Reviews and Problems with Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Showing 1-10 of 24
12 December 2011
Conclusion: Not as good as a good 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 .
Pros: Though heavy on a 1Ds it handles well and the hood protects against rain as well as against flare. autofocus is good and it balances well with my body
Cons: But, and it is a big but, I have so far had the use of four new ones, none of which is anywhere near as good as my 24-85mm f3.5-4.5mm. Curvature of field is so bad that it is like a magic lens. You can focus across a wide street at buildings on the other side, shooting down the street, and gettin...
Summary: I spent several months researching this lens. Countless hours going over sample images, and continuously feeling my heart skip, as I laid eyes on another breath taking image. I thought to myself that there is no way this lens can be that good. Unfortunately, I was right.
Conclusion: I rented one of these from a vey reputable shop after my 28-70L was stolen. Now, especially after reading some of the comments here, I can't decide if I really want to buy one or look for a good used 28-70L. First of all, when I cranked the lens all the way open to 24mm, it "locked up" there.
Pros: Wider aperature than the 28-70L
Cons: Weight, "Bad Copy-itis," lock-down at 24mm, doesn't register images with 580 EX
Pros: One of the best standard zooms Canon makes. A constant 2.8f aperture, helps make a bright viewfinder and aids in autofocus.
Cons: Nothing with the lens itself, just newegg. Wish Canon would put the new Hybrid IS on it. Recieved an open box lens from newegg and was expecting a new one. The box was beat up and resealed. I paid for overnight shipping, and now am having to RMA the unit. At least they are paying shipping both wa...
Summary: Tried to exchange, but was sent a refund instead. May not re-order this particular item from the egg, the shipping packaging was unusually poor & the box arrived beat up. May have had something to do with the performance of this particular unit.
Pros: Great lens if you get a good copy.
Cons: Received a soft copy with a heavy front-focus bias. Paid overnight shipping for a poor copy, had to pay return shipping to exchange-- was sent refund instead of a new lens. If I re-ordered would have to pay shipping again...
Conclusion: I have too many ruined shots to recommend this lens. Typical Canon mediocre quality of their wide angle lenses. I only shoot full frame 5D and 1Ds Mk3, so for APS sized users it may be a better performer.
Pros: Great focal length range.
Cons: Poor performance. To soft on edges compared with prime lenses to be useful for landscape work.
Conclusion: I recently bought a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens for my Canon 40 D and found that in bright sun light IQ was fantastic. Build quality was excellent, presence of the lens is unrivalled, you could walk in to a room full of photographers and get attention immediately.
Pros: I recently bought a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens for my Canon 40 D and found that in bright sun light IQ was fantastic. Build quality was excellent, presence of the lens is unrivalled, you could walk in to a room full of photographers and get attention immediately. Pin point sharp pictures th...
Cons: But in low light and in Flash light photography the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM used in conjunction with either 40 D or 400 D gave images that were soft. Very disappointing and painfull after reading some rave reviews. I sold the lens at a loss to someone who did most of his photography outdoors.
Conclusion: A dissapointment. My Sigma 15-30 performs way better than this lens. Okay, I might have gotten a bad copy, but at this price point, one would think you should'nt have to worry about such things. Thumbs down for Canon.
Pros: Stopped down to f/4 and smaller, it can produce some nice shots. Built like a tank and very fast AF.
Cons: A huge amount of money to spend on a huge, heavy piece of glass, which is, at best, only mediocre.
Conclusion: My use of the 35mm format revolves completely around this type of lens. After buying four copies of Canon's 24-70 lens, I gave up on it. First, like the other reviewers, I couldn't find a copy that was sharp at f/2.8, which is unforgiveable.
Conclusion: Well, much cheaper and smaller lenses have similar or better image quality at f8 or f5.6. At f2.8 this lens is a looser. Wide side is so soft, simply not usable. Not a practical zoom range IMO considering the alternatives. "Big and heavy" is never a problem for me as long as a lens does its job.
Pros: Good Quality Closed down.
Cons: Wide side is soft, at f2.8 not usable. It has a problem with color rendering.