Reviews written by Giovanni Leoni

JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).

By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.

OK, I confirm

You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here

Accept Cookies

Customize

Refuse Cookies

Giovanni Leoni
www.juzaphoto.com/p/GiovanniLeoni

PROFILE

ALL PHOTOS

GALLERIES

Reviews of cameras, lenses, tripods, heads and other accessories written by Giovanni Leoni

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Microsoft Translator.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM

Pros: Exactly what my friend Paul wrote.

Cons: Like above.

Opinion: Let me start: I make portraits and, in the "feminine" portrait, the sharpness as described by Paolo, the detachment of the floors, and the blurry make it an indispensable "piece". I add a "very personal" consideration/opinion (which is then the reason for my comment). As is well known, zooms generally stretch in canvas position, and fall into a wide-angle position. "This" works in reverse (and this would, in itself, be a VALID reason to rub it as a piece of collector's interest!)! that? Canon never explained it, as far as I know. "In my opinion" the reason lies precisely in the blessed paraluce, rightly praised by Paul. In the indented position (canvas) you enjoy a FULLY efficient lampshon; in an extruded position (wide angle) it correctly offers itself for a few millimeters, so as not to vignette. The standard scheme, which theoretically would have allowed better results in terms of resolution, instead obliges a lampshed calculated not to vignette at 24 mm., but thus, in the tele position, there is virtually no protection from the rays of light accidents. With a more "traditional" construction (EF 24-70/2.8 L Mk. II, for example) therefore, it would probably have been possible to obtain MTF (theoretical!!!) a little better BUT, "in the field", having a TRUE AND FUNCTIONAL lampshon would still have led to better images (no less negatively affected by flares). My opinion is that Canon's mathematicians reasoned in these terms! Then, with the Mk. II, to better conform to the wishes of the "ox park" (always insatiable in requesting the "the more there is, the better" -of resolution, in this case-!) they changed course, according to the wishes of the mktg.. My opinion (that I own both), of course.

sent on May 01, 2021