Leicaman101

Before I plunk down $1,800.00 on this lens for my 6D, are there any of you out they that have had experience with this lens and would say "go for it" I know good glass is expensive. I do mostly landscape photos. I got the 6D recently and want one lens.
Thanks

PaulR01 Loc: West Texas

Well worth the investment. Mine is probably on a body more than any other lens.

Camlane Loc: North Carolina

Before you buy, check out the new 24-105 Mark II. You won't miss the 1 stop on landscapes. Hopefully you won't have to wait too long.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

I'm wondering if you meant the 24-70 or 28-70. There was a 28-70, but it's not currently shown on the Canon website. The 24-70 f2.8L II is a great lens (and I want one). The 24-105 f4L II IS has more reach on the long end, is substantially less expensive and has IS, but is a stop slower. According to B&H, Adorama, etc., the 24-105 MKII is on back order, so not readily available yet. If you believe in DXOMark testing, the 24-70 is sharper.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Do you need f/2.8? Your 6D is great at high ISOs and landscape and most things every day don't need f/2.8 to stop action in low light. Both versions of the 24-105L are great lenses as is the 24-70 f/4L. A lens I'm using a lot is the 16-35 f/4L IS. I've become a lot less religious about shooting with a tripod ... All that said, the 24-70 f/2.8L II is worth every penny when shooting at f/2.8 and pretty much every f-stop...

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Since we don't know what else you have....., here's what I would get:
The 24-105 mkl, and a 600 rt speed light.
Secondly, on top of all that I'd get a 50 1.8 just in case you do miss that one stop AND a 17-40 for landscape!
You will not only be all set up but I think you may STILL have money left over for a little road trip!!! LoL
SS

Leicaman101

Thanks to all for your replies. This blog is great, so much knowledge base to tap into, nice to be part of it. It has given me more options to consider which I guess I was looking for before deciding.
Much aloha.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

H

👍👍👍👍 Now that is a very good suggestion! Actually, that's exactly how I started with those lenses and the flash, later adding others.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

I have an EF 28-70 f/2.8L, it's a really nice lens, but, Canon never made a series II version and this lens has been out of production for many years, replaced by the 24-70 f/2.8L. A good copy of the 28-70 f/2.8L should fetch no more than $800.

gwong1 Loc: Tampa, FL

My go to lens with my 6D is the 24-70 f2.8L II. You will not regret the investment. Gary

Roger Lee

My 24-70 f2.8L II is like having a bag full of primes with one lens. It's that sharp, has good micro-contrast, saturation and great bokeh, it doesn't disappoint. Don't overlook this superb tool.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Haydon

The 24-70 2.8L II has only two weak spots price and no IS. Otherwise as Roger Lee so eloquently mentioned it's like having a bag full of primes. Many event photographers actually sold their 24, 35 & 50 after discovering just how sharp this lens is. Where you will see a difference between the 24-105L II and the 24-70L 2.8 is at 24mm. This is where the 24-70 2.8L II really is the king with the least amount of distortion.

The 24-105 both version I & II have IS which can certainly become very handy but I haven't personally had any issue with newer cameras with low noise ISO.

If you're still interested in the 24-70 2.8L II, you might want to check out CanonPriceWatch. They're selling this lens for 1619 from an authorized dealer new.

Can't say enough positive about this lens. It's simply an amazing piece of optics.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

Ihave the 24-70 II and like it. See if you can get a deal thru Greentoe. I did. 1500.00

Nalu Loc: Southern Arizona

You guys seem to know what you are talking about with these lenses, so I have a question. I need to consider a lens or lenses in this focal length for an trip to the Galapagos this summer. My choices in hand, Canon 24-70 EF 2.8 L, Sigma ART 50mm 1.4, Canon 24mm 1.4 L. The zoom of coarse provides more flexibility but I have mostly been a prime guy hence my having the two other lenses in this range. I have considered the 24-105 to give me a little more range, but for sure I will be taking a 100-400 along so the gap between 70 and 100 will be all that I am missing if I go with the 24-70. And then I also have older version of the 70-200 2.8 L that could also come along. My main reason for the Galapagos is the wild life, so the shorter lenses will not get the use as much as my longer lenses. And then there's weight to consider. I think I am answering my own question, take the 24-70, but considering this is "the trip of a life time", do you think there is any need to move to the newer version of the 24-70 or the 24-105? I'm not trying to throw money away here, but I'm scratching my head a bit. Thanks for your thoughts. PS, I use full frame bodies.