Reading mode: Light Dark

Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L Lens

Go to last post
S

sef3rd

Member
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
Location
Richmond, VA, US
I just purchased Canon's 24-70 f/2.8 L lens for use with my Canon T2i. Does anyone own this lens and are you happy with it? It seems I cannot find any good comments about it. I know it's expensive but wanted something of a fast lens for low light.
 
It's very good lens, not stellar but good. I replaced my 24-105L, the lens I never felt in love with, with 24-70 f2.8 and never looked back. You should pay attention to field curvature at 24mm which is quite pronounced with this lens. Otherwise, contrast and colors are great and sharpness very good. I use it for FF or 1.3 crop, but when I had 1.6 crop it served there very well. It is heavy, but you will get used to, despite the fact that your combo might be a bit unbalanced.
Enjoy your lens, it is still the best Canon offers in that range.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/viktor_viktor/

I like this article: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm
 
Well now I am thinking about cancelling the 24-70 and get the 17-55 f2/8. It is not an L lens but just as fast and lighter. I've read some good comments on the lens.
 
If you plan to stick with 1.6 crop, I would certainly encourage you to go with 17-55 f2.8. I had both lenses (17-55 not any more), and it was such an great lens for the crop body, that I think you will really enjoy it. The versatility (wider end), size and weight, IS, and smaller filter thread, makes this lens better option than 24-70 for the crop cameras. Looking back, there were only one problem I experienced with this lens and that was dust inside. But there are some videos on You Tube how to remove it, and I did it within 5 minutes without a problem. Whatever lens you choose, try to test it before buying, because your camera has no MF adjustment, and there are sample variations for sure.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/viktor_viktor/

I like this article: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/lens-sharpness.htm
 
agree. bin the 24-70. It's a very popular portrait zoom but due to be upgraded soon and

for crop 17-55 is better.
 
For whatever it's worth ... I had both lenses as well, and on the crop body the 17-55 2.8 has produced the same quality pictures compared to the 24-70. Even build quality felt very good for an EF-S lens, although not quite par with L. If you stick with crop (or at least keep one crop body) you will not regret buying the 17-55 lens - IS is a very good add-on you'll love!
--

Cheers ...
Axel
--
Photography for 30+ years ... still loving it
http://axelb.zenfolio.com/
 
expro said:
agree. bin the 24-70. It's a very popular portrait zoom but due to be upgraded soon and
Click to expand...
looking back in this forum, it's due to an upgrade for 5+ years now ;) forget about that statement, it's a popular lens for good reasons. Good contrast, versatile range, a bit heavy but still ok, rock solid build quality and weather sealing, which also means that less dust is sucked in during barrel extraction.

martin
 
I have the 24-70 just about all the time on my 5D (mark1) and find it very sharp and a great portrait lens. It was knocked out of my hands once and fell on a concrete floor, a small scratch on the barrel but after carefull checking by Canon, no other damage, is a great workhorse.
 
yes, the 24-70 is significantly bigger, heavier and with longer reach, useful in many cases on crop but not an all around normal zoom lens for 1.6x

unless you do single portraits or outside portraits mostly I also agree the 17-55 IS is a more balanced choice that offers more for general photography.
--
Click Click ....
 
This lens is regularly scorned for being soft wide open, being too heavy, and not having IS. With my 5D Mark I, I usually used my 24-105mm f4. It's lighter, has more reach, has IS, and was just as sharp as the 24-70mm wide open.

That was until I got a 5D Mark II. I discovered that my 24-105mm wasn't as sharp as I thought it was. Wide open it was soft and gave me the same detail as I was getting from my 5D Mark I. I put the 24-70mm on it and even at f2.8 it was sharper and delivering more detail than the 24-105mm was at f4. Since the main point of getting the Mark II was the improved resolution, that made me switch lenses.

I'm sure plenty of people have gotten soft copies of this lens since Canon doesn't do QC any more but I bought mine locally and did my own QC before declaring it good.
 
... especially for highly skilled portrait photographers.

Lens hood will cast shadows with the built-in flash at wide settings, so slip hood up your arm like a bracelet.

BAK
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top