24L and 24L II - Much Difference?

Hi all,

I'm renting a 24L for a week to see if I like it enough to purchase (and to shoot a small event).
It was quite a bit cheaper than the 24L II to rent, is there much difference between the two?

Corner performance isn't paramount for me at the moment due to being on a cropper, but saying that, me going full frame is inevitable.

Is there something specifically problematic about the 24L that pushed Canon to update it?

Thanks a bunch!

benesotor wrote in post #10595376
Hi all,

I'm renting a 24L for a week to see if I like it enough to purchase (and to shoot a small event).
It was quite a bit cheaper than the 24L II to rent, is there much difference between the two?

Corner performance isn't paramount for me at the moment due to being on a cropper, but saying that, me going full frame is inevitable.

Is there something specifically problematic about the 24L that pushed Canon to update it?

Thanks a bunch!

http://www.the-digital-picture.com ….4-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I have the mark I version and love it on crop or FF.

windpig wrote in post #10595431
http://www.the-digital-picture.com ….4-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
http://www.the-digital-picture.com …L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

I have the mark I version and love it on crop or FF.

Ah lovely didn't notice there was a direct comparison, cheers.

Yep, a lot sharper wide open, they also fixed a lot of the CA issues the original had while wide open. The mk II is just a much better lens if you want to take advantage of the wider apertures.

HUGE difference (on a ff), maybe much less on a crop body. It's mostly corner and edge sharpnes.

I would save up for the mark II version.