I am lookng for a medium range zoom lens for a Canon 35mm digital SLR and was wondering what folks have to say about the "Canon EF 24-70mm f 2.8 L II lens." On-line reviews seem positive but I would really love to hear your thoughts.
Thanks,
Posted by Mark Seaver on August 6, 2015 at 8:43 AM
Anil, I have the 24-70 f2.8 L1 version and it's a fine lens. I'm sure the L2 version is better. The question that I ask myself in hindsight is did I really need the f2.8 and what did I get for the extra dollars. As a landscape lens, I mostly use it in the f/8 - f/12 range and on a tripod, rarely do I open it as wide as f/4 and I've probably never kept a photo shot at f/2.8. The high speeds are mostly designed for folks taking people/news pictures. I would encourage you to think about how you would use it and if that justifies the extra expense over the f/4 version or the 24-105 zoom.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on August 7, 2015 at 12:44 AM
I've owned both the I and the II. The improvement in the optics and resolving power in the II are pretty impressive, and that's saying a lot considering that the I is a workhorse and an excellent piece of glass. The II is lighter but takes 82mm filters, FYI. The imporvement with the II matches the 70-200mm/2.8 IS II. When I got that lens in 2010 I was dropping my jaw with the image quality, same with the II 24-70mm. when I got it So image quality wise, you are getting seriously good glass. Funny, I ended up selling it because it was too "standard" for me. I thought it'd be the ultimate walkaround and wedding reception lens, and it turns out it WAS, so I started shooting walkaround pictures. I got bored almost overnight. I keep trying different lenses and keep going back to my main three: 16-35mm for landscapes (and real estate work), the 70-200mm/2.8 which is the ultimate do-all lens to me (except for wide landscapes unless I feel like stitching forever) and my absolute favorite walkaround and wedding reception lens, the 50mm/1.2, shot at 1.2. It's like nothing else and a real pain to work with but the keepers are great. However, I will say that the majority of my landscapes end up at 24-27mm on a FF sensor, so I technically could survive quite well with the 24-70mm. You certainly will not be disappointed with the image quality, i assure you.
Discussion
3 repliesI am lookng for a medium range zoom lens for a Canon 35mm digital SLR and was wondering what folks have to say about the "Canon EF 24-70mm f 2.8 L II lens." On-line reviews seem positive but I would really love to hear your thoughts.
Thanks,
Anil, I have the 24-70 f2.8 L1 version and it's a fine lens. I'm sure the L2 version is better. The question that I ask myself in hindsight is did I really need the f2.8 and what did I get for the extra dollars. As a landscape lens, I mostly use it in the f/8 - f/12 range and on a tripod, rarely do I open it as wide as f/4 and I've probably never kept a photo shot at f/2.8. The high speeds are mostly designed for folks taking people/news pictures. I would encourage you to think about how you would use it and if that justifies the extra expense over the f/4 version or the 24-105 zoom.
I've owned both the I and the II. The improvement in the optics and resolving power in the II are pretty impressive, and that's saying a lot considering that the I is a workhorse and an excellent piece of glass. The II is lighter but takes 82mm filters, FYI. The imporvement with the II matches the 70-200mm/2.8 IS II. When I got that lens in 2010 I was dropping my jaw with the image quality, same with the II 24-70mm. when I got it So image quality wise, you are getting seriously good glass. Funny, I ended up selling it because it was too "standard" for me. I thought it'd be the ultimate walkaround and wedding reception lens, and it turns out it WAS, so I started shooting walkaround pictures. I got bored almost overnight. I keep trying different lenses and keep going back to my main three: 16-35mm for landscapes (and real estate work), the 70-200mm/2.8 which is the ultimate do-all lens to me (except for wide landscapes unless I feel like stitching forever) and my absolute favorite walkaround and wedding reception lens, the 50mm/1.2, shot at 1.2. It's like nothing else and a real pain to work with but the keepers are great. However, I will say that the majority of my landscapes end up at 24-27mm on a FF sensor, so I technically could survive quite well with the 24-70mm. You certainly will not be disappointed with the image quality, i assure you.
Hi Mark and Paul,
Thanks a bunch for sharing your thoughts on this lens. Your help is appreciated very much.
Regards,