Canon 24-70 F2.8L IS

[auden09]

yeah, like all white lenses. i think its for the big sporting events nxt year. =/ world cup, winter olympics, youth olympics...

 

[TheStig]

24-70L is notorious for sharpness issues at the wider ender, as well as AF problems. Some of the pros I spoke to in UK also told me the same problem and somehow images aren't just as crisp.

If 24-70 is a different lens recipe altogether or improved like those new Nikon glass, I really won't mind getting it since it's for work. Other than that, I really don't see how IS is going to help, seriously.

Are you serious? I've had the 24-70 for 4 years. Image sharpness, yes I agree it could be better (My friend's 17-55 is sharper, and my EF-S 60mm macro is much sharper). But AF problems? I've never had problems with the AF of this lens, even in low light. I hope it stays that way :sweat:

IS may help. I hardly (almost never maybe haha) get a sharp shot at 70mm without flash in a dimly lit room :sweat: Canon's new IS is rated 4 stops, right?

 

[woeilee]

I would say that IS would always help when it comes to probability of getting sharp images.
Take 70-200 f4 IS for example. Its elements and construction are similar to the non-IS version, yet with IS, the image it produces seem to be better most of the time. Of course this might be true because 70-200 is a tele-zoom lens where vibration is more obvious.

 

[CS TAN]

I would say that IS would always help when it comes to probability of getting sharp images.
Take 70-200 f4 IS for example. Its elements and construction are similar to the non-IS version, yet with IS, the image it produces seem to be better most of the time. Of course this might be true because 70-200 is a tele-zoom lens where vibration is more obvious.

Yeah, the longer the focal length, the effect of IS is more obvious. At my age, any focal length longer than 100mm will definitely benefit from IS.

 

[speedtest99]

how is the new model of this 24-70 F2.8L difference from Canon EF 24-70mm F1:2.8L USM , saw someone selling at http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=619599 , are they the same. I thought this model is not out yet?

 

[speedtest99]

ok, i think i know the difference, it is the IS version.

 

[markbrian]

how is the new model of this 24-70 F2.8L difference from Canon EF 24-70mm F1:2.8L USM , saw someone selling at http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=619599 , are they the same. I thought this model is not out yet?

The lens code from that lens is "UR", you can see it behind the lens. which means it was manufactured year 2003.

 

[Michaelavaloke2009]

how is the new model of this 24-70 F2.8L difference from Canon EF 24-70mm F1:2.8L USM , saw someone selling at http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=619599 , are they the same. I thought this model is not out yet?

no dfference, its the same.

 

[lightning]

bro all primes set up is very expensive! lol...

It is not only expensive, it is heavy too. Imagine 24-70 replaced with 24F1.4, 35F1.4, 50F1.2 and 85F1.2

I have first hand experienced when I replace 70-200F2.8 with 85F1.2, 135F2 and 200F2. But for the sake of image quality....it is still worth to have all primes!

 

[engrmariano]

if im going to replace my 24-70 & 20-200 2.8 with primes, it would be 24L II, 85L II, & 200 2L.:thumbsup: