35Art <> Canon 24-70 2.8L (= darts) ?

In past I started with the 35L, later I bought the 35 Art.
Long time before I had the 24-70 2.8L MKI, I remember that it was known as not sharp wide open, but maybe there is a copy variation.

I decided to try this lens again as I forgot how good (or bad) it was, some recomposed pics at f2.8 seem to misfocus (don't know if it's my user error of shooting in a hurry).
Some pics at f2.8 are sharp in the centre, others not (all with fast enough shutterspeeds), so it's possible to take sharp pics at f2.8.
But it's a bit like darts, and less keepers than with the Sigma, so less reliable...

I start allready getting nostalgia to my Sigma 35 Art and I have the zoom only 1 week
As 24-70 2.8L I is still fastly sold, I will retest it again for a few weeks, maybe I go back to the 35 Art,
despite I have a 50 Art allready, those primes are wonderfull lenses, colour, sharpness, bokeh,... just everything...

Anyone also switched to the zoom but returned to the 35 Art cause he was used to reliable sharp quality ?

I can't remember what the parts are called, but the 24-70 V1 has an issue where over time the little spacers or plastic tabs that aligned for focus would wear. lensrentals has a whole teardown and article about it and I'm sure the next person who posts will know the exact name. Basically you'll ned to send the lens in periodically and have these parts replaced and the lens calibrated.

And the 35A wide open for me was always hit or mis, but that was wide open with a 5D2. When it hit it was crazy sharp and when stopped down it was crazy sharp. I'd buy it again except the 35LII is supposed to be even better, and it would have native focus. (at double the cost though)

Found it... https://www.lensrental​s.com …/the-limits-of-variation/

The second test of Juzza is again so badly unsharp
http://www.juzaphoto.c​om/article.php?l=en&ar​ticle=38