Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 29 Sep 2012 (Saturday) 13:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

So what is the verdict for the 24-70 II?

 
FastAndFurious
Hatchling
6 posts
Joined Sep 2012
     
Sep 29, 2012 13:16 |  #1
bannedPermanent ban

If we cut the crap, what is the verdict for the 24-70 II?

* Sample variation issues : if we buy one now, we will have to wait 3 months to find the perfect copy because every retailer seems to get a small amount

* Prime killer : Is it better than say 35L or 50L @ 2.8 and above?

* Price : Is it really worth $2,300. Is it as important and crucial as 70-200 IS II?

Sorry, those 24-70 II threads became quite useless, I had to make a new one.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,018 posts
Gallery: 145 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5009
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Sep 29, 2012 13:17 |  #2

I never cared much for it so I don't/wont own it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2ndviolinman
Senior Member
345 posts
Likes: 4
Joined May 2011
     
Sep 29, 2012 14:09 as a reply to  @ airfrogusmc's post |  #3

I'm still curious to see if it is equal to the 40mm/2.8 pancake! I'm not kidding, either.

A friend has ordered the 24-70ii, so I hope to see for myself soon, because I am not close to seeing it online yet. I would love the convenience of the zoom, but I'm more likely to get the 17mm TS-E, as that will be an instant and huge improvement over the 17-40 where I use it most, for the same money, even if I never tilt or shift it.


David
5Dc, 5Dii, Canon 16-35 f/4L IS, 40/2.8 Pancake, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 Macro, 135/2.0L, 200/2.8L, converted 35mm TS, Sigma 50/2.8 Macro, 70/2.8 Macro, Zeiss ZE 21/2.8, Zeiss Contax 28/2.8, 50/1.7 & 85/2.8, Jena 135/3.5, Voigtlander 90mm f/3.5 APO, Canon 28-135.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Eyal
Senior Member
569 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Sep 29, 2012 14:09 |  #4

Its still too early. Not enough reviews.

On paper and pretty much the only two reviews, and a few hands-on, it seems as sharp, not sharper.
So I wouldn't say its better than the 35L and 50L. They are different lenses and they have their own area of work.

Worth 2300$? Do you earn money from your gear? If so, it can be worth it. If not, its probably not.
And crucial as the 70-200? Its only as crucial as you make it.


5DMarkIII+Grip | Extender 1.4x III / 2x III
16-35mm F/2.8L II | 24-70mm F/2.8L II | 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II
Σ 50mm F/1.4 | 85mm F/1.2L II | 100mm F/2.8L IS Macro | 135mm F/2L | 300mm F/2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
0.0f
Member
179 posts
Joined Apr 2011
     
Sep 29, 2012 14:13 |  #5

I've only had my copy or a few days but so far very happy indeed. Very fast and extremely sharp.


EOS 5D MK3 - 24-70 MK2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwhittaker
Member
111 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Devon, England
     
Sep 29, 2012 14:14 |  #6

It's not as good as the 70-200 ii, which we all hoped it would be. It doesnt have IS which we all wanted. Contrast isn't great. It's a disappointment.


J u s t i n
Canon 600D, Canon 70-200 f2.8 mk2, Canon 15-85mm, Samyang 35 1.4, Canon 50mm F1.8,
Flikr Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheLensGuy
Senior Member
598 posts
Joined Sep 2012
     
Sep 29, 2012 14:41 |  #7
bannedPermanent ban

jwhittaker wrote in post #15058237 (external link)
It's not as good as the 70-200 ii, which we all hoped it would be. It doesnt have IS which we all wanted. Contrast isn't great. It's a disappointment.

Wow, that's certainly very negative:rolleyes:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dadgummit
Senior Member
Avatar
977 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2008
     
Sep 29, 2012 22:42 |  #8

Yeah it bums me out too. If it had 70-200 II quality i would have purchased it but with all of the early reviews except one (lens rentals) giving it ho-hum reviews i am going to stick with the 24-105.

The thing that gets me is why cant canon come up with something for full frame with as good IQ as the 17-55? Why is the best standard zoom in canon's inventory only for crop cameras?


My Humble Gear List
I shutter to think how many people are underexposed and lacking depth in this field.Rick Steves

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Zlatko ­ Batistich
Member
Avatar
56 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: New Jersey, USA
     
Sep 29, 2012 23:22 |  #9

dadgummit wrote in post #15059481 (external link)
Yeah it bums me out too. If it had 70-200 II quality i would have purchased it but with all of the early reviews except one (lens rentals) giving it ho-hum reviews i am going to stick with the 24-105.

The thing that gets me is why cant canon come up with something for full frame with as good IQ as the 17-55? Why is the best standard zoom in canon's inventory only for crop cameras?

Don't be bummed out. Check the ISO12233 charts at The Digital Picture:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)
The new 24-70 II looks much better than the 17-55! Of course, it's a little too early to be sure, but those charts make me very optimistic that Canon has succeeded.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agv8or
Goldmember
Avatar
2,150 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 363
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Midwest
     
Sep 29, 2012 23:55 |  #10

If Canon had given this lens "IS" then there would be no debate and everyone would be in love. As it is Canon gave us a better built, lighter weight and sharper lens than its predecessor yet people who have not even used one keep running it into the dirt while those who are lucky enough to own one seem to really love em. There is no doubt Canon will sell a lot of them and most can only hope that a year or two from now Canon will have a Holiday rebate deal too good to pass up.


Rand

Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwhittaker
Member
111 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Devon, England
     
Sep 30, 2012 00:26 |  #11

If the 24-70 had IS and quality of 70-200ii, I would only need those two lenses to have a huge focal range cover for life. So yes, I am hugely bummed out that it hasn't delivered the eye popping quality and IS. I think there must be more to this story that we don't know. Perhaps the genius who designed the 70-200ii got headhunted by Nikon or something.
I can't overstate how important IS is to me after having used it. My 15-85 crop has IS and it is just so useful for video. Shooting handheld video just looks terrible without IS, it would have been amazing to shoot video with 2.8 aperture and IS. And for photos the keeper rate is so much higher with IS. Yes, a tripod would sort that, but you lose the spontenaiety.
As for the image quality of24-70ii, it is very good and I would buy one if it had IS. But just look at the 70-200ii sample thread, those photos are representative of what comes out the camera for the main part. It seems similar results can be acheived with the 24-70ii but it takes processing to get there.


J u s t i n
Canon 600D, Canon 70-200 f2.8 mk2, Canon 15-85mm, Samyang 35 1.4, Canon 50mm F1.8,
Flikr Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Sep 30, 2012 00:36 |  #12

I have been using it for the last week...

Equally as awesome as the 70-200 II... Sharpness is amazing end to end with no CA to be seen. Sharpness and contrast is unreal. For those judging without trying one, don't. This lens IS that good.

There seems to be field curvature variance in which the left or right side at times may be sharper than the other depending on focus distance. I have heard of three people so far reporting this. About the only fault thus far. I may send mine to Canon Monday to let them take a look and calibrate it to my body just for the hell of it. I will have it back by Friday so no real loss to me :)

Overall I am extremely happy. Amazing duo with the 70-200 II. Happy I have up the 24-105 and 35L for it.


-Steve
Facebook (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Eyal
Senior Member
569 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Sep 30, 2012 00:46 |  #13

Zlatko Batistich wrote in post #15059577 (external link)
Don't be bummed out. Check the ISO12233 charts at The Digital Picture:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …omp=0&FLIComp=0​&APIComp=0 (external link)
The new 24-70 II looks much better than the 17-55! Of course, it's a little too early to be sure, but those charts make me very optimistic that Canon has succeeded.

Hmm what is the point comparing it to the 17-55? ??? Not to mention a crop vs FF?
Its like comparing a Lamborghini to a Mazda 6 and saying "see? the lambo is better!"...

So I'm not sure if you are sarcastic or not, but its just wrong.


5DMarkIII+Grip | Extender 1.4x III / 2x III
16-35mm F/2.8L II | 24-70mm F/2.8L II | 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II
Σ 50mm F/1.4 | 85mm F/1.2L II | 100mm F/2.8L IS Macro | 135mm F/2L | 300mm F/2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwhittaker
Member
111 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Devon, England
     
Sep 30, 2012 00:50 |  #14

Do you think there is any chance they might bring out an IS version in a year or something?


J u s t i n
Canon 600D, Canon 70-200 f2.8 mk2, Canon 15-85mm, Samyang 35 1.4, Canon 50mm F1.8,
Flikr Gallery (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SBK1
Senior Member
Avatar
941 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2007
Location: S'West Ohio
     
Sep 30, 2012 01:03 |  #15

jwhittaker wrote in post #15059784 (external link)
Do you think there is any chance they might bring out an IS version in a year or something?

doubt it or Canon would have already done it just to save engineering and manufacturing cost.


1DX|70D||200 f2L IS|300 f2.8IS|400 f2.8IS|70-200 mkII|24-70 mkII|1.4X TC iii|2.0X TC iii|600EX-RT|580EX II|2 Einsteins & AB800|
Buy/Sell Feedback on POTN
https://photography-on-the.net …p=15147375&post​count=3249

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,165 views & 0 likes for this thread
So what is the verdict for the 24-70 II?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is adv01
1063 guests, 265 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.