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 15 Jul 2013 (Monday) 15:39
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Lens comparison 24-70/2.8 mk2 vs 70-200/2.8 mk2

 
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
Jul 23, 2013 12:11 |  #31

Exactly ^

I am not sure how much copy variation there is with this lens, but both of mine have been similar sharpness, although the first had the decentering issue (right side soft always) which is why I sent it back. I first tried to let Canon correct it but they were unsuccessful so it went back to the retailer for an exchange.

My current copy is stunning though. I just love the lack of CA, sharpness to the edges of the frame (corners even) and the fact it remains so sharp from 24mm to 70mm. I hear some not impressed with this lens and it blows me away... There must be some duds out there, like any lens I suppose.

I rarely used my 24-105 because it just fell flat in a few ways. Extremely versatile, but "boring". The 24-70 II changed that due to how sharp and beautiful the images are wide open, end to end. I just can't say good enough things about it honestly. I think it is worth the $2000 it is going for right now because it really is just as good as the 70-200 II, on the wider end of course. And IS? Don't miss it at all... If eliminating IS allowed them to get this level of sharpness, I am all for that decision.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
dylan81
Member
30 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jul 23, 2013 17:45 as a reply to  @ Invertalon's post |  #32

I own the 24-70 II and have rented the 70-200 II 3 times since I purchased the mark II. I've tested the 70mm between the 2 with all 3 copies and can easily say that they are identical in terms of sharpness @100%. The only thing that stood out to me was the distortion (pinching) on the 24-70 that wasn't really noticeable on the 70-200. I checked out the comparison a few pages back and almost laughed. There's NO way the 24-70 II is that bad in terms of sharpness. If it truly was an accurate test then someone @ Canon dropped it before they shipped it out because my copy is as sharp as I could ever ask for. I didn't keep the images between the 2 lenses (kept the 24 1.4 vs 24 zoom though) but I'm renting 2 more 70-200's in September and if this thread if still alive, I'll post them. Additionally, Roger over @ lens rentals stated that EVERY single copy of their 24-70 II was sharper than the 70-200 II. I understand there's a real world setting, but with the consistency of which he was getting better results with the 24-70 almost seals the deal for me.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Andrew_WOT
Goldmember
1,418 posts
Joined Mar 2010
Location: CA
     
Jul 23, 2013 18:48 |  #33

dylan81 wrote in post #16147544 (external link)
I own the 24-70 II and have rented the 70-200 II 3 times since I purchased the mark II. I've tested the 70mm between the 2 with all 3 copies and can easily say that they are identical in terms of sharpness @100%. The only thing that stood out to me was the distortion (pinching) on the 24-70 that wasn't really noticeable on the 70-200. I checked out the comparison a few pages back and almost laughed. There's NO way the 24-70 II is that bad in terms of sharpness. If it truly was an accurate test then someone @ Canon dropped it before they shipped it out because my copy is as sharp as I could ever ask for. I didn't keep the images between the 2 lenses (kept the 24 1.4 vs 24 zoom though) but I'm renting 2 more 70-200's in September and if this thread if still alive, I'll post them. Additionally, Roger over @ lens rentals stated that EVERY single copy of their 24-70 II was sharper than the 70-200 II. I understand there's a real world setting, but with the consistency of which he was getting better results with the 24-70 almost seals the deal for me.

Isn't code137 tested 2 copies already, with second copy progressively worse than first one (which you "laughed at") at 70mm ?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dylan81
Member
30 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jul 23, 2013 21:27 |  #34

I wasn't trying to be rude and just wanted to set the record straight, especially if his copy was as bad as we all see. I'm not going to say that there isn't copy to copy variation, but I do believe that there's a bunch of people that think their lens is bad, when perhaps all it needed was a slight MA (or they did the test wrong). Again, there are truly bad copies, but tell me how Roger can test 5 copies and have them all outperform the 70-200? http://www.lensrentals​.com …-f2-8-ii-resolution-tests (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CTR
Mostly Lurking
11 posts
Joined Jun 2006
     
Jul 24, 2013 01:34 |  #35

Both images are very sharp at f4. I've imported them into LR and compared them at 100%. For the 70-200 image, the focus was locked on to the back of her hair. As a result, her shoulder and face is slightly out of focus. On the 24-70 image, the model is within the depth of field. Sharpness (parts that were in focus) and contrast wise is about the same to me. Try testing using the same composition, wide open and at 70mm.

rwong2k wrote in post #16141471 (external link)
damn haven't checked back with this thread for a while.

ah DOH, I didn't take them both at f/2.8 at 70mm,

one's at 70mm one's at 50mm both at f/4.0, it was too bright to shoot at f/2.8 + strobes + my nd filter.

Here's the RAW images, bikini shots, so I guess NSFW

disclaimer, just random shots I took not final images etc etc.

the image from the 24-70/2.8 mk2 'looks' sharper to me, or I could be wrong.
IS is on with the 70-200 and the shutter speed is 1/160 the max sync speed on my camera, so I think 1/160 with is should be ok at 70mm

https://www.dropbox.co​m/sh/xxvfu4s1hmgbgzn/J​qZ9ounfwZ (external link)

I have another photoshoot on Tuesday, I'll try to do a 70mm @ 2.8 test with both lens




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
code137
Member
61 posts
Joined Aug 2010
     
Jul 24, 2013 14:19 |  #36

dylan81 wrote in post #16148197 (external link)
I wasn't trying to be rude and just wanted to set the record straight, especially if his copy was as bad as we all see. I'm not going to say that there isn't copy to copy variation, but I do believe that there's a bunch of people that think their lens is bad, when perhaps all it needed was a slight MA (or they did the test wrong). Again, there are truly bad copies, but tell me how Roger can test 5 copies and have them all outperform the 70-200? http://www.lensrentals​.com …-f2-8-ii-resolution-tests (external link)

All my shots were either using manual focus or live view focusing. Unless I'm missing something, MA would not have any effect. I received the third lens and it seems to be an almost exact match to my first lens. I've been a bit busy with work, so I'll take time later or maybe this weekend to try to look at things a bit more carefully. I could see almost no difference at all between these two.

Roger did post more about the variation http://www.lensrentals​.com …non-24-70-mk-ii-variation (external link).

I do wish I still had lens number 2 since it seemed to be the odd one at this point. Oh well, I'll do a bit more testing and then I'm pretty sure that I never want to test a lens against itself ever again :). I don't like the idea of getting a bad copy, but then this can spiral out of control pretty quickly.


5D3, 24-70 2.8 II, 70-200 2.8 II, 50 1.8, 2.0X III

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,114 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6182
Joined Sep 2007
     
Jul 24, 2013 15:26 |  #37

code137 wrote in post #16150356 (external link)
All my shots were either using manual focus or live view focusing. Unless I'm missing something, MA would not have any effect. I received the third lens and it seems to be an almost exact match to my first lens. I've been a bit busy with work, so I'll take time later or maybe this weekend to try to look at things a bit more carefully. I could see almost no difference at all between these two.

Roger did post more about the variation http://www.lensrentals​.com …non-24-70-mk-ii-variation (external link).

I do wish I still had lens number 2 since it seemed to be the odd one at this point. Oh well, I'll do a bit more testing and then I'm pretty sure that I never want to test a lens against itself ever again :). I don't like the idea of getting a bad copy, but then this can spiral out of control pretty quickly.

didnt know there was so much variation..... it's kind of disturbing. I recall the 24-105 had less variation... probably best if we were ignorant on these issues, you can drive yourself mad pixel peeping this stuff.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dylan81
Member
30 posts
Joined Jun 2012
     
Jul 24, 2013 19:17 |  #38

All I'm saying is the defective len(s) you had are not worth using for a comparison because it's not how the lens performs, as you probably know. I don't know anyone who's tested these two lenses better than Roger and his results clearly show how they stack up. Additionally, you can see there's copy to copy variation with any lens, including the 70-200. http://www.lensrentals​.com …non-24-70-mk-ii-variation (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rwong2k
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,759 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 183
Joined Aug 2004
Location: Coquitlam,BC,Canada
     
Jul 26, 2013 15:11 |  #39

CTR wrote in post #16148736 (external link)
Both images are very sharp at f4. I've imported them into LR and compared them at 100%. For the 70-200 image, the focus was locked on to the back of her hair. As a result, her shoulder and face is slightly out of focus. On the 24-70 image, the model is within the depth of field. Sharpness (parts that were in focus) and contrast wise is about the same to me. Try testing using the same composition, wide open and at 70mm.

thanks for your comments!

i'll have to dig up or shoot some other examples on my next shoot. I still find the contrast and colours on the 24-70/2.8 mk2 pop more


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

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

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

6,426 views & 0 likes for this thread
Lens comparison 24-70/2.8 mk2 vs 70-200/2.8 mk2
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 dneitz
830 guests, 298 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.