Options
24-70L arrived
CF this thread. Fedex just arrived, so, some first impressions (for anybody else who wants to know more about this lens than "just the facts" or the fanboi posts which regularly pop up at Assorted Other Forums :rofl):
- Um... wow. Just.... wow. :huh
- I'm a huge fan of the Tamron 17-50. It's been my workhorse for 2.5 years, it's light, terrific optics, it's a great price, the AF is plenty functional. Well, I'm here to say there is NO COMPARISON with the handling of the 24-70L. I'm amazed, actually - the speed and accuracy of this zoom has kind of blown my head off. I said I wanted something to compare with the speed and accuracy of the 135L - well, I guess I just got it! I'm not an L snob, but I'm definitely starting to understand why so many people just find the extra $ to get this lens.
- Yup, it's heavy. Not so much on its own, but when mounted; I'm certain that an evening of shooting with it will leave me with cramped hands. It's the first lens I've used that makes me want a grip for the 7d - that would balance it right up, even though it will also add yet more weight. May consider that, or possibly a handstrap, which will keep the size/weight combo from bloating further. Have to consider.
- I've bought several BGN-rated lenses from KEH - this is without a doubt the first one that looks like one! The others have all had incredibly minor blemishes, but this one definitely looks, uh, "used". Ding on the zoom ring, big mark on the filter ring (doesn't interfere with the thread), and an actual dent on the ring where the red "L" is, as well as a big scuff on the plastic f-stop indicator window. I don't personally care at all about cosmetics and it doesn't interfere in the slightest with the function of this lens, but I suspect it will make it harder to sell on the private market when the time comes (assuming it ever does :evil). It also tells me this thing has been hard-used. Is this evidence of professional (or careless!) use anything to worry about? As I say, it's the first lens I've had from them with more than minor blemishes. The glass looks fine, and all rings turn smoothly and without issue. It's exceptional, actually, focusing accurately and sharp at 2.8 through all the FL's I've tried it on so far, including shooting through a screen door, and too-close, wide-open shots of the bubble wrap it came in (I figured that ought to confuse the AF pretty nicely!)
I will say I'm super-impressed so far. Hopefully The Reluctant Model will let me test it out on her this afternoon after school; watch this space...
- Um... wow. Just.... wow. :huh
- I'm a huge fan of the Tamron 17-50. It's been my workhorse for 2.5 years, it's light, terrific optics, it's a great price, the AF is plenty functional. Well, I'm here to say there is NO COMPARISON with the handling of the 24-70L. I'm amazed, actually - the speed and accuracy of this zoom has kind of blown my head off. I said I wanted something to compare with the speed and accuracy of the 135L - well, I guess I just got it! I'm not an L snob, but I'm definitely starting to understand why so many people just find the extra $ to get this lens.
- Yup, it's heavy. Not so much on its own, but when mounted; I'm certain that an evening of shooting with it will leave me with cramped hands. It's the first lens I've used that makes me want a grip for the 7d - that would balance it right up, even though it will also add yet more weight. May consider that, or possibly a handstrap, which will keep the size/weight combo from bloating further. Have to consider.
- I've bought several BGN-rated lenses from KEH - this is without a doubt the first one that looks like one! The others have all had incredibly minor blemishes, but this one definitely looks, uh, "used". Ding on the zoom ring, big mark on the filter ring (doesn't interfere with the thread), and an actual dent on the ring where the red "L" is, as well as a big scuff on the plastic f-stop indicator window. I don't personally care at all about cosmetics and it doesn't interfere in the slightest with the function of this lens, but I suspect it will make it harder to sell on the private market when the time comes (assuming it ever does :evil). It also tells me this thing has been hard-used. Is this evidence of professional (or careless!) use anything to worry about? As I say, it's the first lens I've had from them with more than minor blemishes. The glass looks fine, and all rings turn smoothly and without issue. It's exceptional, actually, focusing accurately and sharp at 2.8 through all the FL's I've tried it on so far, including shooting through a screen door, and too-close, wide-open shots of the bubble wrap it came in (I figured that ought to confuse the AF pretty nicely!)
I will say I'm super-impressed so far. Hopefully The Reluctant Model will let me test it out on her this afternoon after school; watch this space...
facebook | photo site |
0
Comments
Congrats! I just ordered this lens also...with my new 7D!
My Smugmug Site
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
Natural selection is responsible for every living thing that exists.
D3s, D500, D5300, and way more glass than the wife knows about.
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
This is correct. Be sure to test for sharpness as it varies from copy to copy on this lens more so than other Canon L lenses.
Your professional online camera gear rental store
Follow us on Facebook
http://www.facebook.com/borrowlenses
Congratulations, and yes! We'll be awaiting the reluctant MD~
It has the greatest colour of any lens I know. On a 5D2 it must be a dream. You can see where it's gonna take ya!
Congrats!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
And yes, Neil, the colour and contrast were the first things I noticed on the shots
70mm, 2.8. Shot raw, minor processing including my "usual" 7d NR+sharpening in LR3 (ie nothing special)
Approx 100%
Perfect! I never noticed this child has freckles!
Nice lens! I guess you're pleased! Yay!
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
I still need to check out 2.8 thoroughly at other FL's, but it seems to be a decent copy, so I am pleased (if still swallowing hard at having spent nearly $1k on a somewhat banged up, secondhand lens, but I can sure see what I'm paying for in the results, and it was over $200 less than any other copy I've seen. <---- justifies expenditure :giggle Plus I reckon if it was used that hard it must've been sharp for somebody <img src="https://us.v-cdn.net/6029383/emoji/rolleyes1.gif" border="0" alt="" >).
Her freckles come and go, btw - plus I usually process skintones fairly bright, so they actually probably haven't shown up that much!
Well, I'm already learning I need to go with more than 1/focal length - I'm not a rock-steady hand-holder at the best of times, and the weight of this actually means I need to bump up SS even a little more! But I know what you mean and this thing does seem to have a nice dose of magic dust sprinkled into it. I don't think it's quite as extraordinary as the Nikon equiv (I've never seen anybody share a bad shot taken with the Nikon 24-70!), but it's certainly a nice chunk o' glass
Thats the thing about the REALLY over the top, top-o-the line lenses....they DO seem to have special-goo as I call it or Magic Dust as you expressed. Once you have that, notice it, there is no going back to be fully satisfied. Prob like that 135 you speak of~ Many people speak of Sharp lenses, but the special ones have something else too!
Hey, and it's obviously gonna be sharp for you as well!
I love freckles!
Got bored with digital and went back to film.
I very recently picked up a used one on this forum (thanks, Aaron Nelson!) and am amazed at the shots that it is capable of (with my 5D). I also ended up with a sore lower back one day and realized it was because I let it dangle from my neck with my Smugmug strap for half a day. Now I sling it over my shoulder unless actively shooting or support it with a hand.
As you are finding, you have to pay attention to SS and holding it steady in low light (such as the theater).
Looking forward to more posts with this lens!
Good for you. I wish you many years of great shots with this lens. It is on my list too. Just one thing, people talk here of a bad copy. Are these spurious lenses or what does a bad copy mean? Excuse my ignorance.
Regards
Patrick.:D
a bad copy usually means that a lens won`t focus properly or some other defects. I think...
Yes.
Lenses are highly complex and sensitive instruments which function as they should only within very narrow tolerances. They are commonly manufactured in part by automatic factory processes. In any such processes there are deviations in performance and accuracy, and if these create deviations in the product (lens) which are outside of the tolerances for designed functioning, that lens will be discovered by QC or its buyer, and will be deemed a "bad copy". One of the reasons for the recent addition of the microadjustment facility in bodies is to allow the fine tuning of lenses that have not come out of the factory as perfect as they need to be. Everyone who buys a lens should check its calibration. There has been controversy over the reliability of QC/calibration of the 24-70L throughout its manufacturing history. My copy had no major problems, but I had to experience other L lenses before I knew what sharpness really could be!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
I never knew that. I've had this lens for a few years and have often questioned its sharpness. Wish I had known this was an issue...
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
Not only is it heavy - I sometimes get a temporary case of tennis elbow after long hours with this thing - but it's scary-looking, especially with the hood. I get a totally different reaction from people when I point this lens at people - or even if it's just sitting on the table - than I do with other lenses, or with the G12; it can be very intimidating.
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
... and good to hide behind if you are feeling a bit timid yourself!
Neil
http://www.behance.net/brosepix
(just realized that's the 24-70 in my avatar, sans hood)
www.SaraPiazza.com - Edgartown News - Trad Diary - Facebook
Regards
Patrick.
She bought it from a rep. dealer ( used & new) in KEH: here They have a grading system that is well thought of and seems pretty thorough.
Buying from eBay is not the same, new, used whatever...you will not know what you have until you have it from eBay/seller. And yes, as everyone has stated, even buying new from a rep. dealer doesn't assure you it will not be a DOA at your doorstep. Which is a BIG why most folks recommend buying from a rep. dealer~
I used to have one, till I traded it.
www.tednghiem.com
Tom's absolutely right, I did indeed buy from KEH, and largely because with this kind of price-tag on a lens well-known for copy variance, I wanted to be SURE that I could return it if something wasn't right. In fact, I timed this purchase so that I can use it for a theatre shoot next week and see how it performs; this gives me a chance to test it thoroughly in one of my typical shooting contexts, within the 14-day return period. (Similarly, Mini-D may find herself a portrait subject a bit more than she'd like in the next 10 days...
As for copy differences, my understanding was that some were sharper than others at maximum aperture, an anomaly that WASN'T easily corrected by microfocus adjustment (or where different MFAF adjustments were needed at different focal lengths, making it impossible for the consumer to tweak). ??
Btw, hood: obviously this didn't come with one. How likely am I to need one - how does this thing deal with flare?
Oh, and @Rainbow - I wanted that lens of Aaron's but didn't have the money at the time - glad it went to a good dgrin home!!!