Consensus on 24-70/2.8 II field curvature at infinity focus?

Hi.

The 24-70L II is superb at 24mm. Probably why it reviews so well. I was pretty stunned by it. The field curvature is less that at longer focal lengths and the DOF helps hide it. As the OP has said it can do really weird things in the middle of the focus range and mid-long distances and getting an infinity scene sharp at the edges at 70mm is very difficult.

The 40mm pancake is sharper at the sides of the frame at the same apertures. If I was a landscaper I'd put the 24-70L II money into some primes without the field curvature issue.

Do you mean 24L has field flatness and come or does not have coma or...? Could you clarify?

The 24L II has coma issues, the samyang 24/1.4 is a better lens for astro photography. The 24L II is a lot sharper than the 24L. They are getting one thing better at the expensive of something else. Most people will like that direction but if you have special uses, want flat field, want low coma, then you'll need a very good reviewer to tell you. These things aren't noticed by most reviewers.

If lens designs like the 35L disappear in favour of a higher resolution lower CA mkII it will be very sad if that destroys the beautiful way it renders a scene.

Could you please elaborate on the properties of 35L you touched upon? Also, do you have an opinion on how Sigma 35/1.4 compares to it in this regard?

35L makes beautiful images, it does have problems with CA on high contrast edges wide open. I hate that when it occurs and process it away but I'll accept it if the alternative is a highly corrected lens with a less pretty image overall. Sigma 35mm looks to the the lens if you want extra sharpness at the expense of less smooth bokeh. Not everyone will care, some people think the 50/1.4 has good bokeh and I think its awful. The Sigma 50mm looks better in that regard.

Cheers,
Andrew