OT split from 24-70 survey

Then we can do the same test for the sigmaas there are plenty of them sent back.

malla1962 wrote in post #2029691
Then we can do the same test for the sigmaas there are plenty of them sent back.

They are normally a 3rd of the price, and have to be reverse engineered, but at least they will rechip a lens if required for free

Good point. You want to manage that thread, malla?

malla1962 wrote in post #2029691
Then we can do the same test for the sigmaas there are plenty of them sent back.

I find that attitude sad, despite the mock smiles inserted: it's saying let's 'prove' our own favourite gear is OK and point the finger at all the other stuff we don't like' I think we do better for each other by just being objective.

For example, I would like a Sigma 30mm 1.4 EX but would be cautious of buying one for the same reasons I would be cautious about the 24-70mm L. No brand 'issues'. Just going by what I read here and forming a reasonable judgement of risk based on the experience of others.

Whenever anyone, or any small group of people as in this case, are more interested in being right you can be sure objectivity will go out of the window and this whole community suffers as a result. Fan boyism does no one any good at the end of the day.

Thing is, worrying about QA of individual lenses only matters if one is unwilling to send it in for adjustment. I can be without any lenses for a month or so if it needs a fix. No problem. I have been lucky maybe and had no real problems with any.

With the L tho' people have a very high expectation based on nearly 3 times the cost of its close competition (excluding Canon stuff). Some feel cheated having bought into the L myth of build, quality and IQ promoted by a minority here. I don't blame them even tho' I think well just get it fixed and factor in the possibility you may have to. No big deal at all.

condyk wrote in post #2029776
Whenever anyone, or any small group of people as in this case, are more interested in being right you can be sure objectivity will go out of the window and this whole community suffers as a result. Fan boyism does no one any good at the end of the day.

Fan boyism works in other directions. Given the tendency of one or two posters to seek out and capitalize on every opportunity to verbally bash this lens and others like it (and to insert thinly-veiled insults to those that buy and like them), I'd say that there exists a certain fan-boyism that favors the "anything but Canon" club. Fair enough, but it begins to sound like a broken record after a while.

People who have owned the lens (for the most part) are stating their own experience with the lens. If objectivity is "going out the window", you might want to stand in front of a mirror and ask yourself why.

To be fair, this thread was started due to another thread
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=218612

The person that started the original thread (Jackal) had a genuine problem, and so did some of the respondants to that thread. (David S / mrclark321)

As I have stated earlier, good copies of this lens are obviously excellent, but it still remains that people have had genuine problems with it. Not wishing to Knock Canon or this lens at every oppertunity - as I do own 2 Canon bodies and 3/5 len's are also Canon, I still believe that quality control can be improved upon, and should be for the price.

steveathome wrote in post #2029867
The person that started the original thread (Jackal) had a genuine problem, and so did some of the respondants to that thread. (David S / mrclark321)

Mine had to go back to have the front element replaced and recalabration. So not to be picky but the initial out of the box experience was a disappointment. I also ordered this online and will never buy pricy glass unless I can try it first.

The biggest complaint for me was having to send it back to canon and waiting for it to return.

With ANY lens, from ANY manufacturer - there are bound to be glitches. Granted, QC should be more stringent... They also don't look at the lens as critically as we do and some things can develop after it leaves their hands. It's simply a matter of statistics.

That's what warranties are for. If something's not to your satisfaction - send it back!

Tom W wrote in post #2029828
... I'd say that there exists a certain fan-boyism that favors the "anything but Canon" club ... but it begins to sound like a broken record after a while ... If objectivity is "going out the window", you might want to stand in front of a mirror and ask yourself why.

I don't need to do that because I am very confident about where I am coming from. When I joined POTN I wasted a lot of cash following the logic of the L fan boy crowd and so what I try to do these days is provide a balance to that so new people at least see there is more to photography than gear. Back then we had a lot of aspirational gear talk stuff. These days maybe 4-5 people at tops constantly push that side. Most here are much more grounded and appreciate the shooter usually makes the shot. I'd put you in that category.

Any idiot could do a trawl of my posts and see I recommend all kinds of stuff, based on my personal experience mostly. My main walkaround today is the 17-40mm L. Before that it was the 24-105mm IS L. Both are superb lenses that I have constantly advocated to people here.

It's comical for you to think I am in some "anything but Canon" club. I just know from experience that neither are that much better, if at all, than some other stuff non Canon stuff I have had in IQ terms, but I like IS and I like USM and am prepared to pay a premium for that.

If I am a broken record well maybe it's because you only see the one side. Maybe you are blinkered in this instance. Well, there is no maybe actually. You are blinkered here simple as that.

Some subtlety of interpretation is called for when I am speaking against this specific lens, or speaking against a focus on gear before photography. If you only think black and white you will struggle to see the shades of grey in what I say and so you will attack me from this petty kind of 'we L owners are right and you're wrong' perspective. Read my posts with an open mind. If you can't do that well I really don't care.

So, bringing things back to this lens ... it's not about individual experience and generalising that. It is about looking at the big picture, people who have good and not good experiences with a piece of equipment and then making a judgement. I've got decent shots with it before. No learning curve or any of that BS! But I'm not going to ignore all those who have poor results out of the box and yet who can get decent results with other gear, or who send it back for repair and are then happy. Why would anyone do that?

I bought my 24-70L when it was still freezing temperatures outside. I had to make sure I was home for 2 reasons, B&H requires a signature and I didn't want my expensive lens on my doorstep all day. Can't be good for a lens to be inside-outside before it gets to your camera. Just a thought.

""..it's not about individual experience and generalising that....""

The problem here is that the original post asked specifically for answers from people that have owned or now own the lens. Even the title is descriptive enough - "Questionaire: What is Your Experience with the 24-70L?"

If you have experience, answer the questionaire. If not, then maybe consider ignoring the thread instead of going into your usual screed on how this must be a terrible lens because some people complain about it. The purpose here is to get some first-hand input rather than some biased rhetoric from somebody that thinks that anybody that sees value where he doesn't is worthy of scorn.

Indeed, demeaning terms such as "fanboy" and "the L myth" and such that are used to belittle those that have good experiences with such equipment are not only baseless, but add nothing of substance to the arguement.

SuzyView wrote in post #2030159
I bought my 24-70L when it was still freezing temperatures outside. I had to make sure I was home for 2 reasons, B&H requires a signature and I didn't want my expensive lens on my doorstep all day. Can't be good for a lens to be inside-outside before it gets to your camera. Just a thought.

The temperature won't actually adversely affect your lens. The only thing you have to really watch out for is to let it warm up close to room temperature before you unwrap it and mount it on the camera. Condensation will likely form otherwise.

I've experienced this countless times from being out in the snow (I love shooting Nor'easter blizzards, heh) and coming in from same... Let everything warm up, then start pulling it apart or putting it back together. No worries.

Thanks for the comments, even the critical ones. I'm getting a little old to take things personally, but I will say that this "Questionnaire" was meant to get out comments from people who actually have the 24-70 or had it at one time and can offer their experiences whether bad or good. Most people have responded positively to this and I appreciate it. Buying L lenses or third party lenses is a good thing all the way around. If we all had unlimited resources and can buy everything that fit our great Canon cameras, there wouldn't be a forum. We'd just pick the lens and shoot. I joined this forum to hear what people are using and how they are using their gear and learning from them. I can't afford to buy $25k of great stuff, so I have to make choices. The 24-70 is one of the lenses I really wanted to have in my collection. If I didn't join this forum, I would have never spent the money on it, I would have thought it was only for pros. Now I know better. Whether L or not, Canon or not, opinions are what makes this forum so accessible. And I think negative criticism is helpful given in the right spirit. Otherwise, those poor moderators would have much too much to do.

So one overwhelming response to these threads where we have issues is "When I first got it I had problems". I'm finding a steady hand and carefull selection of DoF/shutter speed makes a difference for me. What about you? What is it you do to gain better consistency from this lens?

I spent a lot of time with this lens to make it work for me. I experimented with settings first, then I decided I needed to hold my 20D in a particular way, more steady, since it is heavier than most lenses I have. I also can't believe the quality of my shots in low light without the flash, so the comment above by Dan intrigues me. I now take a few more seconds to get the best out of the shot with this lens. I shoot in RAW and on P. Before I depended on the camera to decide. Now I set the ISO first. Also shooting more in Manual, which is really out of the box for me.