|sent on June 26, 2018 |
Pros: Great sharpness, usable at TA, excellent color rendering, macro function more than acceptable, reasonable price.
Cons: Plastic inner barrel and extending in the zooming phase
Opinion: Taken by a few days I reserve to update after an adequate period of intensive use. The first impact is very positive, great sharpness also at TA, precise autofocus, fast and silent, excellent stabilization. The front lens does not rotate and allows easy use of the polarizer, is internal focus but not internal zoom and the lens lengthens and shortens zooming. Nice the hood with the convenient lock button, even in the resting position allows you to manually focus and of course to zoom. The shots are always very sharp, I have not noticed particular decays of quality or vignetting at the maximum apertures, the distortion at the shorter focals is very contained, almost unnoticeable if you shoot in a bubble but everything is still easily fixed in PP. The optics is heavy and conveys the impression of a solid object and well built, the ring nuts have both the right friction (I took the new lens, we will see how it behaves in time) that the right demultiplying. I was in doubt between the 2.8 not stabilized and this and I'm glad I chose this. The macro function I just tried it in a couple of shots because I did not take the lens for this function but it seems satisfactory. In essence as first impression excellent objective and that apart from the plastic of the inner barrel deserves absolutely the red strip of L series.
|sent on June 26, 2018 |
Pros: sharpness, colors, macros, stabilization
Cons: Heavy (like all quality zooms), dust inside the lens.
Opinion: I use it now for seven months on my Canon 80d, a sharpness, colors and a fantastic image cleaning that do not regret a fixed if not for the maximum aperture, F4 that is a little castrated if you would like a lower depth of field or simply More light. The weight is made a little feel after a day with the reflex at the neck, excellent the possibility of taking macros, even if given the focal you have to approach the subject very much, with the risk of covering the light. Also excellent stabilization, which you notice when you are using a tripod and it automatically turns off. It will also be tropicalised, personally I have not tried except with a light drizzle, but the fact remains that after even a month of use I found it poor and fluff inside the lens, especially on the rear optical group (the one in contact With the sensor), I managed to remove it only by removing the rear part of the lens and aspiring the air inside with a blower. Certainly the dust inside the lens did not affect in any way the quality of the photos taken, but it is still unpleasant, given the cost of the lens.
|sent on June 25, 2018 |
Pros: It's an honest goal. What you expect from a series L. Excellent quality and versatility at all focal lengths.
Cons: The macro. The zoom is not internal and therefore each time you have to pull the lever that locks the lens, otherwise it will drop you down the lens.
Opinion: I found difficulty in using the macro. Perhaps for lack of experience. This function is not important for my needs. It's a lens I bought with the 6d. I only used it with this camera body. I'd say a nice couple. That's what I use the most. I don't know what to add. Better than this there are only the fixed optics, and not even many. I add that now I'm over two and a half years that I use it and I never had problems with dust. Never entered anything in the lens, maybe because after each shot I close the zoom blocking the sliding with the appropriate lever provided.
|sent on March 17, 2018 |
Pros: Sharpness, color, tropicalization, L series
Cons: Focus shift
Opinion: I come from STM and 24-105 is another world: stunning colors and sharpness to the top. Although f4 has a bokeh really quaint and charming. When you pick it up you feel the quality of the L series. Macros are okay, nothing fancy but we do everything on a lens is always handy. Only down fall? the focus shift at close range from f5 to f8, .6 circumvented by stopping or keeping it at room temperature. Overall rating: 9
|sent on February 02, 2018 |
Pros: series l
Opinion: Or taken this goal for about 2 months I find it very well being the best of the series of the canon for quality I recommend a canon 1200 de the first time I take a serious goal I find it very well with this lens or made very beautiful photos. perhaps the only flaw and for macro photographs. I also use it for portraits.
|sent on January 21, 2018 |
Pros: excellent sharpness to all openings, f4 fixed, manageable flare, and beautiful rendering of night lights, creates excellent stars on all light sources.
Cons: The lens for how it is structured has no cons, if you could claim the impossible I would like to have the same characteristics with a 16-120 if I have to find a defect the macro can only be done at close range is very good for flowers but it is impossible to photograph the subjects that escape disturbed by a lens with a photographer a few centimeters
Opinion: It 's the first lens that I mounted on my 6D and I must say that it is a winning combination, for the first year I photographed only with this and I can not complain, for the kind of photos that I often use the 16- 35 f4L and the Tamron 70-200 f4-5.6 but even having the 50ino 1.8 I can not remove it from the bag and if I have to choose to bring the machine with only one lens mounts this glass.
|sent on January 20, 2018 |
Pros: Excellent on everything, for me it is perfect as range, brightness, stabilization, ergonomics, lens hood, heavy weight etc etc
Cons: Nobody, do what he has to and he does it well.
Opinion: On my last trip is the lens with which I took more (before I had not yet). My way of photographing is not very "reflective" are much more instinctive, this lens gives me peace and security.rnI advice read here on Juza were essential to orient me, then after trying it was natural to buy it.Per me have been spent money very well.
|sent on January 20, 2018 |
Pros: I got it from a friend, a long-time Juza user, who actually let me find him in a new condition. I've had it for three weeks and I'm using it as a portrait lens. I have already done three shooting using it exclusively TA (on Canon 7D II or Canon 70D) and I am very satisfied. I have not encountered any problems of those mentioned in several reviews perhaps dating back to the examples of the early days.
Cons: No problem, all OK !!!!!!
Opinion: As I said I was looking for a performance lens to use for portrait and I thought about the version with maximum aperture 2.8. But a recent experience makes me strongly reject the purchase of lenses without the IS. When you are used to using goals with the IS if you use one that is lacking, you think you are suffering from some serious psycho-physical problem ........ So after a bit of thinking I focused on this and I think that I will never regret it. Coupled with the Canon 70-200 f4 IS L USM and with the Canon 35 f2 IS USM to be used in situations that allow it, I have a complete equipment, and, for my needs, very satisfactory in performance.
|sent on December 17, 2017 |
Pros: Very sharp in the center on all focal lengths, good at the edges at maximum aperture, excellent at f5,6 and f8. AF lightning. Very efficient stabilizer of the latest generation.rnContrast and color rendering very good. Macro function.
Cons: I have not found any
Opinion: Purchased to replace the 24-105L.rnI 24-70 L shows a high sharpness at the focal points 24 and 35mm.rnIl 24-105L, at least the one in my possession, was lacking on the wide-angle focal lengths; the edges were very unclear.rnThe 24-70 L compared with the 24-105 L is much sharper, even at the maximum openings.rnCerto the 35mm in most often made comfortable but the price to pay, at least on the lens in my possession, it was really too high in terms of sharpness.rnA true shame because the 24-105 L was excellent under all other aspects such as AF, contrast and color rendition.rnAlso 24-70 L is excellent as regards the AF , the contrast and color rendering with the plus of the stabilizer (very useful) of the latest generation and the Macro function (not 1: 1 but still true Macro) .rnNot a handyman zoom perhaps a little less versatile than the 24-105 L but of the highest quality!
|sent on December 08, 2017 |
Pros: Sharpness already from f4, stabilization, macro (even if only 0.70x), rapid focus, solid, tropicalized and light
Cons: slight vignetting at 24 (completely resolved in a click), if very close to the subject suffers from back focus
Opinion: I use this 8 month objective on aps-c as a handyman. I used it mainly during travels with great satisfaction, it proved very versatile. Very clear already at f4 reaches its peak af 5.6. But let's go by order. Speaking of STABILIZATION I have to say that it was the factor that made me prefer it to a 24-70 2.8 (first series), definitely does its job and allows otherwise impossible shots. FOCUS very fast. The only real flaw of this lens is that it suffers from back focus at close range (but if you are already aware of this defect you can take some precautions and avoid soft photos). The TROPICALIZZAZIONE does not seem so poor as we read around. I do not own the lens from who knows how much but has no dust under the front lens and even with a light rain did not give me problems. MACRO is difficult to use, it must be very close to the subject, but still gives shots (mainly to inanimate objects) that the brothers do not allow. For the VIGNETTATURA I must say that even if shooting on aps-c is present, but it is so light that I realized only inserting the profile of the lens in pp. The CONSTRUCTION is solid (even if in plastic) and I had no problems of any kind with the hood that I find extremely easy to assemble and disassemble .Small little lock the button to not make it stretch unintentionally (although I've never had problems of kind). Resistance to the FLARE very good, I thought it excellent but in the shots of my last trip I noticed two photos (in very unfavorable conditions) that have this defect. rnTo conclude I consider it an excellent goal, especially for those like me who does not like to travel with many lenses and find themselves having to change them between one shot and the other. The only thing that could have made the perfect all-rounder would have been the opening at 2.8 but at this price certainly can not have everything.
|sent on December 06, 2017 |
Pros: Noticeable sharpness at all focals already at F4 really exciting, beautiful saturated colors, impeccable construction and interesting macros.
Cons: It is the perfect lens for the advanced and demanding amateur photographer, a professional would like more an F 2.8 in fact it turns on the Big Brother Mk 2 as it is right that it is.
Opinion: I have wanted this lens since I took the 6d however I got dragged first by the 24-105 F4 L is USM that I found excellent with beautiful colors and remarkable versatility and then after having sold it I got it back from the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 VC USD pensado to reach The perfection between performance and light but soon I realized that in terms of Scalsa little brightness could, it would be served a flash, then the colors have never convinced me much, never made me come the effect "wow" even if I hit the sharpness immediately A really stratospheric 24mm but end of story. I bought later this exceptional Canon and I found my size, I was satisfied in everything and for everything, even the macro that I never considered was a continuous discovery, has beautiful colors, a construction that borders the Perfection, everything in this lens borders on perfection, perfect focal and the handyman par excellence and the macro despite not having a ratio of 1:1 but 0.7 is really what makes this fantastic lens unique in its genre and handyman as never before. The 24-105 to 100mm was a little limp, portraits too soft and blurry, lacked the right grit, stop at 70 to then take a Canon 100mm F2 USM is the next step that I will do very briefly (done the. Day 28/03/18 and resold reluctantly the Canon 24-70 because I did not use it practically never, general problems with children in tow. I enjoyed this lens and now that I do not regret it again and maybe one day I will regain it. On the 6d there was that is a beauty. According to many the lens hood is uncomfortable because of the button fastening, I personally find it clever and very very comfortable, then it is not exaggerated but sober and elegant, it is great. I highly recommend to all this lens that I know to be used also by professionals, it is rewarding and if then you associate with beautiful prime lenses I would say that a photo amateur is not needed anything else. I hope I was helpful to all the undecided.
|sent on October 13, 2017 |
Pros: Sharpness, versatility, stabilizer, flare resistance, chromium.
Cons: Plastic barrel, robust, but plastic.
Opinion: After having had Sigma Art 24-105 for a few months (May / September 2017), I decided to sell it together with the 80D to buy a 6D Mk II. Having already a 70-200, without this lens I would have been discovered on interesting focal points for portrait and street portraits. So I decided to buy this lens after reading and reviewing reviews here on Juza and making comparisons with my older brother f 2.8. Obligated from the available budget, I have been focused on this glass and, except for surprises, I am fully satisfied. The sharpness, first of all, is remarkable already at TA, it becomes incisive by closing one stop.rnHa a range of focal points allows, in addition to the macro , to take landscape photos, set portrait, street and portrait. rnThe stabilizer performs its duty but I reserve the opportunity to take it out in those shots at short notice, as suggested in other reviews. It is punctuated against the sun, or down there, with a strong resistance to unwanted reflexes. I do not think the Gobe UV filter has any influence. The yieldthe colors are remarkable and I find it more saturated than 70-200 f4 L.rnZoomando, the lens expands and you notice immediately that the mobile barrel is plastic. The appearance gives a feeling of robustness, but I do not like it. In summary: despite the plastic around, I think I've made an important and satisfying purchase. RnChiudo with the right to add or modify something if you check any detail that does not conform to what above.
|sent on August 02, 2017 |
Pros: Sharpness, construction, macro, stabilizer
Cons: vignetting, "noise" of the stabilizer if left inserted when not needed
Opinion: The lens looks like a real L, even if the barrel is made of plastic: the construction is cured, robust, the ferrules are fluid and free of play, the front does not move inside the barrel (the 28- 135 in this is just a bad memory ...), the bayonet is equipped with anti-dust seal. The sharpness is very high throughout the excursion, in the middle really excellent already at TA, very good edges at TA, and improves to almost equal the center closing one stop. The distortion is very low at 24 mm, it resolves almost completely at 28 and is absent at all other focal lengths. What I did not expect, especially considering the relative opening certainly not extreme but "conservative", is the vignetting at the lower distances of MAF (let's say up to 5 meters), really showy at full aperture at all focal lengths. It is clearly linked to the internal movements of the lenses with the focus, because it is instead absent allinfinite and imperceptible to intermediate distances. It is also curious that it is much more contained in macro function: obviously the lens shift that occurs in this setting compensates in a similar way to infinity focusing. The colors are saturated as per standard Canon, and the contrast is robust even if not exaggerated, leaving margin for increments in PP without burning the highlights. The stabilizer is great, allows you to shoot without hesitation at 1/6 second at 70mm, even at 1/2 second at 24mm, the image "stops" already in the viewfinder, and this is ideal for video. However I have noticed that often the shots made with times that would not require the stabilizer (eg 1/80 or less at 70mm), but with the same inserted, are a little 'less clear than those performed without the stabilizer. When not needed, it is better to deactivate it. The macro function allows you to get very close to the subject, and the maximum magnification is quite strong (0.7x); the only oneinconvenience is that approaching so much you risk to scare and make the subject away (typically insects), or touch leaves and / or petals, if it is flowers. The blur is very soft and pleasant also diaframmando.rnWhen this lens came out on the market the recurring question was what was its meaning, given the presence of a 24-70 f2.8 L and 24-104 f4 L is, and the launch price close to that of the first and even higher than the second. Now, however, its positioning is correct and its meaning is clear: it costs less than half of 2.8 II, and a 20-30% less than 24-105 II; it is more compact and light than both of these last ones (even if with the 2.8 II Canon has made a good progress, in this); has the 4-stop stabilizer, like 24-105, but absent on 2.8; is the only one of the three to have the macro.rnAGGIORNAMENTO function after a month of intense use. I confirm the high yield on the whole excursion and already at full aperture. It is an obiettruly ultra-clear, with incredible peaks on minute details at optimal distances, e.g. eyelashes, wrinkles, hair etc. in portraits, both in the foreground and in 3/4 or full-length. Its best diaphragm is f5.6 at all focal lengths, but the drop at edges also at f4 is limited and very marginal, in fact only perceptible at the extreme edges of the frame. I confirm the excellent efficiency of the stabilizer, but also that it is better to deactivate it when the shutter speed fast enough does not require it. The only thing I do not like and perplexes me is the vignetting, which appears apparently random, even at f8, in particular at 24mm; but the other focal lengths are not exempted as well. Analyzing the shots that are affected, I understand that it is a problem related to the distance of MAF, and therefore to the position of the optical group dedicated to it within the lens. It happens therefore that the vignetting, with the same diaphragm, is absent in some shots, and appears instead in others, depending on the distance of the point of MAF of each.It is true that the defect is quickly resolved in PP with the dedicated application, however I am disturbed by those shots with the four corners much darker, with a drop of light marginal and sudden that makes you think about a goal that "is framed alone ", or a wrong lens hood. Canon is well aware of the thing, in fact with the Canon DPP software and lens specific data downloaded the defect is completely eliminated in PP even in the most extreme and annoying ...
|sent on April 13, 2017 |
Pros: Well built, sharpness, macro function, lock key for transport, stabilizer
Cons: For me no One
Opinion: I bought it new recently at a great price on Amazon (about €250 cheaper than the store prices). My copy is October 2016 so very recent as a construction and I must say that after a thousand shots I really like. I took it to replace the purchased 24-105l used, it may seem a smallness but for me to have the lock on the barrel to not have the lens that stretches alone with the vibration of transport was crucial, the first series 24-105l is not provided with a small button Lock and stretch every time. I use it on both FF and it's a great all do, clear doesn't have the magic of a fixed, but it's a really versatile lens. I recommend absolutely to those looking for a very good and clear handyman, sure is an F4 and could be a bit ' dark in some cases (but this as all F4 lenses), the difference in price with the Big Brother 2.8 is quite a lot and the 2.8 loses the stabilizer.
|sent on March 28, 2017 |
Pros: Construction, sharpness, AF and IS good
Cons: Nothing in particular.
Opinion: In the hands of the usual feeling of strength of all L-series Taken to assist the 24-105 F4 L (I) that does not always satisfy me as surrender (love-hate). Best to 24/35 both at the edges than in the center, and as a sharpness that distortion. Even the IS seems better. Color and contrast are very similar. The 24-105 is still as it sometimes 35mm longer serve for my kind of picture.
|sent on February 27, 2017 |
Pros: Compact lightweight great handyman
Cons: sharpness not like the 16-35 f4
Opinion: Bought to bridge the gap from 21 to 100mm in my kit and used as a handyman last trip to Norway. has me very satisfied. if it had been slightly sharper it would be perfect. If it had been brighter it would be another goal. Heavier and diverse.rnCredo features it's a great lens to use for landscape photos from sunrise to sunset. For the night i 2.8 are needed. Great diameter filters 77 like so many others of the category objectives. He suffers a little bit of flare (but unfortunately I always without a hood because I use the ring for Lee Filters always mounted). On the edges I noticed an obvious chromatic aberration, easily correbgibile post
|sent on February 27, 2017 |
Pros: Construction, AF, brightness, color rendering, lens hood, macro function
Cons: suffering to flares
Opinion: I am using this lens for four months and now I can express an opinion about. Coming from EF-S 18-200, I found myself facing an abyss when I started using the 24-70, as to yield files with 70D: First sharpness, brightness and color rendering. The AF is fast, quiet and precise. rnrnTrovo the macro whose function is very convenient equipped: to be a short focus lens produces the blurred pretty good and the MAF distance allows to work very close to soggetto.rnrnA ergonomics is very well built, solid and balanced level weight distribution, not too bulky. Amazing the hood that mounts and dismounts effortlessly thanks to precise tolerances and the neo sgancio.rnrnUnico button is some suffering to flares when shooting contrluce (both day and night with the moon) .rnrnNon mostly from the car deadlift except for the few cases of wide use.
|sent on February 16, 2017 |
Pros: Sharpness, build quality, features like macro lens, stabilizer
Cons: We find nothing
Opinion: Used in combination with the 7d mark ii I have not risen .... in some situations it may not be very bright, but remains an exceptional lens also for the possibility of being able to use as a lens marco.Io this lens I recommend it highly. ... great photos; price maybe a little 'high .... but we sta.ultima known stabilizer and autofocus .... really good.
|sent on October 30, 2016 |
Pros: Sharpness, not too bulky, solid, color rendering
Cons: I paid higher than the average. For the rest nothing to detect
Opinion: I bought it as a function of switching to full frame. 5D Mk iv. Now it is mounted on the 70d. It has positive effect. I also have a 2.8 17-55 that I will use again on 70d.rnLa evening difference in yield compared with the excellent 17-55 in terms of incisiveness and sharpness (day) I found all right (I have made thousands of photos with 17-55), which still remains a great lens (snaps in the dark is very fast to keep up with the af). rnProvato today seriously 24-70. Good color reproduction, amazing sharpness - the 70d is reborn! rnAnche the macro are spectacular. I did a quick test without too much attention, has returned photos would call ottime.rnConsigliato absolutely. To buy on offer. I got caught the ankle from the monkey ...
|sent on October 03, 2016 |
Pros: Sharpness, stabilizer, autofocus, built
Cons: Not entirely immune from the flare, large diameter
Opinion: I use it for three months and now I can speak my mind on this lens. I had planned to buy no earlier than next year, but finding it at a great price, and taking advantage of the cashback I jumped at the opportunity. I reaffirm the solid construction, very high sharpness, autofocus speed and very effective stabilizer. The blur is pleasant but not amazing (nothing new for an f / 4), the bokeh is sometimes very unique and looks more like a soap bubble rather than a point of light, and with a bright perimeter edge and the rest semi transparent, sometimes rest mesmerized staring at those circles ... the color rendering I really like, I find it quite loyal and pleasing. rnNon are still able to obtain chromatic aberrations, and not be taken for granted the absence of flare: you have to be going against the light to find it but with a little care and some degree of displacement results in a moment. Distorts a little 'to the minimum and maximum focal opening shots but I never noticed merealize only by applying the correction in Lightroom .... I find it convenient attachment of the hood remains firmly locked in place, a bit 'less useful the barrel lock to the fully retracted position: serves to prevent accidental elongation during transport , but so far I have never successfully leaving deliberately unlocked. Finally, the macro mode: can occasionally come in handy, however, provides good magnification but it is not his job, the true macro lenses are very meglio.rn
|sent on July 16, 2016 |
Pros: Sharp at all focal almost as much as the older brother L II, distortion totally absent at all focal lengths, colors and excellent performance, excellent construction, resistant to flare, flowing rings and no games, weather sealed, fast and precise auto focus, light.
Cons: F4 maximum aperture only
Opinion: He is very close to his older brother Canon f2.8 L II that more than double the coast and weighs much more. Obviously the 2.8 L II is probably today the best standard zooms to the world and the fact that this f4 IS there approximates closely, suggests it may be valid. He 'definitely a step ahead of the 24-105 and I recommend it than the latter who personally has never convinced me. The Af is really fast and quiet and not miss a beat. The stabilizer does a great job. Fairly light and compact, it is hard to take more and behind. Recommended.
|sent on June 18, 2016 |
Pros: solid construction, great stabilizer, excellent image quality, macro function
Cons: In macro mode you must bring a lot to the subject (sometimes too much)
Opinion: fantastic goal, right away you notice a significant solidità.rnHa some subtleties, like the focal block. For now I have done a few shots but the first impression is fenomenale.rnForse a bit 'dark for some areas, but for me it benissimo.rnOttima can be used to make macros, it will not be at the level of a specialist, but I think it is a great starting point for approaching this stile.rnAnche if sometimes forces you to get very close to the subject.
|sent on May 19, 2016 |
Pros: Construction, very good AF and stabilizer, Sharpness, autofocus speed, stabilization, Weight.
Opinion: Taken to match the Canon 5D Mark III, in preference to the canon 24 -105 for its compactness. In the future I will add to the fantastic kit Canon EF 70-200mm f / 2.8 L IS II USM, which seems a natural extension, since it starts from 70 to get to 200. Now it is always attached to my 5D MK III and it amazes me the ability to be able to take pictures even at 1/10 sec. no micro moved. The most exciting qualities of this perspective is precisely his image stabilization that combined an extremely quiet autofocus make it an excellent optics.
|sent on May 13, 2016 |
Pros: image quality, construction, excellent AF and stabilizer, outstanding macro capabilities, low price
Cons: focal range a little less versatile compared to 24-105
Opinion: Initially this goal I was not particularly thrilled since size, weight and price are similar enough to 24-105mm already on the market for years; But using it I had to reverse. In terms of image quality, it is better than the 24-105, in particular with very short focal; closing a little the aperture (f / 5.6, f / 8) has positive effect on the whole frame, the level of the much more expensive Canon 24-70 f / 2.8 II. Autofocus is fast and stabilizer is very useful on these focal; personally I prefer also to 24-70 f / 2.8 due to the presence of the stabilizer, as well as for the excellent quality / price ratio. A distinctive feature of this goal is the ability to use it in macro photography with excellent results: the magnification ratio reaches 0.70x (compared to most standard zoom reaches 0.20x). Even at this magnification, very close to 1: 1, the qualityA picture remains good; the angle is quite wide, so it's used for macro acclimatized and you can hardly get the classic macro with blurred background and uniform. In my opinion currently the best standard zoom lens in the Canon system.
|sent on March 08, 2016 |
Pros: Solidity, clarity, versatility, stabilizer
Cons: For the moment no
Opinion: Got it used in perfect condition 550 EUR Given that I have only the optical few days, mounted on canob 5d mark iii I was amazed by the sharpness even at TA, outstanding stabilizer, I did some tests down to 1/15 and quiet. As soon as I will have to put him on the stand I'll be more specific
|sent on January 08, 2016 |
Pros: after three days of use I can only say that I was shattered dreams
Cons: zoom ring is very close to the room
Opinion: It's hard to admit to being stupid but, alas, it was for my cause sono.rnÈ that goal, new three-day, stood out a flight in free fall from a height of about 8 meters and 53 cm.rnQuesta thing it costs me blood and tears, blood to buy it as it is a series L, tears for the end unseemly that we fatto.rnMa incident: rnaffacciato the window I tried to photograph the sunrise and arranging the zoom I inadvertently pressed the release button of 'anchor bayonet and the disaster has taken place in a attimo.rnMa this because it happened to me, bad luck apart ?. First, as I said, I'm a fool, according to analyzing the dynamics well, you can see that this lens (EF 24-70 mm f / 4 L IS USM) has a system for adjusting the zoom not really usual, at least in my experience. RNLA adjustment ring is in fact built into the lens nearest the anchorage of the machine. Usually use objectives with the system inverso.rnQuesto factor deceived me and, whilecarelessly my unconsciousness I did inadvertently press the release button, I tried to adjust the zoom, not noticing differences in the viewfinder I insisted that moment more that that was enough to remove the lens and do fall from the third floor. rnNon tell you what I felt in those moments, and certainly I say ironically, has worn a career, or rather was stopped in its tracks, maybe the community is better? rnHo tried anyway to contact the support of Canon and not even I know why I did it, maybe I wanted moral support by a soft voice which was hers that she risposto.rnSta fact that I clearly got nothing but the availability, of course fee of shipping and the quote, you can send the lens (say well wrapped and protected) at their service center so that it may assess the damage. But here, I would add, further damage would be to circulate a lens in a state pietoso and that perhaps can not even serve as stops cards given that the only vision sends me into bestia.rnrnChe say buy another lens equal with the same risk of accidental breakage or change your mind and throw away even the new car? rnrnMah, meanwhile cry ? rnMaxrn
|sent on October 31, 2015 |
Pros: Sharpness - Speed ??Autofocus - Stabilization - Weight - Function Macrorn
Cons: None For the Moment
Opinion: And my handyman lens, the use of 6d, already crystal clear at room temperature and constant at all focal lengths, my copy at least in my use does not present the possible problem of "focus shift", the autofocus is very impressive, I have lots of shots night perfect! do not miss a beat, even the stabilizer performs very well, the ultimate in sharpness to the edges is obtained from f5.6 up, nice macro function although very little use, I preferred to 24-105 as I considered not essential focal 105, also the little weight and size less are felt in the portability, the f2.8 not I miss it, overall the buy back with my eyes closed .... rn
|sent on October 16, 2015 |
Pros: high definition image from the center to the edges, compact and lightweight, for what I'm concerned I have not detected the focus shift problem that would occur only in very special situations, inaudible stabilizer and the latest generation, quite good resistance to flare. interesting macro function that can allow a certain risultati.Autofocus great although that of the Canon 17-55 is of aps-c was something little to 24mm inarrivabile..rnDistorce.
Cons: between pro was going to also enter the build quality, except that a few days ago I noticed specks of dust beneath the front lens after 10 months of not even heavy use. rnParaluce very rigid plastic with having to break at any moment.
Opinion: Paid 600 € cashback again thanks to Christmas last year, I am quite satisfied and sincerely, for my store, I do not feel the lack of another all-rounder of the same focal length with f2.8 aperture. Mounted on 6d there remains attached almost constantly, so I sold the Canon 17-40 f4 why do not use it more and also because lower than the 24-70 f4 in terms of contrast and incisività.rnSono still disappointed by the quality of construction because after less 10 months of use, under the front lens settled the dust particles sucked most likely after "closed". And thank goodness that is weather sealed ... For this aspect is much better than the 17-40 f4 that does not stretch when increases focale.rnMi excursion seem to find myself dealing with another (albeit good) Canon 17-55 is f2 , 8 vacuum cleaner ... I have a 20-35 f2.8 L and after 20 years has no speck of dust, but this, like the 17-40, extends internamente.rnLa macro function is interesting,but obviously only usable with still subjects because you have to get close so much that if it was some little animal or insect for sure there would not be there to be filmed ... rnLo stabilizer is incredibly effective: I took a picture of half a second (present in my gallery ) and I was impressed by the lack of micromosso.rn
|sent on October 01, 2015 |
Pros: Sharpness, construction, AF, macro function, weight
Opinion: I used before this point of APSC with a 500d, now the use of ff with a 6d, the quality of this objective it is seen from the first use: af lightning that does not miss a beat, color rendering and sharpness unexpected from a objective labeled "handyman" as early as f4, then TA. Although it is "only" f4, you can use it for portraiture and provides a very nice bokeh, obviously 70mm and f4. The only cons (I do not consider that) is very close range to the subject in the macro function, but being a plus of this lens I would not complain dovermene, indeed can do macro "on the fly" without limitation, using the macro function to 70mm (and not "80" is identified as the maximum focal macro) you can find some great close up while remaining at some distance, approximately 20 cm.
|sent on August 21, 2015 |
Pros: excellent in sharpness, macro stabilizer
Cons: for now nothing
Opinion: Taken as a kit with EOS 6D. I come from an experience of several years with EOS 7D and ef-s 15-85, objective that I almost never removed from the camera and that I feel good traveling companion ... so when, after selling camera and objective, I decided to buy back the camera I chose a full frame .. and after reading and re-reading the opinions on this forum I decided on the EOS 6D and 24-70 f4 lens and f .. that waiting a while I found in the market usati..pensavo note lack of some millimeters, m instead performs well is great and has a good and faithful color rendition. The surprise is the selector for the macro mode, which I had not found in any of the comments I read in forums and leading the distance of focus to a few centimeters. I am fully soddisfatto..è good lente..rnrn
|sent on July 19, 2015 |
Pros: Light excellent performance at all apertures, macro and stabilizer
Cons: I own it for two years and had no problems whatsoever, not even focus.
Opinion: What, combined with 6d is great, no problem, crisp photos in every situation and with little light in easier circumstances. No problems found for the focus indeed, fast and precise. I took it to match the 6d and to avoid the 24 -105 that I exalted. Minor zoom range but higher quality certainly.
|sent on May 15, 2015 |
Pros: Construction, af, macro, made already by 24mm
Cons: Not f2.8
Opinion: Taken back to 650 euro this winter, put the whip for months, ever uncertainty. Usabilissimo to TA and is already 24 mm. I consider it as a handyman unbeatable thanks to the quality and lightness. The only drawback when used in portraits maybe you would want something more open, but not made for this. Instead just great when you come out and you want to stay light. Less of 24-105 mm but more quality to extremes to my personal opinion
|sent on April 15, 2015 |
Pros: Af fast stabilizer sharpness weight macro function
Opinion: great alternative to the much more 'expensive big brother f2.8 ii lose a stop but it has more' stabilizer, the sharpness is not 'at the same level but it is very close. sharp even at the edges. slight distortion I use it for a year of 6d. never riscrontrato problems tilt-shift, (perhaps for my way of photographing) .not like that when you stretch zooms. however for the current price does not think there's any better.
|sent on February 11, 2015 |
Pros: Weight, construction, sharpness, AF and IS good
Cons: Focus shift (from me for now not found)
Opinion: The use of 70d as a "handyman" (something is missing from the side GA but I solved the problem with 17-40), the AF is very fast and not miss a beat; the color rendering and sharpness are outstanding, distortion at 24mm minima.La macro function is obliged to be very close to the subject but as a "plus" lens does not consider it a real difetto.Una series L in effect (especially now that it is on the internet well below the € 800) UPDATE: I switched to 5DIII and I can only confirm the good qualities of this all-rounder!
|sent on January 16, 2015 |
Pros: Sharpness; speed of focus; tropicalization; Price (with cashback this winter).
Cons: None (my copy is not from problems of focus)
Opinion: Objective taken through cashback canon, for about 680 € is definitely purchase the new. I have not used it much, but first impressions are very good: fast, quiet, with excellent color and good resistance to flare.rnNel my case goes to form a good kit with the 70-200 F / 4: on APSC missing something wide side, but you can avoid taking two steps back.
|sent on September 24, 2014 |
Pros: sharpness, excellent stability, distortion below average, weight, diameter filters, lens hood with the block.
Cons: tropicalization, aesthetics in extended zoom.
Opinion: Possess it recently and I am very happy, sharpness ... very convincing stabilization really improved ... low distortion at 24mm ... carry weight ... 77mm diameter filters become a classic. Before I had the latest version f2.8 L II that I sold for weight. How sharpness 2.8 II was slightly sharper and more professional construction, but as unsustainable weight during the trip. The good weather sealing though it is not absolutely the version levels f2.8 L II, some elements of dust I came between the lenses even if very small and almost invisible. Aesthetics in extension zoomed horrible (like NOW almost all zoom) looks like a bald chicken neck. Vastly superior in everything (except for the focal missing) to 24-105L I've owned in different specimens. The aching note about the price that would be a 30% lower price list.
|sent on August 31, 2014 |
Pros: solid, weather sealed, fast AF and excellent stabilization, excellent yield.
Cons: on aps-c I have not found
Opinion: Purchased by Galaxia with the summer campaign at a fantastic price (€ 654), I was torn between this and the 15-85 and after reading various reviews I decided to give up several mm to several qualities and are satisfied with the scelta.rnLo use on 70D how to do everything, just took and made the first shots went off immediately feeling.rnnitido already a TA becomes a blade closing of a stop, to the best of the focal intermedie.rnovviamente on aps-c is lost but I took the GA a dedicated lens, the macro function is very interesting if understood as "sporadic and unpretentious" and therefore no performance as a "real" macro, in fact, the operation provides a complete distance from the subject much reduced so it is not suitable for insects microscopoci .rndopo two months of heavy use, I can say that it is great lens and would recommend it without problemi.rnrn
|sent on July 30, 2014 |
Pros: Excellent construction, weather sealed, compact and relatively lightweight despite a diameter of 77. Sharpness from center to the edges smooth, distortion at 24mm and contained even less than the 24-70 2.8 II, contained excellent resistance to flare and chromatic aberration, vignetting at 24mm on FF enough contained, optical stabilizer of the latest generation super quiet and very effective, excellent bokeh and blur despite f4. Dedicated macro function quite usable for the occasional shots.
Cons: Only real argument against by report and present in all samples as a "feature" project: the shift in focus shots at focal lengths less than 100cm and smaller apertures of f4
Opinion: Surely the 24-70 f4, despite the loss of 35mm, is in direct confrontation with the 24-105 f4 rather than with older siblings 24-70 2.8 I and II, also due to the fact that the two approaches are presented in kit with 6d.rnHo and had long used two copies of the 24-105 f4 L and is now struggling with a second sample of 24-70 L. The 24-105 f4 is I've used both on aps-c that ff (eos 60d, 5d mk III and 6d) and only 24-70 on ff. Therefore I will make a strictly comparative review between the two approaches for the ff.rnrnQuest 'perspective is very interesting although it has a big handicap as has been noted on several forums, including here, and I have personally raised the issue of the portal Canonclubitalia, or the presence a clear shift of focus to the minimum distance of focus, but I'll poco.rnrnIl 24-70 has on his side less distortion at 24mm, excellent resistance to flare and almost total absence of chromatic aberrations throughout his focal length. RNA 24-35mm and the 24-70 solves visibly better than the 24-105 and has a better definition on the edges & a gisevere; f4, which improves going to close. 24mm and 35mm on the definition you really notice the difference from 50mm upwards posting thins. rnElemento important, as anticipated, is the presence of shift of focus distances less than 100cm from the subject and is present at all focal lengths makes it ... except the macro so it is not absolutely love. Unfortunately this is a problem that Canon has officially called a "feature" due to the inherent design project (two aspherical elements instead of three) leads to a shift of the point of focus behind the subject when shooting, problematic due to the fact that the focus is always taken diaphragm fully open and close the aperture when shooting at the set value, postpones fire 1.5/2cm behind the subject (residual spherical aberration). I reiterate that the macro mode is absolutely not affected. So to each his own evaluation of whether it can be a limiting factor. rnrnGli stabilizers: the 24-105, although not one of the most ug &rave; noisy, presents scraping type noise when the stabilizer is activated and deactivated. Eventually we abitua.rnIl 24-70 f4 has the stabilizer quietest ever tried. It 's almost impossible to warn him! RnIl first is old technology 3 stops. The second is the new type 4 stops sensing panning.rnAnche the construction of 24-70 is excellent and gives an overall feeling of solidity and tropical conditions and better balanced than the 24-105. 24-70 rnIl finally presents a lock button (the same one that switches to macro mode) that prevents optics to stretch when held down. The 24-105 does not have the long and the lens tends to loosen and stretch alone. rnNel 24-70 is the new central front cap with clip and hood with button blocco.rnrnDa that I liked, the 24-70 gives more saturated colors and natural (but I have not had trouble reaching the same tones with a fast post-production on the 24-105), one of the most pleasant blurred Prettyand 9 blades against 8 of the circular bokeh of the 24-105 and offers very interesting to be an f4. rnSu ff vignetting is present but not at all annoying on the 24-70.rnChe mean, there are more in favor of the 35mm 24-105. Personally I do not care. Ride at least three optical, as they consider and, personally, where I do not get with the 70mm, 105mm I do not often bastano.rnRiguardo brightness, opens up a whole universe of discussion because the general tendency is to consider the 2.8 for indoor and 4 for the daylight. These concepts are too general because the diaphragm is not there just to let more or less light but at the same time controls the depth of field. For optical light, personally, I mean down to f2. 2.8 or 4 have a difference of one stop that, it is true, results in half or double values ??but with the new sensors to achieve very good results even at high ISO and times veloci.rnrnLa macro function, finally, but not bad presents a bit 'of theimitations away forcing you to stay pretty attached to the subject but usabilissima to do on the fly macro but with occasional light side or controluce.rnComplessivamente a nice optic but it has an Achilles' heel that can be annoying to anyone. The price starts to go down and it might be a good choice for those who want higher quality than the 24-105 inside the 800/900 euro Canon remaining at home. If you do not keep to all the amenities such as Canon in the first place the excellent service, then you might also want to consider the new beautiful and heavier stabilized the Tamron 24-70 2.8 but mounts 82mm filters against the relatively cheaper to 77mm of the two optical Canon.rnrnrn
|sent on July 16, 2014 |
Pros: Lightweight and robust
Cons: No obvious contraindications
Opinion: I had version 2.8 for years with whom I have worked almost always in internal and external rare occasions because of its weight and size. Finally with this f / 4 IS I can go out for a walk carefully by mounted on the FF without having to ask for help from a Sherpa and I think it is a great all-rounder, from the macro to the portraits on the fly here and stolen là.rnIl fact that it is only f / 4 in 'era of super bright, makes you feel a little lame, but for spectacular photos from the bokeh you can use other lenses, this is thought to be always ready for use in travel reportage, in street photography, the landscapes and macro, yield and there is more than satisfactory, the price as well, and what you ask for? Honest.
|sent on July 14, 2014 |
Pros: Compact, sharp at all apertures, macro function, IS very effective and quiet
Cons: I do not have it
Opinion: Since I bought the 24-70 f / 4 with the 6d I'm using a lot, it is almost always mounted on the body. With this objective, I am taking 90% of my photos, it's really a whole do. It offers the best yield from 24 to 35, it is still very good even with the focal superiors. Being an f / 4 to get a good blurred need to use it at 70 and the quality of the bokeh is really remarkable. From the tests that I have done I have found a sharp center / edges, which is already pretty good at f / 4, so it's an F / 4 true.
|sent on May 27, 2014 |
Pros: excellent sharpness even at EDGE, low distortion, blurred (for an excellent f4), excellent IS, "macro" and hybrid IS, construction, weight and size
Cons: at the moment no
Opinion: I took it for a short time to replace the 24/105 lens that I enjoyed despite its limitations (on FF I immediately found the edges a little sharper, with openings to the landscape as f8). I was able then to compare them in the same "condition" and I found the 24/70 lens an excellent and better than 24/105 in all respects: excellent sharpness at all focal lengths (especially at the edges there's really no comparison ), distortion (contained dates focal lengths and significantly lower than the 24/105), blurred (pleasant thanks to the 8 of 9 lamelline vs 24/105), IS (4-stop, absolutely silent and very useful for quasi "macro" being the same "hybrid" also used on the 100 2.8 L IS Macro), "macro" (there are "satisfied" with a reproduction 0.7 instead of 1: 1 but you have the convenience of having the lens always "ready" for use , with an excellent detail and as said with a hybrid IS in the case of free-hand) .rnCostruzione, size and weight are other positive elements but broadly in line with the 24 / 105.rnPerde "only" on hikingfocal length (105mm somebody can make comfortable) and the price (although using the current cash back the difference is significantly reduced) .rnLa function "macro" is very usable, of course you can not expect the working distance or blurred of a 180, but it's like having almost a 100 L IS macro always ready to use; is not just for those who do not consider it necessary to have a macro lens dedicato.rnAlcuni highlighted in a past issue of "focus shift" to the maximum focal length (70mm) and "subjects" very close (less than 1 meter); I did various tests but I have not found anything really limiting use common.
|sent on August 15, 2013 |
Pros: A great all-rounder also good ravvicnate "certainly not macro" rnDi good build fast and preciso.rnf4 great for the landscape.
Cons: For now I do not have riscontrati.rnOk, you are the settings to be done in the car or in post-produzionernma now on what lenses do not s?? RNE quality 'is paga.rn
Opinion: From about twenty days I use it intensively to put him to prova.rnsolitamente natural landscapes and macro. Not 'some a macro, but like me' that often turn to montirnse you already 'installed and you happen especially when the speed of a situation ravvicnata, there sei.rnCerto I also have true macro, but changing time ... and the fleeting moment if I do not make it va'rnOvviamente S. .. M. .. to put the sun in the corner of the frame and then to the light to make criticisms about the quality '. rnNon will be' suitable for reportage night, but at 1/8 and 400 iso seen the stabilizer can make it if you really forget devi.rnNon tropicalization ...... you do not travel only with good weather ... rnCia at all.