Canon EF 24-70 F2.8L Lens Extend while zoom?


Status
Not open for further replies.

RossChang

New Member
May 2, 2004
1,549
0
0
rossblogspace.blogspot.com
Read that the 24-70 F2.8L extends while zooming, anyone got a picture on how long the lens extend to the max?
 

RossChang

New Member
May 2, 2004
1,549
0
0
rossblogspace.blogspot.com
wander what's the rational of the extension while at the wide end? to cater for the hood?... tat's a bit rubbish..
 

Terence

Senior Member
Nov 16, 2003
4,751
0
36
I'm a Llama!
The length of the barrel (even non extended), the weight and the overall bulk of this lens is what made me sell my copy off. My good ol Tamron 24-135 did just as good a job.
 

RossChang

New Member
May 2, 2004
1,549
0
0
rossblogspace.blogspot.com
So is that one of the main reason ppl is letting go of this great lens?...

I have not got hold of this lens yet... so was wandering those who have / had tis lens... what is the main reason hindering you from using this lens frequently?
 

ST1100

Senior Member
Jun 18, 2003
1,784
0
36
Singapore, Bedok
The weight and size. And the slow f2.8 (compared to primes).

'To cater for the hood' is not rubbish - it is in fact ingenious. Else the 70mm end will have to live with a short 24mm hood.
 

misnomer

New Member
Jun 30, 2004
11
0
0
Westerner
RossChang said:
wander what's the rational of the extension while at the wide end? to cater for the hood?... tat's a bit rubbish..
Ross, if you read the Fred Miranda article carefully, you'll see the reason for this is quite compelling. How do you design a fixed hood for a wide to tele zoom trying to balance the need for flare control and minimising vignetting, not an easy task I would imagine!
 

mr_jason

Senior Member
Jul 22, 2003
1,084
0
36
Singapore
www.pbase.com
RossChang said:
Read that the 24-70 F2.8L extends while zooming, anyone got a picture on how long the lens extend to the max?
The full extension at 24mm is around 6 to 8cm, can't remember exactly. ot significantly very long or would it be an issue.

The main thing about this lens is that it is very heavy. You've got to carry it around to believe it. Ideal range and speed for walkaround, but not ideal weight. But picture quality and colour is fantastic.
 

oeyvind

Senior Member
Feb 25, 2002
3,833
1
38
www.oeyvind.org
used one to cover an event... good lens, pretty useful range on 1.3x crop body but the day after my left arm aching (almost as heavy as 70-200 IS) :cry:
 

Belle&Sebastain

Senior Member
Jun 27, 2002
3,796
1
0
here
www.9frames.com
this monster lens about 90g less than a kilo!

i work with pros and some do not use the hood at all.

with the hood on, it looks like a monster.
 

kiwi2

Deregistered
Feb 4, 2003
953
4
0
Visit site
This is one heck of a lens used by the most discerning digital photographers (usually professional) who does not want to be hassled with changing lenses often but yet want a fast f/2.8. Weight shouldn't be an issue to them if important shots matter a lot.

I believe if you shoot with a high mega pixel cam such as the 1D MkII or 1Ds, you can tell the diff in image quality between the 24-70 and other consumer or 3rd party zooms. Do think about distortion control too.
 

misnomer

New Member
Jun 30, 2004
11
0
0
Westerner
RossChang said:
Does that mean that the quality differences is not noticable with other bodies?
I think the theory is that with high resolution sensors you begin to discern the resolution limits of even the best lenses. I assure you though, L quality is obvious even on a 3MP D30, contrast and colour being the other important factors.
 

canturn

Senior Member
Sep 29, 2002
2,643
0
36
East, SG
www.lyricalmoments.com
Sharpness ain't everything... Sigma, Tokina and all these can give u razor sharpness.

L's for the f-stop, the colour, the texture that it can render...but frankly, with digital, all these can be achieved in Post-production ;)
 

Status
Not open for further replies.