Question regarding the 24-70 Canon lineup

Add me to the list too. I use the 24-70L on the FF all the time, from kids in the house to portraits in a studio setting. I really didn't like the 24-70 MKI I had, but I kept it around for a few years due to how useful it wise, despite its issues of some sort of weird OOF side of the frame in portrait mode. The MKII is great, sharp, focuses very quickly, and has great versatility. Primes are good too, however invariably you will step a prime down in may cases putting it back at f2.8 or slower, or at least I would when doing paid gigs/senior portraits. 24-70 II and 70-200 II are perfect for what I shoot.

Tommydigi wrote in post #17828941
I gave myself a Christmas gift and just placed an order for the 24-70 F4 IS.

Nice! Hope you enjoy it as much as I am. Don't think you will be disappointed!

Thanks, It should be a great lens for travel and casual shooting. The macro feature is a nice bonus. The size is just right too as I've been considering ways to make my camera kit a bit smaller so I've held off on any Canon gear but I've decided I don't want to switch to mirrorless.

I'm looking forward to testing it out.

Just came today, just a few quick snaps. Seems nice

Macro Mode ( not a great example but cool how close you can get )

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/BwS9​md

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/CunP​xx

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/Cs5d​vq

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/CunX​4K

Tommydigi wrote in post #17831296
Just came today, just a few quick snaps. Seems nice

Macro Mode ( not a great example but cool how close you can get )

24mm

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/CunP​xx 24-70 F4IS @24mm by Tommy DiGiovanni, on Flickr

70mm

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/CunX​4K 24-70 F4IS @70mm by Tommy DiGiovanni, on Flickr

Congrats. That lens is on my radar for next year.

Btw, I love what looks to be your cast iron rooster/hen. She/he is very cool.

I felt the same way when looking to get an all walk around lens and weighed my options between 24-70 tamron 2.8 is or the canon without is. I'm loving the tamron even tho it's a crop lens it still has the is function. But one day I will get a full frame!

hlam wrote in post #17831440
I felt the same way when looking to get an all walk around lens and weighed my options between 24-70 tamron 2.8 is or the canon without is. I'm loving the tamron even tho it's a crop lens it still has the is function. But one day I will get a full frame!

I dont think the tamron is a crop lens, I am pretty sure it is also a ff lens?

The Di in the Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC lens name indicates it is designed for "FF" bodies. If the name includes Dii, it was designed for APSC sized sensors

Tommydigi wrote in post #17829059
Thanks, It should be a great lens for travel and casual shooting. The macro feature is a nice bonus. The size is just right too as I've been considering ways to make my camera kit a bit smaller so I've held off on any Canon gear but I've decided I don't want to switch to mirrorless.

I'm looking forward to testing it out.

Well, I just ordered one myself The $200 rebate is ending soon, and I have some extra cash from some car parts I returned, so yeah, pulled the trigger. We've heard it all before, but this is honestly the last lens I need for my lineup.

congrats. I'm really liking it.

I've been following this thread since its inception and I still have some questions.... How much better is the 24-70 f/4 IS than the 24-105 f/4 IS: I've heard the range of the 24-105 is great, but the lens is less than spectacular... true? In addition to that.... I realize the 24-70 f/2.8 II is preferred over the f/4 IS 24-70 based on sharpness, color, etc. and I can see why. I'm trying to get a handle on what will be better for me, i.e., IS or f/2.8. The money isn't a huge consideration since I'll be saving up cash anyway... what's a couple more months in the long run?

I've never used a walk around lens without IS so I have no frame of reference. My crop walk around was the 15-85 IS... and I got great shots with that. I would lock it down on a tripod for landscapes, of course, but for casual walk arounds, I could hand hold it without any issues.

I believe I would use a 24-xx or 24-105 more as a walk around or in cases when I need more length than 35mm for landscape, because I am using a 1D IV and have the 16-35 f/4 IS for wide landscapes and interior kitchen photographs. On the other hand, eventually, I may very well buy a full frame landscape camera and in that case, the IS would have less value. I can't envision myself using f/2.8 for landscapes and I think I'd always stop down to f/8 or so........ and I really don't do low light much, unless I'm taking a photograph of a restaurant meal. I usually use a.... ummmmmm cell phone for those those photos. <shudder>

Anyway, if anyone has any thoughts to help me clarify my decision, I'd appreciate it.

This write up by Roger at Lens Rentals: http://www.lensrentals​.com …ngle/canon-24-70mm-f4l-is

Accurate, in your view?

even a restaurant meal, you are better off with 4 stop IS. You buy the 24-70ii for events. In that regard, you want a little bit more ambient for flashed shots and/or shutter speed for low light shots of people. It's great for quick impromptu group photos. For posed group photos, I tend to opt for something longer with a 70-200/100/135 ect.

Charlie wrote in post #17839431
even a restaurant meal, you are better off with 4 stop IS. You buy the 24-70ii for events. In that regard, you want a little bit more ambient for flashed shots and/or shutter speed for low light shots of people. It's great for quick impromptu group photos. For posed group photos, I tend to opt for something longer with a 70-200/100/135 ect.

Thanks, Charlie

nfoerster wrote in post #17823731
I have had the 24-70 II for a week now and I absolutely love it, but I am beginning to think that the lens is way too much for me at the moment. When I say too much, I mean too expensive and too heavy to be comfortable mentally and physically as a walk-around. I miss having the IS that I had on my 24-105, and I just cannot justify spending an extra $1000 for an extra stop, and an extra $150 just to buy 82mm filters.

I was curious to know from those who exchanged the 2.8 for the 4 and if they were satisfied or not, loved it but had buyers remorse, etc.? What were the major differences noticed? If I do exchange, Im going to be applying part of that difference towards some accessories, mainly a new set of legs and a flash.

Post it to me and I'll send you my 24-105L in exchange