24-70's are all crap

johnf3f wrote in post #17744234
I am happy to tell you that Canon has gone one better than a 24-70 F2.8 L IS - they have made one WITHOUT IS! No waiting for IS to spin up, no fighting the IS when tracking and a slimmer better (IQ) lens as well. What more could you want?

I am still, 2 years, trying to find a use for the IS on my Canon 800 F5.8 L IS and 300 F2.8 L IS - so glad they didn't muck up my 24-70 F2.8 L V2 with it.

So glad for you when alot of us do need it.

johnf3f wrote in post #17744234
I am happy to tell you that Canon has gone one better than a 24-70 F2.8 L IS - they have made one WITHOUT IS! No waiting for IS to spin up, no fighting the IS when tracking and a slimmer better (IQ) lens as well. What more could you want?

I am still, 2 years, trying to find a use for the IS on my Canon 800 F5.8 L IS and 300 F2.8 L IS - so glad they didn't muck up my 24-70 F2.8 L V2 with it.

you know you can turn off the IS right? I mean, we should applaud canon for crippling the lens, is basically what you're saying. You may have no use for it, many will disagree.

I disagree with the article as all tools are good tools in the hand of a skilful craftsman & Tony Northrup's comment at the bottom says it all for me. I do agree with the sub-article "one photographer, one camera, one lens...however. Apart from the 20mm, I got all the lenses in that article and if I was forced to use 1 lens and 1 lens only for the entire wedding event, I would pick my Nikon 24-70mm over all the other mentioned so how can that be a "crappy lens choice"

dragon76 wrote in post #17744633
I disagree with the article as all tools are good tools in the hand of a skilful craftsman & Tony Northrup's comment at the bottom says it all for me. I do agree with the sub-article "one photographer, one camera, one lens...however. Apart from the 20mm, I got all the lenses in that article and if I was forced to use 1 lens and 1 lens only for the entire wedding event, I would pick my Nikon 24-70mm over all the other mentioned so how can that be a "crappy lens choice"

This. ^ When relegated to one lens it will always be the 24-70 2.8.

I wouldn't call it a relegation but a preference for its versatility as well as quality. People use macro lens to take portraits but I wouldn't say that's a bad lens choice if they want to use it for both portraits and macro shots.

Tony Northrup • 7 months ago


The 24-70 is a versatile, fast zoom, great for quickly framing and snapping a candid shot in dim churches and after-dark receptions. It's an event lens. All these examples are posed.

Of course, no wedding photographer shoots the wedding with only a 24-70. It's good to have wider, faster, and more telephoto lenses, and of course a macro or extension tubes. But you grab the 24-70 for the table shots at the reception, for the low-light dancing shots, and you or the assistant probably has it out for the ceremony.

I'm just here reading the comments like....

johnf3f wrote in post #17744234
I am happy to tell you that Canon has gone one better than a 24-70 F2.8 L IS - they have made one WITHOUT IS! No waiting for IS to spin up, no fighting the IS when tracking and a slimmer better (IQ) lens as well. What more could you want?

I am still, 2 years, trying to find a use for the IS on my Canon 800 F5.8 L IS and 300 F2.8 L IS - so glad they didn't muck up my 24-70 F2.8 L V2 with it.

I guess Samyang will do one even better than Canon then, when they make one WITHOUT AF! No more dealing with MFA, or AF errors, no fighting exactly which AF point to use, or have the camera decide for me, and a smaller slimmer choice. What more could you want?

I am still, 10 years, trying to find a use for AF in all my Canon L lenses - so glad knowing that Samyang won't muck up a 24-70 with it.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17753244
I guess Samyang will do one even better than Canon then, when they make one WITHOUT AF! No more dealing with MFA, or AF errors, no fighting exactly which AF point to use, or have the camera decide for me, and a smaller slimmer choice. What more could you want?

I am still, 10 years, trying to find a use for AF in all my Canon L lenses - so glad knowing that Samyang won't muck up a 24-70 with it.

Very interesting TeamSpeed!
I thought that I was a bit of a Luddite for not liking IS! Unfortunately HIGH SPEED and ACCURATE AF is essential for the bulk of my photography. Otherwise I would still be using my5Dwouldn't have spent silly money on my 1DX!

On the odd occasion that I give my Canon A1 a trip out I find it very rewarding to have to contemplate an image, compose it and then manually focus to exactly the point that I want. Then consider the DOF that I want and adjust the exposure accordingly. Yes it's slow, sometimes very slow but the results are worth it! However most of my photography is wildlife so I LOVE AUTOMATION!
But NOT IS!

Incidentally I have never (yet) had a Canon body or lens that needed MFA/AMFA. I have tried it but the factory settings were better than my attempts.

johnf3f wrote in post #17753861
Very interesting TeamSpeed!
I thought that I was a bit of a Luddite for not liking IS! Unfortunately HIGH SPEED and ACCURATE AF is essential for the bulk of my photography. Otherwise I would still be using my5Dwouldn't have spent silly money on my 1DX!

On the odd occasion that I give my Canon A1 a trip out I find it very rewarding to have to contemplate an image, compose it and then manually focus to exactly the point that I want. Then consider the DOF that I want and adjust the exposure accordingly. Yes it's slow, sometimes very slow but the results are worth it! However most of my photography is wildlife so I LOVE AUTOMATION!
But NOT IS!

Incidentally I have never (yet) had a Canon body or lens that needed MFA/AMFA. I have tried it but the factory settings were better than my attempts.

You need to shoot in low light more where you cannot use a flash, or shoot macro, where you are at f16 or more in good lighting, but your shutter speeds are still very slow. Or shoot long distance objects at 1500mm! IS is essential for those types of things, IMO.

Love IS for stabilizing subject in Viewfinder on long lenses while shooting handheld.
As the days get longer, the yips get stronger.

"Don't most use 2 lenses on 2 body's to stay "reasonable compact" ?"

Good lord you wouldn't to see me then. I guess I am not "compact". I have used as many as five cameras and three shooters. All depends on the venue. My main most lenses are my 24-70 f2.8mm and 70-200mm f2.8. They are on my 1Ds Mk III. And that combo gets 75% of the work.
I add a 7D with a 100-400mm on a tripod at the back of the venue. I always have one extra shooter usually with my 24-105mm f4. This person roams around both the "church" and reception.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #17753926
You need to shoot in low light more where you cannot use a flash, or shoot macro, where you are at f16 or more in good lighting, but your shutter speeds are still very slow. Or shoot long distance objects at 1500mm! IS is essential for those types of things, IMO.

Nice shots.
I don't do much macro and use a tripod when I do.
The majority of my photography is with my Canon 800mm F5.6 L IS, most often at F8 to F11 as it has so little DOF, both off a tripod and hand held. I did turn on the IS earlier today to check it still worked, it does and very well too, then turned it back off. I will use it when needed - just haven't found a use for it since the beginning of 2014.
Just for fun I have attached an unprocessed image.

Tripods don't work with insects much, and the butterfly was actually on my hand. I also shoot the moon handheld. IS is a very nice convenience as is aAF.

No need to expound on what everyone else has said in this thread, but in my minimalist view:

"Best tool for the job": Artistry vs. Versatility... getting a pretty shot vs. getting the shot. The variable in this equation is the photographer's vision + creativity/imagination​.