24-70 i vs ii

Is it really worth the price difference? I have never shot with the version i so I am not familiar with the sharpness, CA, etc. Currently shoot with 6D but am adding 5D4 as well. Families, weddings, etc.

Version II is better in every way, other than cost.

Depends on whether you need prime-like-sharpness at F2.8 or not.

Do you need F2.8? Have you considered the 24-70 F4L IS?

And what you do think about 3rd part, like Tamron's 24-70 F2.8 VC G2?

You can find the 24-70 F2.8 MKI for about $600ish used sometimes. Makes it very attractive. It's softer than the MKII.

Very best,

What Martin said. Get the II. You won't regret it.

I had a very sharp copy version 1. dropped it and broke the zoom and sent it to canon and they fixed it and recalibrated to my camera. Came back even sharper and did a great job. Went all primes for 4 yrs and sold the version 1.

After 4 yrs of switching primes at wedding receptions, I had enough. So I grabbed the 24-70v2. Sold off the 35L. Started using the 24-70. Now it rarely comes off the camera. Been shooting most of the day with the 24-70 and the siggy 85 Art and I switch to the 50L when i need to.

The new 24-70 is so prime sharp. It does not do F/2.0 so I shoot just a tighter shot. Dont even miss the 35L and I love not switching glass all night long

Its a great lens and tool to have in the bag

I went through 4 version I lenses, and only found one that was livable, and then it developed a decentered lens and I had Canon repair it. The version II is better in every way, I would never recommend a version I with all the better options out there today, Canon or 3rd party.

I've never shot with version I, but version II truly is like having a bag of primes. Sharp through its range, even at 2.8. Great resolution and color rendition. Best, most versatile lens I own for event shooting. And yep, it's pricey.

Shoot your Tamron at 24mm f2.8, that's how good the mkii is through the range. Shoot the Tamron at 70mm f2.8, that's how strong the mki is.

new camera + old lens = no bueno

I'm also thinking of the Canon 24-70 ii for my new 6d mkii. The only lens I have at the moment to use is from my 7d kit, the 28-135. I was thinking of other combinations for the money but my most used lens on my 7d was the Sigma 17-50mm and I'm thinking the 24-70 will do nicely. I guess it's better to pay up not then to waste money on other lenses and then end up paying later.

There's also black Friday deals on Canon lenses right now.

I had the version I years ago. It was extremely sharp ... most impressive lens I've ever owned. I just didn't like the reverse zoom (extended out for wide angle) and the weight (... plenty of people have given me a hard time for saying this, but that doesn't make it any less true.)

If you were buying the 5D Mark IV in a kit, would people buy the kit with the 24-70 II or the 24-105 II?

I think wedding photographers need the speed over the range, but non-wedding photographers would usually choose the added range over the speed.

WA Tiger wrote in post #18506571
If you were buying the 5D Mark IV in a kit, would people buy the kit with the 24-70 II or the 24-105 II?

I don't (usually) shoot weddings, but I'd choose a 2.8 over anything else with smaller aperture purely on ability in low light situations rather than zoom range.

I don't think that's a fair statement. the choice is between IQ and convenience.