|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on December 12, 2023 Pros: Sharpness, AF speed and precision, construction, colors, reliability, lots and lots of performance. Cons: cost, needless to say lack of stabilization, for those who are used to it it is not a drama... Opinion: Recently purchased, I come from a Canon 28-70 f2.8 L that I will always remember in its beautiful rendering, now vintage... I can't say that the change was really radical... Maybe I expected it to be lighter, but in terms of speed, sharpness even on the sides and colors, we are on another planet. I was already aware of what the advantages of this lens would be, but trying them out for yourself is a whole other thing... The blur is true, it is not "creamy" and generous like the first two versions, because of the different microcontrast, but nothing detracts from the fact that its three-dimensionality is superlative... The engraving of the details and nuances are indescribable... If we have to talk about the speed, it really amazed me, I really didn't think it was so fast despite the weight... With high-performance autofocus modules, it becomes a lightning bolt... Many have complained about the lack of stabilization, but let's be clear, is it really necessary for a lens like this? Although now the RF system has been updated, I recommend it completely from landscapes to portraits, for intensive professional use even today even on mirrorless it can give the best of itself... Perfect project ! |
 | sent on November 18, 2022 Pros: Sharpness, overall image quality Cons: It is not stabilized, the diaphragm group from what I understand almost always breaks (mine is broken) Opinion: The 24/70 is the lens that should never be missing (for Full Frame systems) practically you can do a bit of everything from the landscape to the portrait, the model in question is an L series lens and in my opinion has no particular defects, the images generated are pleasant, sharp (even at full aperture) with pleasant colors, I used it for years on the 5D Mark III I noticed some difficulty in focusing in particular situations such as backlight using it instead on Canon R6 with adapter I did not encounter the problem indeed there was a significant improvement in focus. Defects : missing the stabilizer that perhaps in some cases would be useful the problem but I solved it with the R6 that is stabilized; The diaphragm group EROOR 01 broke and considering that I use it very little is somewhat strange, reading on the various online forums from what little I understood is a very frequent defect, the cost for the repair was 200 Euro and considering the cost of the lens we say you would not expect similar problems. |
  | sent on June 19, 2021 Pros: Crisp at all focal points, pleasant blurry, compact size Cons: nobody Opinion: Objective excellently built and able to give high performance to all focal points. For the same opening, it does not make us regret the corresponding fixes. I am using it mainly on a 5DsR and it is a perfect pairing that can give results always of excellence. It is the natural complement of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS II. In general the resolution is always excellent with a prevalence on shorter focal points. At 70 mm Maybe I find something more in the 70-200 but let's talk about laughable news. Distortion is always well controlled even at 24 mm where it is slightly more noticeable but controllable via software. For my use I do not find it heavy or bulky. Until now I have not felt the lack of the stabilizer even in the less favorable conditions where the large opening almost always allows safety times. Mechanically it is impeccable and robust. I am also recently trying it a Canon R5 on which it works very well and without creating difficulties for autofocus. The total footprint is slightly lower in volume terms than that of 5DsR. I would say that it is a advisable optics even after the advent of the new RF attack especially for those who know how to move in the used. |
 | sent on April 17, 2021 Pros: Sharpening,fast af,bokeh,image quality Cons: Price,not stabilized Opinion: Taken instead of 24-105 f4 ii. I didn't regret it at all despite costing twice as much and it's shorter on the canvas side. Much sharper and returns quality, image cleaning, bokeh and three-dimensionality of another level. It would be 10, but I'm taking half a point off the lack of stabilization that, to be honest, is not so indispensable on these focal points at this opening, taking into account what today's high-iso cameras can do. The price is proportionate to the quality it offers |
 | sent on October 30, 2020 Pros: f2.8, RELIABILITY and SPEED MAF, silent, Sharpness, three-dimensionality, Weight.. ALL (No flaws!) Cons: Some complain about the lack of stabilisation, for me it is a pro, as it saves weight; if you buy such a lens you have to have a minimum of machine body worthy of supporting it (not an entry level for sure), so you work with safety times and raise ISOs. So for me nothing, apart from the cost (but even here, it's all worth it in my opinion and there's no complaining) Opinion: What to say, you mount it on the body and you don't really take it off anymore (try to believe). The pros are a marvel, at 2.8 it is very sharp almost to the corners, at F4 it is a blade on everything. All PRO's are well described by other users and I gladly confirm them without repeating myself! Apart from the BOKEH that does not particularly excite me (I think, however, the subjective thing), the lens is perfect for me! |
 | sent on July 04, 2020 Pros: Sharpness, construction, reliability, maf Cons: Excursion, no stabilization Opinion: Taken as a handyman instead of the 24/105 F4 L, I immediately noticed the extreme sharpness! Now I can hardly get out of the house without this lens. It has a sharpness superior even to the fixed L series, excellent focus with very quiet engine, fast and precise. The bokeh is very sweet and pleasant. The only ones in the are the poor focal excursion and the absence of stabilizer (I felt the need only by shooting indoors in the evening), things known when buying a 24/70 but making themselves felt. |
 | sent on May 07, 2019 Pros: Exceptional sharpness Cons: Encumbrance, lack of stabilization Opinion: I had it for some time, then sold it for the above cons, but then I bought it back because I missed it. Perhaps for specialistic use given the reduced albeit classic focal hike. I'm not so happy with the resistance to flare, although the second (bought recently) seems better than the previous (possible?) but the weight and size would have required the stabilizer. Ultimately a great lens to know how to use to exploit it fully. |
 | sent on May 06, 2019 Pros: Max Aperture 2.8 Cons: Weight-size-Price Opinion: I have used for years the 24-70 4.0 L IS. Compared to the latter it has nothing more than the possibility of greater detachment from the 2.8 diaphragm background. Of cons is not stabilized, which is very useful in many situations. With the same diaphragm, until now, IMHO, the sharpness is identical. It also weighs more and is bulkier. |
 | sent on April 08, 2019 Pros: Accurate, Reliable Cons: Not having had it in the outfit to date Opinion: I tried several zoom 24-70 from the first series of canon, to the Sigma art passing through Tamron and it has always been, even on an emotional level, a compromise between versatility and quality. I have a few days the 24-70 2.8 L II a fantastic lens accurate and reliable, a must have in the outfit of a professional (both photographer and videomaker) that has the need to combine quality versatility and dynamism. |
 | sent on March 14, 2019 Pros: Flare, sharpness, MAF Cons: Front lens hike Opinion: I have several L-series lenses, I love them with their strengths and their flaws... This, among all, is not my favorite, it returns images too sharp, all too harsh. The flare is almost non-existent. I would say the only drawback, is the frontal hike. I don't always shoot with tripods, so I don't feel the lack of stabilizer |
user69293  | sent on December 16, 2018 Pros: Work objective without compromise Cons: None for professional use, for amateur Use Council fixed focal objectives Opinion: For weddings and events This lens is the best there is in circulation, it is crisp, AF Lightning and gorgeous chromatic rendition. Also fairly light and compact to be an f2.8. It is a "serious" and expensive lens, so for amateur use does not offer much satisfaction, primarily the cost is very challenging (but it is worth them all) so not affordable for everyone, is not stabilized and is only f2.8. For this I think that in the amateur with the fixed there is more fun given the costs more content, more brightness or stabilization, for more "artistic" shots that can be performed calmly, unlike the 24-70 2.8 thought to work in "hurry", Who can not stand too much thinking but must bring the excellent shot at home, because it will be handsomely rewarded. |
  | sent on December 06, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, precision, colors, general yield Cons: It's not stabilized Opinion: A rock, gives absolute security, does not miss a beat. Of course at f2.8 it won't be a dream lens with a f---ing, although at 70mm it's not bad, but when you need the certainty of taking home the work there aren't many alternatives to this superb level of quality. I use it on short trips when I carry a single lens. When the lack of the stabilizer is made important use the flash. For targeted outputs, however, I prefer brighter fixtures. No comparison possible with the various f4, it is not only for the extra stop but for the general quality of the image, when you bring a single "universal" lens in general you have to settle but with this no compromise, the photos also street and reportage are excellent. Probably the best 24-70 around. Paired with a 135 can constitute an entire set. It's worth how much it's currently expensive. Vote 10 despite being without IS. |
 | sent on November 23, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, AF accuracy, color rendition Cons: Price still high ma...si knows already departing Opinion: I came from a Tamron 24-70 VC first series, of which I was still very satisfied, I had the opportunity to buy the used Canon. I was surprised at once the fidelity of the colors rendered, really superior to other lenses, the AF is excellent even in the sports shot, the sharpness only flaw to f/2.8 then always superb, distortion of fact present only at 24 mm but correctable in post. The small defects have already been highlighted by almost all: high price, lack of stabilizer for shots with "long" times, stretching when facing downwards. The only note for me where it does not shine is the fuzzy, however agreeable but I was not surprised as in other respects. To this day a lens of which I am immensely satisfied. |
| sent on September 22, 2018 Pros: Sharpness and chromatic fidelity out of the ordinary Cons: Really nothing... Opinion: Bought a few months ago proved right from the outset a real professional optics. It has no defect, from the build quality to the sharpness of the frame, from the absence of aberration to any graphic distortion at 24mm. Finally, after the flop of the 24/105 F/4 and many other Canon lenses, an L series as you wish. Second only to 14 mm, the rest is unrivaled. Buy it! |
 | sent on August 24, 2018 Pros: Color rendition, AF speed, image quality. Cons: Weight, and perhaps lack of stabilizer. Opinion: The best zoom in circulation in these focals. Weighs, and stretches zooming, so discrete is not compared to F/4. I had the F/4 and I liked it... I found it comfortable in the walkaround version. But this for portraiture makes it much better. Fire fast and precise, very beautiful colors. Blurred not exceptional but still nice. This is the lens that I often wondered whether to keep or replace with fixed but then I said: Gosh I should take at least a 35 + a 24 to make landscapes, and finally I keep it always tight. For me it's really a prime killer. |
 | sent on May 17, 2018 Pros: Sharpness, Af speed, blurry, contrast and color Cons: Maybe the weight but not too much: it's a f 2.8 zoom. Lack of stabilizer, light vignetting and distortion Opinion: Zoom almost definitive handyman (I say almost because if he had also the stabilizer would be the top.. who knows in a future version III). Having started with the only real "flaw" that you can find the rest are all pros (the weight, as well as the cost, do not put it in the counter as it is assumed that a bright zoom can not be even a featherweight). The AF is fast, accurate and silent. The images are clear even at full opening, with warm and saturated colors. It has a bit of vignetting at 2.8 and distortion at 24mm, but correctable in post. Blurry and excellent detachment, of course for a 2.8 nothing to do with a large aperture fixed. However, with a single lens you can replace several fixed (f 2.8) in one shot. It has the block of the lens that prevents the latter bait because of the weight: the zoom is not internal but it comes out (sometimes calling even some air and dust). To the touch it may look like plasticity but now they are almost all so... for what it costs if it had a hard case would be better... The lack of is in some situations is felt and would help to keep Iso lower. Recommended, however, both for the quality of the images and for its "multivalent" dowry. On the road, you can leave slow (and unnecessary weights) at home. |
 | sent on March 24, 2018 Pros: Fast, precise focusing. The bokeh is very beautiful and excellent brightness. Cons: Honestly, I can not see anything against it. Maybe a little 'pesantino? But with the 6D you get used quickly Opinion: Practically now is the fixed goal for my 6D (not MKII) that I use both for landscape and for portrait together with the 70-200 Sigma (Choice of Sigma on the advice of a friend professional photographer) with the fantastic opening to 2.8 I was told that I should not give back 24-105 f 4 to buy this but I can honestly have more satisfaction than the other rnAppena I will complete the series with the 16-35 f 2.8 |
 | sent on September 10, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, fast, silent and super-precise. Blurry is a fable and the light it catches is awesome for its great brightness. Cons: At first, just bought me the price but over time I cushioned her cost with the photos produced and sold to the big. It's a bit heavy enough to unbalance my 6d, but over time it's a habit. Opinion: The yield of this optic does not equal, sometimes I wonder how it was the first series to make a comparison, but I have not had the opportunity yet. Its sharpness is fantastic, you notice detail detail in the photos to be left astonished. It is my optic no. 1 always attached to my 6d and use it almost anywhere except when i need a canvas. I also hope to buy the 70-200 f2.8 stabilized to have the same quality in sports and detail photos. Now the price has dropped so I definitely recommend this instead of tamron. |
 | sent on July 09, 2017 Pros: Sharpest. Colors. Layout of floors. Great construction. Cons: Nothing at all. Opinion: The 24/70 par excellence. The stabilizer I think is completely useless on this type of lens. It is crisp on all the frame, the colors are superb. It offers a beautiful blur and is handy and portable. It offers some good features such as lock function. It smells great and has a very good floor plan. If you want to find a defect is expensive but at the moment there is no competition. |
| sent on May 14, 2017 Pros: Sharpness, colors, brightness, constructive quality. AF speed and precision. Cons: Nothing that is not the known limits of a zoom with this focal length. Price. Opinion: I had for years 24-105 L, it was the first L series optics I purchased, I used it first on 100d, then on 6d and finally on 5diii. An excellent handyman, practical and robust, well-established, beautiful photos .... but ...! It was always that "but" that made me read hundreds and hundreds of reviews, tests, tests, forums, and discussions. Having also the tamron 70-200 2.8 I was close to buying the smallest brother to side with insulone. But then I've read all about it (not very precise and undecided, especially in low light conditions, clear up to 50 but not beyond, etc.) and eventually I took the step and chose Canon again. I had to test it a little more yesterday, at the ceremony of a baptism of a granddaughter. What to say, has nothing to do with 24- 105. It's a lens on another planet. It is true that it is shorter than 35 mm but it is also true that from 70 onwards the F4 is really not very sharp and above all incalculable. rnI took the full service without flash, in a naturally lit church, alternating only with 135 f2. The photos I just downloaded are all of great quality. The colors are very beautiful and truthful. Excellent sharpness. Great blur. Of course the limit is the lack of a stabilizer that, with little light, makes you risk the microregion. I solved this problem by setting the minimum speed to 1/160 by working in the AV and with automatic ISO limiting at 6,400. The photos taken were all very good, without requiring particular PP. And those to be discarded are only for my composure errors, timing, dirty shots etc.ecc. Similar situations only happen when using slow lenses such as L 85 1.2, 135 2.0 and why not tamron 70.200 2.8. RnWould you then spend more than twice to buy this zoom compared to tamron? I can not tell why I did not try. I just know that everyone says Canon is the best. The dxomark site is one point for Canon's benefit. Other proofs are always winning the Canon. ValgusDo these 800 benefits and pass the euro? Doubt I do not know how to answer, but I still preferred not to overwhelm the problem and I went to the original, to avoid then wanting to resell the tamron one day to try this decanted lens. Now I'm sure, after testing it, that I have mounted Canon's best zoom in this focal range on the camera. If I want to have more, I just have to fix it, but the practicality and versatility of zoom in certain situations, such as ceremonies and events, are absolutely winning. Is it worth giving away the 24/105 to a few hundred euros to move on to this optic? Everyone may be the preferred answer. I absolutely believe it just as it was going from 100d to 6d and then to 5diii .... and maybe tomorrow at 1d mk XX? At certain levels, the benefits are never proportional to spending and less than ever in photography, especially in the digital era, but this is known. |
 | sent on May 01, 2017 Pros: construction from the L series, constant f2.8 aperture over the entire focal length, colors. Cons: anything Opinion: I have already had this superlative optic last year then resold to switch to 24-105 f4.rnrnL I rebuilt a few days to complete the triad f 2.8 from 16 to 200 mm.rnWhat to say? Very good in all directions, from the well-finished construction to the photos it gives.rnThough crisp, real colors, lightning fast.rn In low light conditions Usm always finds the subject to focus in very few moments. RnrnThe only thing that together with 16-35 f 2.8 I'm not excited about the size of the 82mm filter, I would have preferred a 77mm diameter similar to 70-200.rnrnPosso comparison with tamron 24-70 f 2.8 is stabilized and costs half the Canon but ... for low-light and low-light photos it is not up to the highest Canon. RnI do not think there is the best standard zoom with these features and rendered, the cost I think is the norm for this lens.rnIf the price does not scare you, along with 70-200 is ii Usm creates a winning winner .rnVote: 10 |
| sent on April 25, 2016 Pros: Construction, sharpness, contrast, brightness .... Cons: Price??? Opinion: Boys if all professionals in the world canon use this lens there is a reason !!!!! rnHo had a thousand doubts and concerns about the price, I admit. I tried the Tamron because it cost less and is stabilized. Great course. rnMa then you decide. You buy it, attach it to the camera and do not come off anymore! rnColori stratospheric. Pdr phenomenal. excellent autofocus accuracy and speed. rnInsomma if you want to save money ok ... But this is a different storiarn |
user39791 | sent on March 09, 2016 Pros: Construction and resolution. Cons: Distortion, vignetting and CA are not an improvement over the version I, blur and flare are deteriorating compared to version I. Opinion: Thanks to the kindness of a friend, who owns them both, I had a chance to compare calmly version I and II 24 70 2.8 Canon. The II from its greater portability and considerably increased the resolution at the edges to 24 mm. 35 to 70 the differences become very slight, almost imperceptible to tell the truth. Distortion, vignetting and CA are almost identical and fairly well controlled in both versions. Not good news for the II in the field of fuzzy (best version I) and in the resistance to flare (much better than the version I). Honestly I was a little disappointed in the II, expected improvements over the I from all points of view and it is not. Indeed some parameters are worsened and the real big difference is the elimination of the field curvature which limited the series I at the edges to 24mm. Worth 1,700 Euros (current, cost over 2,000 until a few months ago)? In my opinion, not entirely. And 'good optics, but not great as in the case of 70 200 2,8II. |
 | sent on March 03, 2016 Pros: Engraving, colors, brightness, Versatility Cons: Nobody Opinion: A 2.8 has the same incision, a fixed. It remains at exceptional levels throughout the zoom. Range very wide color, black is perfect. Worth every penny of its price. Very precise and fast autofocus, brightness that allows you to not climb too much with the ISO and take in hand. On portraits to f70 it must be a bit 'close to the subject but the softness of the skin results make shots usable with less post-production intervention. Versatile and excellent quality, to make street is fantastic. |
 | sent on January 04, 2016 Pros: Excellent sharpness at all focal lengths, color fidelity, unmatched, tropicalizzata.rn Cons: It lacks only the stabilizer Opinion: , I bought this lens after trying for three months that the 24-105 as ease of use, the color fidelity and IS can be a good lens but I did not meet the 24mm focal distortion and flare, I used only 50mm 100mm and did not satisfy me the little punch, I took the Tamron VC 24/70 f.2.8 but it was a cry, in low light was unusable, not hooked AF point and in shaded areas chromatically was not good, I tried the old 24/70 f.2.8 but I have not found one that went after bene.Ora Without some financial sacrifice I took this wonderful GOAL coupled to my 5DIII is a blade Incisiveness, Colors Stupendi, and working without flash and with lack of light with underexposed brings out all the colors that even the naked eye can distinguere.Per me is the BEST 24-70f.2.8 Outstanding and competes with many optical Fixed Focal Length of Equal. Worth every centime Speso.PER ME THIS AND 'THE REAL TUTTOFARE INSUSTITUIBILE.rnOTTICA RECOMMENDED TO THOSE LOOKING FOR QUALITY' |
 | sent on December 29, 2015 Pros: openness, clarity, color Cons: weight, external zoom sucking dust Opinion: I'm using it for about a year, I find it very comfortable and versatile (I also body analog plus a aps-c), it makes the colors very loyal and warm, weighs a bit 'but the brightness and quality has a certain weight . the price does not consider it a hand, a view so it lasts a lifetime. I highly recommend it to those looking for a standard zoom quality. The only drawback, when it zooms feels a bit 'the air that is sucked, too bad for optics Tropicalised |
 | sent on December 29, 2015 Pros: Extreme sharpness at any focal length. Fantastic colors Cons: Lack stabilizer Opinion: I'm using this lens for about a year and I must say that in my opinion is the best optics that Canon has in assortment (I can not say anything for super telephoto pirtroppo that I have not had a chance to try). Honestly I find it hard to find fault except that the lack of a stabilizer that would have made this point practically perfect in every way view. Consigliatissima |
 | sent on November 25, 2015 Pros: Sharpness at the highest levels, beautiful colors, three dimensional ', AF perfect Cons: The price ..... although worth every penny of what it costs Opinion: A perfect lens, The Zoom-rounder par excellence to focus more 'used at all, if I were to have a single lens would choose this. Risolvenza, micro-contrast, three-dimensionality 'and colors at the top. Blurred great. AF does not miss a beat. Good quality 'constructive, a bit' heavy but for me it 's an advantage. It seems to have a fixed yield and so 'nice indeed I sometimes wonder whether it is worth to detach mount a drive on those focal (except when there is a need' to open more 'of 2.8) .rnOttimo for travel and in all occasions when you have to do everything with one goal. Really the final lens of the zoom range, it included a thousand times! |
 | sent on October 26, 2015 Pros: Sharpness across the frame, very high resolving power, color, saturation, construction, af fast. Cons: The bill for this lens is outstanding particularly salty, given the price, a best case they could put it there. It also would be a killer IS lens. Appreciable to 24mm although less than the 24-105. Opinion: It replaced the 24-105 as "handyman", now is the lens that remains almost always glued to the SLR, despite the 24-105 remained in the running (for now) .rnLa special feature of this lens is to provide pictures taken and finished . The various corrections that normally did in LR on pictures taken with the 24-105 are a distant ricordo.rnLa made of this lens it is really record-breaking. It's incredible precision and high speed contrast even in critical light. I understand why, along with 70-200 II, is the lens of choice for matrimonialisti.rnI colors are incredibly saturated and detail returned throughout the frame is really elevato.rnAnche bokeh is very nice, both in TA that stopping down. rnIl high price made me give up for a long time, but as soon as I had the chance I took off the sfizio.rnA 24mm lens distorts, but the profile of LR are well made and the distortion is removed agilmente.rnLa vignette to 2.8 but this to me, personally,like. |
 | sent on September 09, 2015 Pros: Excellent yield. Cons: None in particular, but insist that for the price that he should have a housing or a bag. Opinion: I use it a lot. He never misses a beat. Whether on 7dmkII that performs very well on older sisters. I like the performance, sharpness, sfocato.Qualità sublime. That is perhaps the price he could put the stabilizer, but I do not care, I use it always. In short career goal, expensive, but for those who work indispensable. Certainly to match 70/200. |
 | sent on August 26, 2015 Pros: Sharpness and af lightning Cons: Nobody Opinion: After lengthy evaluations if buy ol Tamron 24-70 or canon used first series I decided to go to canon mark ii used practically new and save some pennies do. The figure is still high but as soon as you try it you can immediately appreciate the great qualities that ha.per me the main feature that a lens should have is the speed and accuracy of autofocus in low light ... otherwise one takes a manual lens ... if for some reason the church late one second to focus when focus and I lose the right time? regarding stabilization think that a machine that takes the iso well and good speedlight can absolutely do not regret it. ..who snaps im church at 1/8 of a second to find the couple or the child moved the laundry? ??? Is like having fixed focal lengths in one lens and bright ... not really but with a zoom versatilitàdi not too heavy as many say. ... |
 | sent on July 21, 2015 Pros: Sharp already in TA, precise in maf (even with the extreme side of 5dmark3) fast and versatile. Cons: None for now, to be trivial, I would have liked is a canon and a f2 but I was happy;) Opinion: I state that I own a few hours there and I made a few shots (maybe 100) more than other tests. Compared to the first version, I find nothing that unites them except the Red Line and the focal length. Compared with the Tamron 24-70 VC it ??is definitely better as reliability in maf. It is true that the Tamron has stabilized but the two examples that I had and then made both created fuzzy slight but unacceptable when the VC was added (front x focus accuracy) disappearing excluding the VC (is). Mysteries !!!! The yield of the Tamron was great but the canon is another level definitely much engraved and "brilliant". It even 24-105 f4 which has great value q / p but is beginning to be clear from f5 / 5.6 and it is too to work indoors. I plan to review it in greater detail when I have brought in "trenches" and pressed duty. THE price penalizes him but should be considered if you want the "top-zoom" on these focal. AGGGIORNO: After a serious test in the field confirmthe goodness of qursto objective clear and precise incidentally also TA beautiful colors. |
 | sent on June 01, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, versatility, tropicalization, weight, balance with 6D. Cons: High price for which I would have expected the IS, plastic construction, too small hood, in general "too perfect" but with little character, for my taste. Opinion: I am a bit 'Bastian Contrario and I insert my experience for those who are undecided in the choice between this and the 1st version: in fact I said that I had and sold, after having 2 copies of the first series f / 2.8 that does not they had never satisfied me and a 24-105 f / 4 that was even worse, despite being the latter of recent construction (2013). But returning to the goal in question .... in the end I sold it to return now to a sample of the first series finally OK. At the time I also compared it with the Sigma 35 f / 1.4 art and from my empirical tests and home affairs made with the 6D I detected a slight superiority of the sigma 35 art on the Canon 24-70 f2.8 II. So slight that superiority that I ended up preferring the immense versatility of the zoom without any regret, also because these objectives were very similar as rendered (sharpness, neutrality ... I would say "both perfect"). As I said, however, I also sold this last zoom to come backand the first version of 24-70 f2.8 (a very fine specimen that is rare to find) which has a definitely lower sharpness but which I find more pleasant for bokeh, three-dimensionality and detachment of the floors. At least for my taste! In addition to the old model I like the construction of a tank (but of greater weight) and the large hood that protects it even mechanically especially at 24 mm when it is in maximum extension (as opposed to the new model) .rnVolendo greater sharpness and above all the two opening stops in more today I would resume the Sigma (yes, but to find a sample without problems of f / B focus! or maybe wait for a version II of 35 L), but only because it has those different features (and complementary) at 24-70 1st version. rnA who instead prefers those features described among the pro version of the new zoom I recommend it strongly because it would not regret any fixed in those focal (a bit like the 70-200 f2.8 IS II L- except the f / 1.2). rn |
 | sent on March 21, 2015 Pros: Excellent sharpness General (f / 2.8 is already clear), precise autofocus and fast, excellent color rendering, excellent handling, excellent construction Cons: since it is an L-series lens and given the cost ... I would like to find in the box a padded semi rigid type the Sigma and not a "lackluster" bag cordon. Opinion: I believe this lens almost a must for business use, almost free from imperfections, accurate, timely and fast for every occasion, to use non-working one can settle for some other lens. I would not complain if in the near future the Canon would add the stabilizer and a case worthy of the lens that is currently in the box is inadequate. |
 | sent on February 18, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, autofocus, color rendering, construction Cons: A bit expensive Opinion: After a period of dissatisfaction with the Tamron (24-70 2.8), in the end I got there! The Tamron has stabilized but now with the canon I do not feel the need to own. On 5DMARKIII is phenomenal. Autofocus quickly and accurately (it was not that the Tamron), color rendering, exceptional clarity, construction. Costs much more but it's worth it. Highly recommended |
 | sent on September 21, 2014 Pros: Sharpest, fast, weather sealed, rugged, outstanding color rendering Cons: A little 'dear Opinion: Purchase decided without hesitation after trying the equivalent of the first generation and the new Tamron. A surgical sharpness on 5d mark III, fast. The absence of stabilizer x nn is me 'pregiudichevole and color rendering wonderful. Beautiful even in portraits. At first it seemed a bit 'expensive, compared to the old canon and tamron but now it' s perspective that most ex-nn 'by reflex. |
 | sent on July 28, 2014 Pros: robust, reliable, well-tropical conditions in the fast focus, excellent quality lenses and ommagini. Cons: 24-70 focal unhelpful. Opinion: I finally got it. and now I'm aprezzandone all his professionalism. but I remain of the opinion that the CANON little strives to put out innovative objectives, the technology allows it. In my opinion 24-70 is a little voice utile.rntroppo high to be a true wide angle, too low for ritratti.rnUn little effort on the part of CANON, just saw the price affordable, white aluminum barrel, focal length 17 - 85/90 would have been stabilized and the objective best-selling mondo.rnMa CANON fails to rinnovarsi.continuano to throw out things already obsolete at the start. |
 | sent on April 04, 2014 Pros: Clarity, focus, ease of handling. Cons: price. Opinion: I used it on a 5D Mark II and I have to say I do not miss a beat. I have not tried the predecessor and therefore does not express myself, but I tried a 24-105 f4 and you see the difference .. of course, also in the price! I have not suffered from the lack of stabilization because frankly I use it very little (much bother me though in fact it is useful). Rnih past I have to say that I have also used Nikon lenses, Pentax, Zenit, Vivitar, Sigma, Soligor, Tamron, Leica. I believe that the Canon could and should (given the excellent camera which offers) do more at these prices .. plus if the price is high the problem is probably also due to the fact that the Italian market is "still" than others. (Where price-bargain). |
 | sent on March 11, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, new ergonomic design. Cons: In certain cases, to nitpick, feels the lack of IS. Opinion: Definitely the new design and ergonomics, easy to handle and manageable, lightweight and portable enough to ride all day, maybe with a 5D MII or III, or a 1-SD attached to the neck, very sharp and contrasted, in fact, different from its predecessor , (of which I have to say I have a very good impression, my copy has never suffered from BC, has always had a good focus, and especially around the middle focal 50mm, according to me a hard time so far in different fixed lenses, also considering that the old design was derived from the still older 24-70 28-70). rnih Ultimately, a big step forward in everything, perhaps, but here I stress maybe, there could also be a stabilizer, which instead it would be necessary with the old 24-70, where in extreme cases with little light and the focal length of 70mm would have made me catch my breath between shots and the other. rnUn beautiful zoom works well at 24mm and at the same time allows make portraits at 70mm with a great bokeh, passing through all the intermediate focal lengths, making you forget at times and "just" laziness, uthe beautiful sare fixed lenses like Canon L series 35 50mm f/1.4 or the 24-105 f/1.2.rnNon know the brothers so I can not make comparisons with these, I feel, however, assert that it is an excellent, excellent zoom tuttofare.rn |
 | sent on March 10, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, size and dimensions new objective lens hood, AF Cons: Lack of the SI and price Opinion: I was very undecided whether to sell my 24-105 to move to 24-70 for a number of reasons, among which in the first place: greater outlay of money, as in less than 35mm focal range and loss of the stabilizer. Besides all I was undecided whether to take the 24-70 Canon or that of the Tamron, that at half the price offered as well stabilizer. I eventually sold the 24-105 and I opted for the Canon and I must say that expectations have not left me disappointed. I use it mounted on the 6D and pulls out the images with clarity / quality really impressive, so I can say that I am satisfied. Of course I could not say if the price difference compared to 24-105 is justified or not, but I believe that there is a right answer or a wrong, but it depends on the needs and availability of each. As for the comparison with the Tamron would not know because in the end I got to try it. But I can say that compared to the excellent Canon 24-70 The difference is, for image quality, size, weight, paralight much less cumbersome and finally the lens is closed at 24 and extended to 70 and not vice versa as in the first version (which frankly was decidedly uncomfortable). |
 | sent on October 13, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, speed in focus, brightness and quality construction. Cons: objective relatively heavy, lacks stabilization. Opinion: An excellent lens from the high brightness and good build quality, just have it in your hands to perceive the "consistency". rnIo use it on the 60D and the lens is "always installed" on macchina.rnUn defect is relatively high weight is felt that taking it in the neck for a long time and even more ruinous overly unbalanced the machine forward when placed on the ground . The long continuous abut on the lower edge of the front lens leads to increase of the game extensible part optics ... rn |
 | sent on October 06, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, engraving, focus always fast and precise, versatile, weather sealing, good resistance to flare, L series Cons: Is not, price, filters. Opinion: Optics that satisfaction, crisp, well-balanced, hood with grafting of class, if the purchase does not scare, it is a lens that the great advice, offers beautiful images, I have it for a week, and I always use it, both on 7D, 5D of that, and it is always top play er. I also tried the duplicator kenko pro 300 1.4 dgx, and works great, no obvious drop in sharpness, short for those who want to carry around one point of view, without the hassle of changing lenses, in my opinion this is a whole do, SCREAM ....!! |
 | sent on May 17, 2013 Pros: Huge step forward compared to the first series: Sharpness, color rendition global AC practically non-existent Cons: Price, plasticky construction Opinion: 26egrave; tangible but less marked. rnih definitive, since the saving of time in post prod, only to regret not having bought it sooner! rn |
 | sent on January 24, 2013 Pros: Sharpness, MAF, engraving, sealed, accurate and fast Cons: price, not IS Opinion: I recently switched to full size and I allowed myself the 5D Mark III and 24-70 in question, I was able to take a few test photos and except for a slight barrel distortion (also nice) is an optical fantastic! certain quoto all previous interventions stressing that the price could contain stabilization, although it is not essential! Apart from the price dizzying highly recommend it! |
 | sent on December 28, 2012 Pros: center to edge sharpness at all focal lengths, fantastic ergonomics Cons: price Opinion: I got to try it yesterday ..... FANTASTIC! I was amazed at his performance at 24mm, currently the most 'beautiful wide canon of the house, a light ac and a bit' of barrel distortion, but I repeat absolute clarity from the center to the edge! Another surprise 'was the ergonomics, once mounted on the machine does not even look like the whole 'heavy, and the whole' so 'well-balanced not to feel the need ... the stabilizer single defect and' the price, but frankly, especially after having tried the new Tamron stabilizato, honestly prefer the Canon even though it costs twice as much and is not! |
 | sent on December 27, 2012 Pros: Sharpness at room temperature, zero AC, excellent resistance to flare, compactness and ease of handling (for a 24-70/2, 8). Cons: Could have the IS Opinion: Optical amazing. Always clean and razor sharp. Micro-contrast colors and the top. Excellent bokeh. The new project has also led to a more compact and lighter than the old one. To me personally the new hood, also with snap button, extremely fluid, absolutely not dispiavce, contributing to its compactness. If desired, given the price, there IS a nice place it would still potutto (not strictly necessary, but useful). If the expenditure is not afraid of a piece of optics that satisfies 100%. |
 | sent on November 27, 2012 Pros: Sharpness, versatility, tropicalization, weight, balance, accuracy and speed AF, low noise. Cons: Price, diameter filters Opinion: I'm more a fan of super-bright LEDs that fixed the zoom, but with this new Canon 24-70 has reached a quality that convinced me to buy. RnrnNon have the magical tone bokeh 50 L or 85 mm f / 1.2, but for those looking for a practical all-rounder by the sharpness of more than 24 mm tse (at the same focal length) and 70-200 f / 2.8 II (70 mm), this will not disappoint 24-70 . rnrnRispetto its predecessor the weight seems more balanced (I like to feel) and aesthetically less invasive, thanks to the new paraluce.rnrnIl hood is designed with the trigger button type 70-200 f / 2,8 II, which makes it easy and practical engagement. rnrnCostruttivamente is solid and pleasant to tatto.rnrnL 'AF is very fast, quiet and precise even in poor conditions luce.rnrnA find the same focal length 24 mm f / 1.4 L II even more nel'immagine which gives, for both distortion and for contrast and color, but nothing that significantly affect foto.rnrnIl bokeh 70 mm is a little sterile for my habits, theymild perhaps due to its being devoted to extreme sharpness. To create the most magical atmosphere we still use 85 mm or 50 mm diameter filters mm.rnrn82 (for those who use them) places greater emphasis on the economic effort that already when purchasing lens reveals dissanguante. However, it is a purchase that is amortized over time, both for the duration of use, both for the quality offered by the prodotto.rnrnIo use as optical reportage and travel, for outputs disengaged, but also for confirmations, communions and assignments vari.rnPerfetto companion for those who want to move with a single optical or otherwise leggero.rnrnPerfetto for FF cameras. On aps-c, losing the wide side, I find it a little 'wasted. |
 | sent on November 20, 2012 Pros: Sharpness, engraving, Weight. Cons: Price, Filters. Opinion: I had the pleasure before you can test this in mind, now I have purchased and comparison to the previous version you will immediately notice the difference in weight and smaller dimensions, the engraving, the focus is much improved. The lens prices rise greater diameter filters, especially for what polarizzato.rnL 'purchase is expensive but it is a view of great quality change with the old is recommended. |
| sent on November 02, 2012 Pros: Sharpness, optical quality and construction Cons: Distortion moderate price Opinion: I took a few days and I must say this point I was immediately impressed by the build quality external materials are excellent and mounted on the camera body is a further confirmation, Af quiet and lightning. I think the real strength of this zoom lens is the sharpness and optical quality really amazing, already CT images are very sharp images with true color and contrast to the scene, the moderate distortion that has certainly passes in the background. Returns a definitely excellent bokeh that completes this light handyman. The only drawback the price certainly for the maniacs of perfection and the pros certainly will not be an obstacle. I think it is a perspective that should not be missing in a kit. |
 | sent on October 03, 2012 Pros: sharpness, weight, making kelp Cons: price and a slight barrel distortion in the 24 focal Opinion: I just bought and I still have to perform many tests, but a test of clarity I did today. I compared this lens with the Canon 24-105 and Sigma 24-70 (old non-stabilized). From the tests showed a dominance of sharpness especially the focal length of the new 24-70 24. In practice, a 24 mm quality at the center is better but not striking, however the edges the quality is outstanding, it is not even comparable to the other two lenses. As you climb the focal difference in quality is decreasing but is always higher than the other two. For the rest (barrel, weight, handling, nuts, focus, vignetting) I must say that is a very high level of quality. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
