Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, reviewed by jay125

Jay,

I couldn't agree more. It's a bit large for everyday use, but for anything "special", it is top notch.

My favorite lens for most of the shoots that I do. I usually have it mounted on my 1DX. That combo is like working with a cinderblock in your hands (heavy!!!) but the results are well worth it. The thing is just fantastic. I see you didn't give your copy a 10 for AF but mine is the fastest AF of all my L glass.

Good review, thanks!

My copy compares well against my friend's Zeiss primes both in sharpness and contrast. There is a very good reason people call it a bag of primes. Very good AF, excellent image quality. It even has decent bokeh for a zoom (sometimes you can see some onion rings but that seems to be true for any lens with aspherical elements). My only gripe is the size and weight; it isn't small, light, or inconspicuous. I don't like using it as a walk-around lens for that reason. I wouldn't mind having IS but was willing to give that up for the quality.

texaskev wrote in post #17365035
My favorite lens for most of the shoots that I do. I usually have it mounted on my 1DX. That combo is like working with a cinderblock in your hands (heavy!!!) but the results are well worth it. The thing is just fantastic. I see you didn't give your copy a 10 for AF but mine is the fastest AF of all my L glass.

Good review, thanks!

The only reason I didn't was because my 100-400 II is actually faster at focusing. After that, the 24-70 is a very close 2nd.

I use it for parties and weddings on my 1Dx and also as a walk around lens.

I have only recently purchased this lens to replace my 24-105.
My intial thoughts are VERY positive! I was expecting a lot due to it's price and it is certainly delivering. Whist I think the 24-105 is a great lens, especially at it's current pricing, there are compromises in this lens althogh many can be fixed in PP.
Now I have the 24-70 F2.8 V2 I am getting sharper images with less distortion and even better colour rendition. Many make the point that this lens lacks IS, personally I am glad! I don't want a dead piece of glass in the focal path that serves no purpose for my uses.

Is it worth the extra money over the 24-105 or the 24-70 F2.8 V1? To me it is but both of the others are still very good lenses.

Is the lack of IS ever a problem for you?

Never had an issue with lack is IS. 2.8 is fast enough for anything I shoot. It mostly lives in my 5D3 which handles ISO extremely well, so as part of my kit, it's an outstanding lens.

Is it worth the upgraded price over II version if you already have verison I?

supert wrote in post #17879412
Is it worth the upgraded price over II version if you already have verison I?

Version 1 is a beast of a lens, built like a tank with a metal barrel and carries some significant weight and from what I see, a very nice lens, however version II is remarkably sharper, but more plastic. I think if version 1 is doing it for you, by all means, stick with it. If you need/want/desire sharper images, then you'll want II, but at about $1000.00 more? Personally, I've never had the I, and the II is simply excellent in it's performance.

Glad to see it's highly reviewed. I'm looking to get one soon also

I just recently got this lens. It is tack sharp and really fast.

I recently picked one up also when Canon was having a refurbed sale. Hasn't see a lot of use yet but so far quite happy with the results. The 24-105 might be expendale now ...

Anandnra wrote in post #17890865
I recently picked one up also when Canon was having a refurbed sale. Hasn't see a lot of use yet but so far quite happy with the results. The 24-105 might be expendale now ...

I thought the same thing about the 24-105, but ended up keeping it as a walk around lens for my 1DIV. Every time I think about letting it go, I shoot a few off and that changes my mind.