What is the best 24-70mm?

OK. Let's be honest:

The cool thing about the way the question has been interpreted by everyone is that we get answers to two (actually several) questions!

Thanks for the info.

For me, I can only speak as to using a 24-70 as an event lens - I have rented the 24-70 f/2.8 II and the Tamron w VC. (I own the 24-105 f/4 IS).

I used the Canon 24-70 at two weddings and for a week of dance recitals/rehearsals. About 20,000 shots with the Canon (no pun intended) and a few thousand at the dance events with the Tamron.

Sorry, but the Canon was far superior - focus, color, contrast, overall image quality, usability.

I love IS - have it on most of my lenses - but did not miss it at all on the 24-70 f/2.8 II. It's a very special lens that does not require special uses.

24-70L mk2

Bassat wrote in post #17960592
The question is which 24-70 is best. You define best as IQ. There are other ways to judge best. That is what this thread is about. There is no 'best' until you define what you mean by best. For you it is IQ. Fine. For me, the 24-70II was not even an option because of the cost. For someone else, best may involve IS, which puts the 24-70 II out of contention without a second look.

There are way more than two types of people.

The question was "What is the best 24-70mm?" Not which is the best for the price or which has the best IS.
I almost agree with what you said. And I understand. But the bottom line is what delivers the best photo. And the correct answer is still the ef 24-70mm f2.8L.
Nobody comes out an says man my IS works better than anything but the photos are not as sharp as the Canon. Or my lens is almost as sharp as the Canon and I only spent $xxx.xx dollars on it. When the rubber meets the road the Canon is the best 24-70mm f2.8. I currently own the others. If I didn't and didn't use them I would not be so sure.

Well,

I will continue to follow this thread but I took myself out of the dilemma. I just got a 24-105 f/4 IS L refurb. I know it isn't a top of the line lens but it has IS which I think is important for me, at my age.

I already have the very fine 16-35 f/4 IS L for landscapes and the 100-400 ii L for birding. I really wanted a Canon 24-70 f/2.8 IS L.... but it doesn't exist yet. I figure, I won't lose that much money if I sell the 24-105 later if and when the 24-70 f/2.8 IS becomes a reality.

ebiggs wrote in post #17965159
The question was "What is the best 24-70mm?" Not which is the best for the price or which has the best IS.
I almost agree with what you said. And I understand. But the bottom line is what delivers the best photo. And the correct answer is still the ef 24-70mm f2.8L.
Nobody comes out an says man my IS works better than anything but the photos are not as sharp as the Canon. Or my lens is almost as sharp as the Canon and I only spent $xxx.xx dollars on it. When the ribber meets the road the Canon is the best 24-70mm f2.8. I currently own the others. If I didn't and didn't use them I would not be so sure.

so you really think the 24-70ii will give better IQ if I'm in a musuem? Nightscapes at an amusement park? Stopped down landscapes during dusk, purposeful motion blur, moving water, ect.

I know the 24-70ii on the A7r can be a mess at times, no IBIS, however on the A7rii, it's a light chomping monster. 3 stops IS can easily make or break an image. All the IQ in the world doesnt mean jack if you're shooting ISO 6400 rather than 800.

for event photography, the 24-70ii shines *mostly*. Taking detailed shots at low shutter speeds can be a disaster.

I am with "ebiggs" on this one. The Canon 24-70 F2.8 L V2 is just fine as it is. Attached to a substantial camera body it is very steady (especially with a bit of target shooting experience) and I have yet to come across a situation where I wanted IS. Also It certainly has given better IQ, on my cameras, than any zoom lens that I have tried in roughly this focal range.
I normally use a Canon 1 Series but do, sometimes, use a 7D2 and the lighter body does not help with stability - which is why I normally use it with the battery grip attached.
I note "Charlie's" comments and wonder if it might (possibly?) be the smaller/lighter camera body that makes IS/IBIS/OS more useful? I don't have much experience of the Sony A7r and A7r2 (that Charlie lists in their gear) but I have used them and couldn't get on with the ergonomics though they were OK on a tripod.

johnf3f wrote in post #17965341
I am with "ebiggs" on this one. The Canon 24-70 F2.8 L V2 is just fine as it is. Attached to a substantial camera body it is very steady (especially with a bit of target shooting experience) and I have yet to come across a situation where I wanted IS. Also It certainly has given better IQ, on my cameras, than any zoom lens that I have tried in roughly this focal range.
I normally use a Canon 1 Series but do, sometimes, use a 7D2 and the lighter body does not help with stability - which is why I normally use it with the battery grip attached.
I note "Charlie's" comments and wonder if it might (possibly?) be the smaller/lighter camera body that makes IS/IBIS/OS more useful? I don't have much experience of the Sony A7r and A7r2 (that Charlie lists in their gear) but I have used them and couldn't get on with the ergonomics though they were OK on a tripod.

it's the combination of body and high megapixel.

think 7D2, you cant use the same shutter speeds as a 1D body due to micro blur. I have a lens like this for pin sharp images, whether it's handheld or tripod usage. Granted the primary use of the 24-70 is for 4K video, concept is still the same.

I'm a big fan of the museums in LA, and many wont allow for tripods. Getty for instance, is an amazing museum with an amazing view..... no tripod.

I am very torn by everyone's comments and I really want to get the Canon 24-70 II, but the price doesn't justify the quality. If it was around 1500 original and around 1000ish then I would consider it since it is a highly respectable lens. I been debating between the tameron and the canon. sighs...

Charlie wrote in post #17965283
so you really think the 24-70ii will give better IQ if I'm in a musuem? Nightscapes at an amusement park? Stopped down landscapes during dusk, purposeful motion blur, moving water, ect.

I know the 24-70ii on the A7r can be a mess at times, no IBIS, however on the A7rii, it's a light chomping monster. 3 stops IS can easily make or break an image. All the IQ in the world doesnt mean jack if you're shooting ISO 6400 rather than 800.

for event photography, the 24-70ii shines *mostly*. Taking detailed shots at low shutter speeds can be a disaster.

Why on earth would you shoot long shutter speeds at events?

How can something so simple generate so much discussion

Here's the world's roughest flow chart to help (excuse the formatting; a CODE block seems to have a mind of its own):

Do I regularly shoot with shutter speeds slower than the 1/focal length rule (without a tripod or monopod)?
       |                               |
       No                               Yes
       |                               |
       |                               \/
       |               Do I need f/2.8 for shallow DOF or AF in very dark environments?
       |                               |                               |
       |                               No                              Yes
       |                               |                               |
       |                               \/                              \/
       |               Canon 24-70 f/4L IS               Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC
       |
       |
Do I need f/2.8 for shallow DOF, AF in dark environments, or for holding my 1/focal length shutter speeds?
       |                               |
      No                              Yes
       |                               |
      \/                               \/
Canon 24-70 f/4L IS          Is budget an issue?
                              |               |
                              No             Yes
                               |               |
                              \/              \/               
                               Canon 24-70II   Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC               

Charlie wrote in post #17965283
so you really think the 24-70ii will give better IQ if I'm in a musuem? Nightscapes at an amusement park? Stopped down landscapes during dusk, purposeful motion blur, moving water, ect.

You forget the Canon ef 24-70mm f2.8 is starting with better IQ in the first place. Perhaps the ones with IS can improve what they have. And perhaps it is still not up to the Canon.

sploo wrote in post #17965612
How can something so simple generate so much discussion

It is what this forum is for. We all have our opinions and it is fun to express them with like minded people.
It all good and when it comes right down to it, most lenses are better than the one using them!

ebiggs wrote in post #17965737
You forget the Canon ef 24-70mm f2.8 is starting with better IQ in the first place. Perhaps the ones with IS can improve what they have. And perhaps it is still not up to the Canon.

I'm not forgetting anything, your claim was "what delivers the best photos ", and I counter those claims, even the 24-105 would beat out the 24-70ii in many scenarios.

A three stop hit on ISO will rob whatever margin of IQ advantage you had.

If all the 24-70's were the exact same price, which one would outsell all the others combined?


That's your answer to the best one.

delta0014 wrote in post #17965777
If all the 24-70's were the exact same price, which one would outsell all the others combined?


That's your answer to the best one.

I find that to be a really lame argument. Some people still won't want to carry something the size of the LII. Some folks have a real need for IS. Some folks don't care about f/2.8. Your scenario describes the most popular. The only thing you've done is eliminate cost as a consideration. There are others. Best still requires a definition.

Situation: all automobiles are priced the same. My guess is the A/4WD SUV would sell more than any other. It is still only 'best' for the soccer-mom crowd. If you need an F350 12-cylinder diesel, a Corvette is not the 'best' auto you can get.