PIX 2015
Previous page Next page

Studio Tests (APS-C)

The Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM performs exceptionally well on APS-C in the studio, matching or surpassing any other lens in its class (although the differences aren't necessarily huge). Sharpness is hugely impressive even at maximum aperture, to the extent that there's barely any measured improvement on the EOS 7D on stopping down to F8. Distortion, CA and vignetting are all very low too.

Sharpness Sharpness is exceptional, and notable for both its evenness across the frame and consistency from end to end of the zoom range. Indeed the lens is performing so well on the EOS 7D at F2.8 that there's barely any room for improvement on stopping down, with little difference in MTF50 between F2.8 and F8. This is a remarkable performance by any standards.
Chromatic Aberration Lateral chromatic aberration is extremely low. At wideangle there's a little blue/yellow fringing, which changes to red/cyan at telephoto. But none of this is likely to be objectionable in most real-world shooting.
Vignetting Vignetting is negligible, as usual for a full frame lens used on APS-C.
Distortion Distortion is low, which again is typical for a full frame lens used on APS-C. There's moderate barrel distortion at wideangle, which could be visible in highly geometric compositions . This reduces in zooming in, before switching to slight pincushion distortion at the telephoto end. But in real-world shooting it's unlikely to be visible across the majority of the zoom range (35-70mm).

Macro Focus

Macro (APS-C) - 100x67mm coverage
Measured magnification: 0.20x
Distortion: Negligible

Minimum focus distance*: 36.0 cm
Working distance**: 17.3 cm
Focal length: 70mm (112mm equiv)
* Minimum focus is defined as the distance from the camera's sensor to the subject
** Working distance is measured from the front of the lens to the subject

The 24-70mm II's measured maximum magnification using manual focus is 0.2x, fractionally higher than specified but still pretty typical for its class. Note though that SLRs won't generally autofocus quite this close.

Image quality at minimum focus is very dependent upon aperture. With the lens stopped down to F5.6 central sharpness is very impressive, but in our flat-field test chart shot the corners are soft due to curvature of field. Stop down further and they sharpen up pretty well. There's just a hint of chromatic aberration in the corners, and minimal distortion.

At larger apertures, though, image quality is much less impressive. At F2.8 the black lines on our test chart are shrouded by green-coloured chromatic aberration (click here for the test chart shot), to the extent that the image actually looks out-of-focus when viewed as a whole. At F4 this effect is reduced, but still visibly present; at F5.6 it's cleared-up completely. This has knock-on implications for focusing, and means the 24-70mm II isn't a great lens for selective focus close-ups. We'll look at this in more detail later in the review.

Specific image quality issues

As always, our studio tests are backed up by taking hundreds of photographs with the lens across a range of subjects, and examining them in detail. This allows us to confirm our studio observations, and identify any other issues which don't show up in the tests. Here we're looking at issues specific to APS-C users; for a fuller picture, be sure to read the next page too.

Chromatic Aberration

Chromatic aberration is generally very low on APS-C bodies, and while Canon's most recent model, the EOS 650D can correct it in JPEG processing, older cameras such as the EOS 7D and 60D can't. In normal shooting it's most pronounced at wideangle, and shows up as green/magenta fringing towards the corner of the frame. Raw shooters can correct it easily in post-processing if necessary, of course.

The example below shows what you can typically expect - it's visible, but not hugely objectionable even without any correction.

Canon EOS 650D, 24mm F8, camera JPEG (CA correction disabled) 100% crop, top left corner
Previous page Next page
I own it
I want it
I had it
Discuss in the forums


Total comments: 9
Kirk Sunglieng

I just bought the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II for my 5D MK II. I agreed with the comment about the price of this lens without the IS. I am disagree with Canon on the claim that IS will compromise the image quality and the size of the lens, but I am a dedicate Canon user so I spent the money. I think there is something else along the way Canon has plan in the future for this focal length.

Miguel Rodríguez

I've just got my new 24-70 f2.8L II USM and so far looks incredible, performs much better than my 17-40 and Siggy 35 f1.4 @f4. It is comparable to my 70-200 f2.8 at 70mm. So it is an impressive piece of glass. I upgraded from my 24-105 after more than a year hesitating to do it, the reason is the 24-105 at the end of the day was not a lens I trusted 100% of the time, in my experience sometimes I managed to get good results, something not so good.


I agree, this lens is absolute amazing and you'll see pictures quality differences taken with this lens or another one. They will not be identical even at first look. Now that price had dropped with some regular promotions, it's worth. I don't have any trouble with my 24-105 but of course clearly below the quality of this 24-70/2.8 II which was marked by a wellknown photo magazine in France as "the best 24-70" ever seen among all lens providers. At 50mm the only which could compete is the new Sigma 50/f1.4 ART (it's a prime at 900 €) !

1 upvote

Hold on, the Canon 24-70mm F2.8 L USM is weather proof. :|


Just a hobbyist, I bought the 24-70 f2.8L ii usm abt a yr ago happy with the overall performance but man oh man the 70-200 ii is usm just acquired last wk was beyond my expectations! At 70mm the later lens is certainly way better! Honestly, both lenses are pricy hope canon could lower their overall pricing to enable more users to join the rank of satisfied customers.

1 upvote

Yes this 70-200/2.8 II is amazing too and a little bit better at 70mm as the 24-70. You're right. BUT : until now no lens provider was able to offer such a lens with best results on both sides, 24 and 70 mm. Nikon has same results and is additionally under quality of the Canon offer and not cheaper !


This is the go-to lens for those wanting flawless image quality, but with the price tag of around $2,000 one would expect IS as an option. If you don't have this kind of money, I recommend the Canon 24-105mm F4L IS USM as an alternative.

1 upvote

I was a little reluctant to dive in and make the switch to the new 24-70.I have the old version and I am pretty happy with it. But the reviews have been so good .And after talking to a couple of different photographers and I have upgraded to the new 70-200 IS ll and noticed the difference between the old version and the new version so I said I would give it a try . It was well worth the money . I am glad that I upgraded. The images are crisp and very sharp all across the frame.I am very impressed.


I just received the new 70-200 2.8 IS vII. Wow, what a lens. I was expecting some improvement, but the level of improvement was beyond any of my expectations. So much so, that I am now considering the 24-70 vII.

As just a hobbyist, I am reluctant to dish out this amount of money, just a week or so after buying the 70-200 II, but oh that performance of the 70-200 was beyond my expectations! I shot a volleyball tournament last weekend, shot a similar tournament two weeks prior with the version I. My keeper rate was so much higher - and I can attribute my non-keepers to my own errors vs. that of the lens.

Just a hobbyist, but man am I addicted!

1 upvote
Total comments: 9