Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM thrashed.

oakfieldphotography.com · May 17, 2011

Much to my dissapointment the Canon EF24-70 L just got thrashed within an inch of its life over in its Flickr group. The reason why i am so concerned about this is because i am going to invest in this very lens.
So much bad news is off putting for someone that never has used it and can lead to people making misinformed decisions based on what i would call "scaremongering".
I have read countless pros and cons and feel that the pros are closer to the ground on the scales of ++. I am sure that there are a few copies that the manufacturer let into the market but no way near what i have read over in Flickr. The problem relates to what the user calls sharp and soft.
Finally at the end of the Flickr groups tread a link was posted from a company that rents cameras and lens. I thought it would be very informative for anyone interestsed in buying this lens to read from this link. http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2008/12/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-myths

Regards
Patrick:D

PS I am still going to buy this lens.

divamum · May 17, 2011

My experience: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=193689&highlight=24-70 (be sure to read to the end of the thread - very happy outcome, and, once again, props to KEH for making it really easy to work out

)

Based on that, I would say that the "good copy/bad copy" isn't a myth (even if it does grow from "compatibility of tolerances between lens and camera"), and you just have to find the right one for you. I shoot wide open a lot in real life, and thus sharpness at 2.8 on my 7d was important to me; for others, it may not be as big a deal.

The big problems with the first copy I had were that 1. at 24mm it didn't seem to focus on anything and 2. it was inconsistent - some shots would be terrific, and others not. I need a lens I can trust every time, so it really wasn't good for me.

I'm EXTREMELY happy with the copy I wound up with - it's rapidly becoming my most-used lens.

ThatCanonGuy · May 17, 2011

Who cares if some random online forum says it's no good? Really, that article is correct, and we know that the 24-70 is a great lens. In Diva's case, even with microadjustment it was still a bad copy. I would go right ahead with buying it, as long as they give you a no-questions-asked return period (like a week or something).

oakfieldphotography.com · May 17, 2011

divamum wrote: »

My experience: http://www.dgrin.com/showthread.php?t=193689&highlight=24-70 (be sure to read to the end of the thread - very happy outcome, and, once again, props to KEH for making it really easy to work out )

Based on that, I would say that the "good copy/bad copy" isn't a myth (even if it does grow from "compatibility of tolerances between lens and camera"), and you just have to find the right one for you. I shoot wide open a lot in real life, and thus sharpness at 2.8 on my 7d was important to me; for others, it may not be as big a deal.

The big problems with the first copy I had were that 1. at 24mm it didn't seem to focus on anything and 2. it was inconsistent - some shots would be terrific, and others not. I need a lens I can trust every time, so it really wasn't good for me.

I'm EXTREMELY happy with the copy I wound up with - it's rapidly becoming my most-used lens.

Hi Divamum,
I was just wondering when you would come in to land on this issue. I read your tread and yes i agree with what you wrote. I justy found it off putting for a group who took pictures with this lens to give it such a slating when i had chose it over the 24-105. I know when i go to buy my new lens i will ask the camera shop to carry out a calibration test between my 5d2 and the 24-70 L before i buy it and i will make sure that they have a good returns policy.

Regards
Patrick.:D

divamum · May 17, 2011

One of the reasons I like dgrin so much is that it doesn't for the most part drift into the fanboi, sarcastic-to-the-point-of-trolling, mine-is-better-than-yours nonsense one finds elsewhere on the net when gear is discussed. Sure, there are debates here, but they are usually reasoned, thoughtful discussions rather than the kind of pointless gear-bashing one finds in photo discussions elsewhere on the net.

I wouldn't take one internet group as gospel. THe 24-70 for sure needs updating and I think most Canon users look forward to a version II, but in the meantime it's the best on offer in that focal length: you don't see so many pros carrying a lens unless it does the job - they can't afford to be "fans", because they need their tools to pay the mortgage! That the 24-70 is the lens of choice of MANY pros speaks volumes - it's a tool that does the job.

Copy variance is well documented, so just go in knowing that and plan accordingly. Take lots and LOTS of test shots, especially in the conditions you usually shoot (frankly, it doesn't matter if it shoots rulers and bills perfectly if it won't do the same in the field - "clinical" tests are useful to help diagnose a problem, but aren't the same as actaully *using* a lens). And most of all, enjoy it! I'm really loving mine

oakfieldphotography.com · May 17, 2011

divamum wrote: »

One of the reasons I like dgrin so much is that it doesn't for the most part drift into the fanboi, sarcastic-to-the-point-of-trolling, mine-is-better-than-yours nonsense one finds elsewhere on the net when gear is discussed. Sure, there are debates here, but they are usually reasoned, thoughtful discussions rather than the kind of pointless gear-bashing one finds in photo discussions elsewhere on the net.

I wouldn't take one internet group as gospel. THe 24-70 for sure needs updating and I think most Canon users look forward to a version II, but in the meantime it's the best on offer in that focal length: you don't see so many pros carrying a lens unless it does the job - they can't afford to be "fans", because they need their tools to pay the mortgage! That the 24-70 is the lens of choice of MANY pros speaks volumes - it's a tool that does the job.

Copy variance is well documented, so just go in knowing that and plan accordingly. Take lots and LOTS of test shots, especially in the conditions you usually shoot (frankly, it doesn't matter if it shoots rulers and bills perfectly if it won't do the same in the field - "clinical" tests are useful to help diagnose a problem, but aren't the same as actaully *using* a lens). And most of all, enjoy it! I'm really loving mine

Hi Divamum
it is at this point in the conversation that i am green with envy. I have chosen this lens over the 24-105 due to the fact that i really dont need that extra reach and the fact that it dosent have as much barrel distortion and vigenetting at the longer end i think according to reviews.

Regards
Patrick.:D

Sam · May 17, 2011

I don't want to upset the apple cart.....but............I have rented this lens and borrowed this lens. I want to love this lens, alas...I don't care for it.

The ones I have used have been unremarkable in image quality. Bear in mind I am comparing this with other L lenses, not a consumer lens.

I really recomend you rent one first or make sure you can fully test it and then return it.

Sam

ThatCanonGuy · May 17, 2011

Maybe a 24 2.8 USM? I've heard it's a very good lens.

Then again, I've heard the 24-70L is a very good lens.

But at $300-400 used, you can't really go wrong. I plan on buying one myself someday.

DeVerm · May 17, 2011

The bad 24-70L that DivaMum got was 2nd hand... I would not call any bad 2nd hand lens a "bad copy" because you never know what the previous owner(s) did to it. The question is how big a chance is there that a new copy is bad.

I have been following the rumors about the 24-70L Mk.II and the 5D Mk.III but I just bought a 5D Mk.II with the 24-105L instead of waiting for the new revisions. The rumors are that the new 24-70L might be a disappointment.

I already have a 7D and an EF-S 17-55 IS USM lens. This is an excellent alternative for the 24-70L (on a crop sensor) and provides very good IS. Also, the weak points of the 5D Mk.II are mostly covered by my 7D so I decided to buy now. I might receive it tomorrow already

ciao!
Nick.

Matthew Saville · May 20, 2011

It just depends on what you shoot, what your *needs* are in a lens, and what your standards are as far as the results.

A photojournalist who simply needs to get the shot will buy the 24-70 without hesitation, and use it happily. Fuzzy corners don't matter at all, the center is decently sharp even wide open and that's all that matters most. As well as the ability to zoom from 24mm to 70mm, of course.

A landscape photographer, of course, will need to test their lens thoroughly and pick their copy carefully, but that's the case with ANY lens really. But considering the factors of size, weight, price, and *average* copy sharpness, ...I just can't recommend the 24-70 to a hardcore landscape photographer who is looking to milk every last pixel out of their beautiful full-frame body.s

The bottom line is that when you're investing in such an expensive (let alone controversial) lens, ...you should certainly be renting and testing the lens (multiple copies maybe) a few times before getting out your credit card...

=Matt=

BTW, I know I'm usually one of those "24-70 L bashers", but that's just the geeky side of me peeping at pixels and reading tons of online reviews. In reality, I'm also the type who doesn't hesitate to get a job done and use equipment properly to maximize the results. Here's an image I shot last year when I did a wedding on a 5D mk2 and a very sharp copy of the 24-70 L...

(I would look up a 100% version but SmugMug is in read-only right now...)

David_S85 · May 20, 2011

Wait. There's a mk II in the works. Shouldn't be too long.

divamum · May 20, 2011

David_S85 wrote: »

Wait. There's a mk II in the works. Shouldn't be too long.

So they keep saying, but...

I've been following "24-70II" rumours for about a year now in the hope I might be able to go that route instead, but I finally decided to go ahead and buy the vI since I got sick of waiting and needed one *now*. While I have no doubt there will be a Mk II eventually, with the delays from the Japan earthquake even if there is one imminent I can't imagine there will be a ready supply of them in the short to medium term - for me it just made sense to go ahead with it now and deal with any subsequent upgrading down the line.

So if you don't need one right away - and can weather the inevitable sticker-shock of a Mk II (see the 70-200vI vs Mk II for examples!) - for sure wait and see what happens over the next couple of months.

TaDa · May 20, 2011

You will find the 24-70 in almost every pros bag. I'm sure that there are copy variations that need to be sent in for calibration, but over, the lens is a stellar performer. Always keep in mind with web content, most happy owners hardly ever post "positive" comments about their gear. When someone has a copy that they're not happy with though, the first thing they do is run to forums and ask for advice or complain.

I happen to appreciate the 24-70 and the images that it helps me produce.

paddler4 · May 20, 2011

oakfield,

You shoot a 40D, which is relevant in this case. If you are reluctant to spend so much for a lens you are uncertain about, have you considered the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 as an alternative? It is optically very good, 1/3 the price, and a lot lighter. It does not have USM or FTM focusing, and the BQ, while fine, is not L-level. If you look at reviews, you will find that the are very positive about IQ except for some softness in the corners, which you won't see with a crop-sensor camera. I bought one 3 year ago or so and have been quite happy with it. It is not on a par with my absolute best lenses, but it is pretty darn good, and a very good deal for the price.

oakfieldphotography.com · May 20, 2011

Hi Paddler4
i could go down that road but i would end up selling the lens again anyway. I think i will hold off for the L glass and if i am not happy with it at least i will have a good resale price towards my next purchase. I have a 40D with the standard 17-85usm is and it will do for a bit of reach. I have noticed when i put the nifty fifty on this camera an improvement in picture quality. I dont want to rush my purchase and i do have time on my side so thanks everyone here for your help and advice but i think i will go for which ever lens is available during the time of my purchase. I was considering the 24-105 but with the 24-75 f2.8 available or the mark2 i feel i will be making the right choice.

Regards
Patrick

DeVerm · May 20, 2011

Well, I just got the 24-105 f4.0L IS and I love it

But I primarily got it for the 5D2 and I don't think it's wide enough as a standard lens for a crop sensor. Meaning the 24-70L has that same problem.

The simple fact is that Canon has no L-glass for a standard lens for a 1.6x crop sensor. Well, may be the 17-40L but it's f4.0, no IS and 40mm is too short. I think the problem is that 17-55mm is very wide for a full sensor and every L lens must fit a full sensor camera I guess.

ciao!
Nick.

oakfieldphotography.com · May 20, 2011

DeVerm wrote: »

Well, I just got the 24-105 f4.0L IS and I love it

But I primarily got it for the 5D2 and I don't think it's wide enough as a standard lens for a crop sensor. Meaning the 24-70L has that same problem.

The simple fact is that Canon has no L-glass for a standard lens for a 1.6x crop sensor. Well, may be the 17-40L but it's f4.0, no IS and 40mm is too short. I think the problem is that 17-55mm is very wide for a full sensor and every L lens must fit a full sensor camera I guess.

ciao!
Nick.

Hi Devern,
i should have said that i do own a 5Dmk2 so the cropped senser issent an issue.

Regards
Patrick:D

ThatCanonGuy · May 20, 2011

The 17-55 is pretty much an EF-S L. The only thing it lacks (besides the full image circle) is the red ring.

DeVerm · May 20, 2011

oakfieldphotography.com wrote: »

Hi Devern,
i should have said that i do own a 5Dmk2 so the cropped senser issent an issue.

Ah, sorry

In that case, let me list what I have; I have a 7D and since a couple of days a 5D2. I have these Canon lenses:

EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 IS
EF 17-40mm f4.0L
EF 24-105mm f4.0L IS
EF 100mm f2.8L IS macro
EF 70-200mm f2.8L IS & 1.4x teleconverter

The way I see it (and we all see it differently :-) is that the 7D is my telezoom body (like a 1.6x teleconverter) and the 5D is wide landscape & studio body. I am not sure which one I will prefer for macro yet. I don't do sports photography but think I would use the 7D for that.

Looking at the list of lenses... which one would I give up first? None of them! But with the 5D and 17-40 I would sell my 12-24mm Tokina if asked.

The reason that I didn't buy the 24-70 f2.8L is that it's old, I don't want to wait for Mk.II and I do want IS for my standard zoom lenses. If the 24-70L would have had IS I might have chosen it over the 24-105L for it's f2.8. But the 24-105L came as kit lens with the 5D2 saving me some $$$ there.

Also, I always have the 7D with that 17-55 f2.8 at hand which makes it easier to go for the 24-105L. I think that is about all the thinking I did when deciding which lens to buy

What I can tell now is that the 24-105L is a real L lens and it's zoom ring is even smoother than my 70-200L. It's enough lens for me!

ciao!
Nick.

DeVerm · May 20, 2011

ThatCanonGuy wrote: »

The 17-55 is pretty much an EF-S L. The only thing it lacks (besides the full image circle) is the red ring.

Yes, that's the consensus. However, with the EF-S, I miss the weather sealing (I live on sea water / salt air) and the build quality of an L lens. The zoom ring is nowhere near as smooth as that of my 24-105L. But I will not sell my 17-55 either; I just need to be more careful with it.

ciao!
Nick.

oakfieldphotography.com · May 20, 2011

You guys have me watering at the mouth with all those lenses. It will take me time to accumulate that much but with more money and a quiet wife we might sneak these in the back door. One by one. lol

Thanks

Patrick.:D

RedSox · May 27, 2011

I must be lucky. My 24-70 is tack sharp on all bodies that I owned and used. I have a XT and a 40d. In addition, I tried it on 50D, 7D, 5D and 5DII. All perfect sharp. No Micro adjustment required. If you check Amazon rating, out of 272 reviews, 214 people gave it 5 stars. It really is an amazing lens. I have 3 buddies own the same lens. On complaint heard.

Eric

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM thrashed.

Comments