DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Suggestions for a 24-70mm Canon substitute?

Started Dec 20, 2012 | Discussions thread
qianp2k Forum Pro • Posts: 10,350
Re: Suggestions for a 24-70mm Canon substitute?
1

Sovern wrote:


Well having the ability to shoot 50 at 1.4 soft or not is still a good ability to have especially when shooting weddings. I found the 2.8 aperture to not be fast enough and not give good enough bokeh at the 17-50 and 24-70 range. The 70-200 I agree is an excellent lens and probably the only zoom lens I'd ever consider buying (I'd still prefer a 200 2.8 prime over it just due to cost and because the prime will have better IQ).

L primes will still have better color saturation & micro contrast though as physically speaking glass is glass.....more glass will lower the quality of the image and the L primes and even regular primes have less glass than these L zooms.

I think that the 24-70II should be priced at $1,200 but than again I don't like zooms.

Wishful thinking at $1200 price   Everyone will be glad too. But no way as even 24-105L official price (not street price) is around that figure, lol.  Check how much Nikon 24-70/2.8 G?  It's $1900 at promotion, so why Canon has reason to reduce the price as it's better than Nikon version in every aspect except at 70mm Nikon is a bit sharper at edges/corners.

You responsed during my modifying last post. Check these real-world samples from this 24-70L II. I am impressed even at such small size.

http://blog.benoa.net/2012/12/canon-ef-24-70mm-f2-8l-ii.html

Please don't jump on conclusion too quickly. These two Canon flagship zoom IQ are truly as good as L prime at f/2.8 and beyond from perspective of IQ - sharpness, contrast and colors. L prime lenses probably still better but only slightly. Nevertheless those L primes can shoot below f/2.8 and have better bokeh probably but also not huge difference. Personally I might add Sigma 35/1.4 and 85/1.4 later but not in priority as I am mainly zoom user. I will skip 135L, 50L, 100L macro (as I own Sigma 150/2.8 OS macro) and 200L/1.8 (200L/2.0 IS is for sports similar as 300L/2.8) in portraiture. Two Sigma f/1.4 lenses I mention should be good enough for whole body, half body and shoulder above portrait and rest ranges can be covered by two f/2.8 L zoom.

-- hide signature --
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow