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 24 Apr 2014 (Thursday) 10:17
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM - am I expecting to much from this lens?

 
Jerobean
Senior Member
785 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Mar 2008
     
Apr 24, 2014 13:35 as a reply to  @ post 16858480 |  #16

I think lensrentals did a comparison of multiple copies of each lens. The best version 1 lenses were still worse than the worst version 2, but the disparity was not large.

If you had a great version 1 and move to a "mediocre" version 2 you might not notice a large difference.


_______________
6d, 24-105L, Tak SMC 50 1.4, 85 1.8, 135L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,838 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 8136
Joined Oct 2009
     
Apr 24, 2014 13:53 |  #17

Charlie wrote in post #16858489 (external link)
the problem is that your testing @ F4-11, where differences will be minor. If that's you're normal shooting habits, then you may be better off with a slower 24-105.

If you like having a fast zoom, then test it wide open, that's where the differences are.

I owned the 24-105. The differences at 24mm @ F11 on a full frame are not minor compared to the 24-70 II.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garbidz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,722 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 18
Joined May 2005
Location: Reunion Island
     
May 08, 2014 07:51 |  #18

Jerobean wrote in post #16858495 (external link)
I think lensrentals did a comparison of multiple copies of each lens. The best version 1 lenses were still worse than the worst version 2, but the disparity was not large.

If you had a great version 1 and move to a "mediocre" version 2 you might not notice a large difference.

...until you bump or drop your MK I lens which is supposed to be built like a tank.
In fact, it is very fragile. The front element goes out of alignment very easily. The Zoom and focus helices lean on pieces of plastic that break and get stuck inside of the lens.

The MK II is not an upgrade, it is a remake where optical quality seems to be built for a 40-MB sensor and the mechanics have been revised according to the esperiences of the repair department.

I got my MK I from the repair shop -the third visit during the 8 years I've got it- and it is quite good enough for me. But if I were a first time buyer, no doubt, I'd go for the MK II, especially if there was a mission where a technical failure would not be considered as an alternative.


This is worth reading! (external link)


bag

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick_Reading.UK
Senior Member
Avatar
836 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK
     
May 08, 2014 08:05 |  #19

I never used or owned the mk1 but a can say that the mk2 is ....... THE DOGS BOLLOCKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


EOS 5Dmk3 X2, 60D, EF24-70mm f2.8L mk2, EF70-200mm f2.8L IS mk2, EF85mm f1.8, EF50mm f1.4, EF50mm f1.8 mk1(350D with 18-55mm Sh"kit" lens).
Speedlite 600EX-RT, 430EX II Flash. manfrotto 190XDB tripod, Giottos GTMML 3290B Monopod, B+W 77mm 110 Single Coated filter, Hama 77mm Variable Neutral Density Filter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garbidz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,722 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 18
Joined May 2005
Location: Reunion Island
     
May 08, 2014 08:24 |  #20

Nick_Reading.UK wrote in post #16890157 (external link)
I never used or owned the mk1 but a can say that the mk2 is ....... THE DOGS BOLLOCKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never owned a dog.
Probably on a Tamron your money would be better spent.


bag

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,838 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 8136
Joined Oct 2009
     
May 08, 2014 09:11 |  #21

Cool. That is the way Yoda would have said that :D


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FarmerTed1971
fondling the 5D4
Avatar
6,262 posts
Gallery: 66 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 3683
Joined Sep 2013
Location: Portland, OR
     
May 08, 2014 09:19 |  #22

I don't remember Yoda mentioning dog bollocks. ;)

I'll stick with my 28-70 for the meantime. The shear price of the MkII keeps me away.


Getting better at this - Fuji Xt-2 - Fuji X-Pro2 - Laowa 9mm - 18-55 - 23/35/50/90 f2 WR - 50-140 - flickr (external link) - www.scottaticephoto.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick_Reading.UK
Senior Member
Avatar
836 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK
     
May 08, 2014 10:11 |  #23

garbidz wrote in post #16890177 (external link)
I never owned a dog.
Probably on a Tamron your money would be better spent.

Tried it.. Returned it.. Not sharp enough !!!


EOS 5Dmk3 X2, 60D, EF24-70mm f2.8L mk2, EF70-200mm f2.8L IS mk2, EF85mm f1.8, EF50mm f1.4, EF50mm f1.8 mk1(350D with 18-55mm Sh"kit" lens).
Speedlite 600EX-RT, 430EX II Flash. manfrotto 190XDB tripod, Giottos GTMML 3290B Monopod, B+W 77mm 110 Single Coated filter, Hama 77mm Variable Neutral Density Filter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Invertalon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
6,495 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Cleveland, OH
     
May 08, 2014 10:31 |  #24

My 24-70 II is crazy sharp... It really put my 24-105 to shame (and I have heard the 24-70 I was not that much different IQ wise from the 24-105). It was completely worth it for me, even at the $2200 price tag I paid when it first came out.

At 24mm it is really an optical beast... At 70mm, it surpassed even my 70-200 II... Colors, contrast, etc... All so nice :D


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,722 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
May 08, 2014 10:42 |  #25

Replies are going to be extremely varied. One man's slight improvement is another man's huge improvement.

To me it is a budget issue. If you can afford/justify the cost, I doubt many will argue that the 24-70 f/2.8L II is not the best available lens in this range. On the other hand there are many fine lenses out there that are much less money.


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
digital ­ paradise
How do I change this?
Avatar
14,838 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 8136
Joined Oct 2009
     
May 08, 2014 11:03 |  #26

Tapeman wrote in post #16890474 (external link)
Replies are going to be extremely varied. One man's slight improvement is another man's huge improvement.

To me it is a budget issue. If you can afford/justify the cost, I doubt many will argue that the 24-70 f/2.8L II is not the best available lens in this range. On the other hand there are many fine lenses out there that are much less money.

You may as well ask if should I put a UV filter on it. Might be more than a budget issue only. You look at the reviews, tech data and user reviews which are just as important I think but are subjective. Either you like or your don't. If you are not sure then don't buy it. If you buy it and don't like it send to back.


Image Editing OK

Website (external link) ~ Buy/Sell Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garbidz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,722 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 18
Joined May 2005
Location: Reunion Island
     
May 08, 2014 11:15 |  #27

Nick_Reading.UK wrote in post #16890417 (external link)
Tried it.. Returned it.. Not sharp enough !!!

Now that's an opinion.
Either you got a faulty unit or then you have to go medium format.
As far as today's FF lenses go, optically and mechanically the 24-70 mk II is the state of the art. Of course it is possible that all the reviewers in all the sites and the magazines of the world are wrong but statistically that would be improbable.
I am fine with people having opinions.


bag

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garbidz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,722 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 18
Joined May 2005
Location: Reunion Island
     
May 08, 2014 11:33 |  #28

digital paradise wrote in post #16890505 (external link)
You may as well ask if should I put a UV filter on it. Might be more than a budget issue only. You look at the reviews, tech data and user reviews which are just as important I think but are subjective. Either you like or your don't. If you are not sure then don't buy it. If you buy it and don't like it send to back.

Of course, choises are different for those who sell pictures for living and those who go trolling on various websites and on their better days post videos on YouTube where you can see them opening boxes of toys.

A point that has not been brought up is the repair shop.
Accoriding to Lensrentals statistics, a Sigma has a three-day through time at the works. This means that the item will be fixed and shipped out within three days of its arrival.

Nikon is not doing as well in the US, they are more like 4-5 weeks.
Bump a digital Leica M, it gets sent to Germany and will be off your bag for six to nine weeks. Can you deal with it?

Canon is doing OK with its one to two weeks delivery times.

Now, when I look at the repairs for my two lenses and a 5D III while in Helsinki, I could have bought a new nice DSLR kit. Or two pocket point-and-shoots. And they did NOT have the spare part so the 35mm L had to be left behind.

But yes, do put on a UV filter on and a lens hood as well.
Aligning the front element costs about 250 euros plus parts.


bag

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

4,468 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM - am I expecting to much from this lens?
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 heflerbj
1007 guests, 323 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.