sharp photos, quick focus, solid feel and wide focal range it offers. My 17-35 2.8L is lighter but not by much and when compared with my 80-200 2.8L its a real featherweight.

When I'm framing a shot, it feels balanced in my left hand and I can easily adjust shutter speed, apeture and focus with my right hand while still looking through the view finder.

A good camera strap is also helpful when your moving around to the next location.

I hope this is helpful

[ghocking]

For a 24-70 I think it is heavy, and it takes soom getting used to. In another thread I stated I would have preferred it with IS, but a lot of users like the weight and feel of it. I also found having it around my neck gave me a neckache, so now I use a Lowpro AW 75 bag with chest harness and take camera out as required and I find it a lot better. Most of the time it is fitted to my 350D body as I carry my 100-400 L IS fitted to a 20D and only swap it over to the 20D when only taking that lens.