Canon 24-70 F4
Feb 21, 2015 15:14:40 #
I'm thinking about purchasing this lens to fill the gap between my ultra wide and my medium telephoto. The review on The Digital Picture states that the lens is somewhat soft midrange. Given the overall excellence of L glass, I feel I have to take this with a grain of salt and not being a professional or a "pixel counter" I'd be surprised if I actually noticed it. That said, I'd very much appreciate some feedback from those of you who own this lens. I want to stay light (in weight and cost), and I like the macro capacity of the lens, so I'm not sold on the higher performing 2.8 at this point. I feel like F4 will be fast enough for me, especially with IS. Thanks in advance for comments.
Feb 21, 2015 19:14:19 #
aerides wrote:
I'm thinking about purchasing this lens to fill th... (show quote)
The 24-70mm F4L sacrificed a lot to downsize from the F2.8 version. Its a compromise for people wanting to get by for less money. The Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 VC lens is MUCH sharper and a much better buy if you are counting pennies. Otherwise save for the F2.8L to satisfy your Canon brand urge.
Here is a technical spec side-by-side:
http://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-24-70mm-F28L-II-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III-versus-Canon-EF-24-70mm-F4L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5D-Mark-III___886_795_1074_795
Feb 21, 2015 20:17:12 #
aerides wrote:
I'm thinking about purchasing this lens to fill th... (show quote)
I have the 24-70 f/4 which I use primarily on my 6D. For routine use I find it to be excellent. Sharp throughout the range with little distortion or CA. Of course, the 6D, like all the newer Canons, incorporates correction data for the lens. If you are using an older body you may get different results.
Feb 21, 2015 22:07:57 #
MT Shooter wrote:
The 24-70mm F4L sacrificed a lot to downsize from the F2.8 version. Its a compromise for people wanting to get by for less money. The Tamron SP 24-70mm F2.8 VC lens is MUCH sharper and a much better buy if you are counting pennies. Otherwise save for the F2.8L to satisfy your Canon brand urge.
Thanks MT Shooter. That's just the kind of summation I was hoping for. For better or worse, for my wallet and back.
Feb 21, 2015 22:10:25 #
LFingar wrote:
I have the 24-70 f/4 which I use primarily on my 6D. For routine use I find it to be excellent. Sharp throughout the range with little distortion or CA. Of course, the 6D, like all the newer Canons, incorporates correction data for the lens. If you are using an older body you may get different results.
I guess the software for my 5DIII could probably be updated, if there's a new version since then. Thanks for that!
Feb 22, 2015 09:05:06 #
MT Shooter wrote:
The 24-70mm F4L sacrificed a lot to downsize from ... (show quote)
DXO Mark remember hates Canon and is extremely biased against their products (Setting up testing parameters specific to favor one brand over another) so keep this in mind when looking at their results
Feb 22, 2015 09:34:04 #
Architect1776 wrote:
DXO Mark remember hates Canon and is extremely biased against their products (Setting up testing parameters specific to favor one brand over another) so keep this in mind when looking at their results
Thanks.
Feb 22, 2015 09:40:53 #
Architect1776 wrote:
DXO Mark remember hates Canon and is extremely biased against their products (Setting up testing parameters specific to favor one brand over another) so keep this in mind when looking at their results
Still trying to convince yourself of that huh. That's really sad!
Feb 22, 2015 10:03:45 #
MT Shooter wrote:
Still trying to convince yourself of that huh. That's really sad!
No just stating the truth.
I have looked at a lot of other testing sites that contradict the extreme bias of DXO.
Feb 22, 2015 17:25:48 #
I bought the new Canon 7D MK II and when I read the report from DXO I felt so bad because he really knocked this camera, well I couldn't be happier with this camera
so I know what you mean about being bias against Canon.
so I know what you mean about being bias against Canon.
Feb 22, 2015 17:51:58 #
aerides wrote:
I'm thinking about purchasing this lens to fill th... (show quote)
I have not looked at the 24-70 f4.
That said, I don't know why I would get an f4 lens that covers 1/2 of the range as the 24-105 at the same aperture? Personally I would get the longer range lens. The 24-105 is my most used lens. I can't begin to imagine that the 24-70 could come close to being as useful at the same aperture. Though IF it has a decent Macro component, that would be worth something! ;-)
SS
Feb 22, 2015 22:42:31 #
SharpShooter wrote:
I have not looked at the 24-70 f4.
That said, I don't know why I would get an f4 lens that covers 1/2 of the range as the 24-105 at the same aperture? Personally I would get the longer range lens. The 24-105 is my most used lens. I can't begin to imagine that the 24-70 could come close to being as useful at the same aperture. Though IF it has a decent Macro component, that would be worth something! ;-)
SS
That said, I don't know why I would get an f4 lens that covers 1/2 of the range as the 24-105 at the same aperture? Personally I would get the longer range lens. The 24-105 is my most used lens. I can't begin to imagine that the 24-70 could come close to being as useful at the same aperture. Though IF it has a decent Macro component, that would be worth something! ;-)
SS
Good points. Reports seem to be that the macro capability on the 24-70 F4 is useful, close to 1:1. I wonder if the F4 with IS would be roughly equivalent in speed to the 24-70 2.8 without IS. Still concerned about "real life" differences in IQ.
Feb 22, 2015 23:27:24 #
SharpShooter wrote:
I have not looked at the 24-70 f4.
That said, I don't know why I would get an f4 lens that covers 1/2 of the range as the 24-105 at the same aperture? Personally I would get the longer range lens. The 24-105 is my most used lens. I can't begin to imagine that the 24-70 could come close to being as useful at the same aperture. Though IF it has a decent Macro component, that would be worth something! ;-)
SS
That said, I don't know why I would get an f4 lens that covers 1/2 of the range as the 24-105 at the same aperture? Personally I would get the longer range lens. The 24-105 is my most used lens. I can't begin to imagine that the 24-70 could come close to being as useful at the same aperture. Though IF it has a decent Macro component, that would be worth something! ;-)
SS
That's exactly what I was thinking at f4. 24-105 is my main lens too.
Feb 22, 2015 23:39:06 #
SharpShooter wrote:
I have not looked at the 24-70 f4.
That said, I don't know why I would get an f4 lens that covers 1/2 of the range as the 24-105 at the same aperture? Personally I would get the longer range lens. The 24-105 is my most used lens. I can't begin to imagine that the 24-70 could come close to being as useful at the same aperture. Though IF it has a decent Macro component, that would be worth something! ;-)
SS
That said, I don't know why I would get an f4 lens that covers 1/2 of the range as the 24-105 at the same aperture? Personally I would get the longer range lens. The 24-105 is my most used lens. I can't begin to imagine that the 24-70 could come close to being as useful at the same aperture. Though IF it has a decent Macro component, that would be worth something! ;-)
SS
Imagine the 24-105 in an f/2.8L version. The things that dreams are made of..........
Feb 23, 2015 08:35:12 #
davidrb wrote:
Imagine the 24-105 in an f/2.8L version. The things that dreams are made of..........
I agree but it would be rather large. I imagine that is a partial reason for limiting the aperture to f4.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.