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 03 Jan 2013 (Thursday) 18:13
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-70 II vs 35L - A Quick Review

 
L.J.G.
"Not brigth enough"
Avatar
10,463 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 42
Joined Jul 2010
Location: ɹǝpun uʍop
     
Jan 03, 2013 21:47 |  #16

Thanks for that quick review. It is nice to get an honest normal persons down to earth review on things rather than a heap of technical jargon that makes your eyes glaze over.


Lloyd
Never make the same mistake twice, there are so many new ones, try a different one each day
Gear Flick (external link)r

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
cdang
Senior Member
263 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Dec 2011
     
Jan 03, 2013 22:04 |  #17

Nice write up. I like it more than the usual technical stuff. For me, if I'm after shallow DOF of a prime, who needs corner to corner sharpness ? Sharpness is overrated sometimes. Unless your doing landscapes etc




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kouasupra
Goldmember
2,750 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 471
Joined May 2008
Location: Fresno/Clovis, CA
     
Jan 03, 2013 22:26 |  #18

Corner sharpening are for landscaper. I'm pretty sure 99% of the folks are that shoots portraits don't really care about the corner sharpness. I want a 24-70II, but I'm just waiting for the price to drop on them.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rwong2k
Goldmember
Avatar
1,759 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 183
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Coquitlam,BC,Canada
     
Jan 04, 2013 00:12 |  #19

side note random comparison, the 24-70/2.8 mk2 when I was testing focus on batteries had a different (more?) contrast than my 40/2.8 ( I know not the 35L, but there were some differences there)
I'll try some test shots with my friend's 35/1.4 to see if there are any colour differences


5DMK3 + Contax CY Lens
http://rw-photography.ca/ (external link)

http://www.facebook.co​m/RwPhotographyVancouv​er (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Jan 04, 2013 00:17 |  #20

I have both 35L and 24-70L. And I am a hobbyist. I use each equally depending on my objective and situation. For instance, if I went to a street fair and wanted to take pictures of mostly people, I would bring my 35 and 85. People at fairs tend to walk around so you can walk up to them or you can wait till they walk up to you. When framed properly, you take the shot. I vary the aperture from f1.2 to f 8. It depends how much environmental information I want to tell the story and usually I vary the aperture so the series dosent get boring.
I use the zoom alot when I walked around Shanghai last month simply because people don't approach you nor do they like you to take pictures of them. The zoom helps to vary your picture and capture the composition you want as you continue to walk onward. I took people shots, building shots, details and everything in between. Try that with just a 35L. And F2.8 is plenty wide when you prefer some context but burred enough that your subject is separated apart from the background. It's more important to frame it right, then to simply isolate the subject by destroying the background into a blur.
So keeping both is useful to me, and each type of lens I owe has different strengths and characteristics for different scenarios and moods. Keep both if you can afford too.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jacobwilson99
Member
59 posts
Joined Dec 2012
     
Jan 04, 2013 00:58 |  #21

Thanks for this! I've got a 24-70 I and love it. Been looking to get. 35L soon tho.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kobeson
Goldmember
Avatar
1,075 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jan 04, 2013 01:38 |  #22

It is a good read up, and something a lot of people wonder (24-70 or 35 is a common question).

I had wondered recently if I should sell my 35L for a 24-70 II, and had wondered how long I would last with only f2.8 at 35mm. Since then I've done a lot more shooting with my 35, and decided I would keep it an perhaps look at the 24-70 f4 IS if its image quality is up to Canon's recent lofty standards. I never wanted the 24-70 mk I, and wasn't interested in the mk II until I rented one for some event work. I realised how handy a zoom would be for paid work. I shot it between f4-f11 mainly (only used f2.8 for some tests) so I don't need a zoom with f2.8 in that range (35 and 85 primes), and will be looking closely at reviews of 24-70 f4 IS. I actually would get more use out of the IS than the f2.8. The 24-105 f4 didn't impress me greatly.

So personally, I liked hearing your comparisons between the 2 lenses in terms of how wide the apertures go.


1Dx | 5D III | 1D IV | 8-15 | 16-35L II | 24-70L II | 70-200L II | 400L II | 1.4x III | Σ85 | 100L | 3 x 600EX-RT | ST-E3-RT
website  (external link)facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 04, 2013 02:15 |  #23
bannedPermanent ban

@kobeson - Any lens is sharp at f4, especially for paid work.

24-105 is good enough for that, no client can tell the 10% IQ diff from the new 24-70f4 which cost double.

Makes perfect business sense :)


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Jan 04, 2013 02:25 |  #24

kin2son wrote in post #15442417 (external link)
@kobeson - Any lens is sharp at f4, especially for paid work.

24-105 is good enough for that, no client can tell the 10% IQ diff from the new 24-70f4 which cost double.

Makes perfect business sense :)

If the 24-70 IS adds 4 stops and is sharp, its worth the price hike.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 04, 2013 02:32 |  #25
bannedPermanent ban

snake0ape wrote in post #15442426 (external link)
If the 24-70 IS adds 4 stops and is sharp, its worth the price hike.

Well if paying double for 1 stop more IS and 20% increase in IQ at best is your thing, then sure :)

It makes sense if you are a purist/serious enthusiast. For paid work, no way it's worth it.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tmuussoni
Senior Member
330 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2011
Location: .FI
     
Jan 04, 2013 02:56 |  #26

Thank you OP for interesting, down to earth comparison :).

Now I would be interested in similar sharpness comparison with the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4, as most others probably agree with me that the Sigma beats the 35L in almost all areas :).


Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
snake0ape
Goldmember
Avatar
1,223 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 11
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Los Angeles
     
Jan 04, 2013 09:35 |  #27

kin2son wrote in post #15442430 (external link)
Well if paying double for 1 stop more IS and 20% increase in IQ at best is your thing, then sure :)

It makes sense if you are a purist/serious enthusiast. For paid work, no way it's worth it.

Yeah, slipped my mind that the 24-105 has IS also. I guess we will see what the market price will be after a while.


5Diii | 50D | 8-15L 4| 16-35L 2.8 II| 24-70L 2.8 II | 70-200L 2.8 IS II |Tamy 150-600 | Σ35Art 1.4 | 40 2.8 | Σ50Art 1.4 | 85L 1.2 II | 100 2.8 Macro | Helios 44-3 58mm f2.0 |Helios 40-1 85mm f1.5 | 1.4x & 2x teleconverters

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kobeson
Goldmember
Avatar
1,075 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jan 04, 2013 18:08 |  #28

kin2son wrote in post #15442417 (external link)
@kobeson - Any lens is sharp at f4, especially for paid work.

24-105 is good enough for that, no client can tell the 10% IQ diff from the new 24-70f4 which cost double.

Makes perfect business sense :)

I should have also mentioned I want a 24mm landscape lens.

But the 24-105 I rented was fairly soft towards the edges, at all apertures. Maybe renting the 24-70 II straight after it spoiled my experience with the 24-105, but it didn't seem acceptable for my needs.

No signs of softness on the mk II anywhere you look, if I am buying a zoom I want it to be versatile enough to handle for paid work & landscapes without any problems.


Tmuussoni wrote in post #15442464 (external link)
Thank you OP for interesting, down to earth comparison :).

Now I would be interested in similar sharpness comparison with the new Sigma 35mm f/1.4, as most others probably agree with me that the Sigma beats the 35L in almost all areas :).

From what I gather, at f2 and narrower the Sigma and Canon are pretty much even. Considering the 24-70 II is f2.8, I think the comparison results would be similar to the 35L. Wide open is where it is a bit better with sharpness/contrast.


1Dx | 5D III | 1D IV | 8-15 | 16-35L II | 24-70L II | 70-200L II | 400L II | 1.4x III | Σ85 | 100L | 3 x 600EX-RT | ST-E3-RT
website  (external link)facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kenwood33
Goldmember
2,597 posts
Likes: 20
Joined Jul 2005
     
Jan 04, 2013 18:30 |  #29

is one lens better than the other in terms of bokeh?


Gearlist

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,882 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 2689
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jan 04, 2013 18:44 as a reply to  @ kenwood33's post |  #30

For me they are 2 different tools. I have both and they are used for different purposes. The 24-70 does not do F/1.4 through f/2.5......Big reasons to have this.

24-70 gives you flexibility and does things a 35L cant do.

Im with Ed Radar and Nickson...both are must haves in my bag and are tools to accomplish very different things.........For our needs... we want and need both.

I dont doubt that the new 24-70 is as sharp as the current 35L.......the big question i have is how sharp do these things have to be ?? I have a sharp copy 24-70 version I. its not that far off the version 2 24-70 and definitely nothing a bump in sharpening and contrast in Lightroom would not match.


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

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

8,701 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-70 II vs 35L - A Quick Review
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 danielbandari
883 guests, 201 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.