ldmarsh

Does anyone have experience with this lens and the reason it does not come with an image stabilizer. I will use it on a 5DMarklV. Comments appreciated.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

This is Canon's premier zoom lens as sharp at f/2.8 as any aperture. As sharp as L-series primes within the zoom range. It's already a large piece of equipment where adding IS adds both weight and size (and cost).

If you need IS assistance at speeds 1/20 through 1/80 while handholding, consider the well-regarded f/4 IS version.

ldmarsh

That makes sense. Thanks for the response. I will enjoy the lens I am sure.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The Tamron VC version of 24-70 f/2.8 is stabilized. It’s not Canon, but it is a great lens if low light stability is important in your work. 6-year warranty... about half the price.

khorinek

I used this lens for years. It is one of the sharpest lens Canon makes. I (regrettably) sold it and bought the f/4 version as I didn't use f/2.8 that much, I wish I still had it. Rumor has it, Canon is coming out with a IS version soon.

https://www.canonrumors.com/tag/ef-24-70-f2-8l-is/

Notorious T.O.D. Loc: Harrisburg, North Carolina

I have this lens and agree with CHG's comments. Very nice lens if you can afford the cost.

johntaylor333

Plus the f/4 has an almost-macro (0.7X) close focusing feature that I love.

Jakebrake Loc: Broomfield, Colorado

The Tamron VC version of 24-70 f/2.8 is a great lens IMO, and rarely leaves my 5D Mk IV. Being kinda old at 73, I developed some tremors and IS/VC is essential in all of my lenses.

conigk

By far my favorite lense.

MountainDave

I worried a little about lack of IS before buying this lens but it's a total non issue. I also have the 5D IV and found I can use quite high ISO without objectionable noise so I've been able to hand hold in very low light. This is a fabulous lens not just in terms of sharpness but fast, accurate, consistent autofocus and great color rendition. One reviewer called it the zoom all other zooms are judged against. It blows away the 24-105 F4L II I owned before it.

JohnH3 Loc: Auburn, AL

I have the f2.8 24-70 and the f4 version of the of the lens. It took me a while to understand the purpose of IS. It is to stabilize me not the subject. Sadly, I have to admit that for a while, I misunderstood the purpose of IS. The purpose of IS on a given lens is to allow you to use a slower shutter speed in an attempt to avoid motion blur using a smaller aperture for a given shot. Thus, with f2.8, you really don’t need it to the same degree as with a f4 lens. I occasionally do turn it on when using the f4 version in lower light conditions. However, not much is sharper than the EF 24-70 f2.8 series II version of the lens. I am glad I bought it. It was worth the additional cost.

ldmarsh

A big thank you for all the response to my question re IS for the 24-70mm f2.8. I am feeling much better after reading all the comments and am sure I will enjoy the lens. I have found this forum excellent in having questions answered from experienced photographers. Thanks again for the input.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM "II" is one of the finest "standard" zooms money can buy. Some reviewers liken it to "a bag full of premium primes", referring to the EF 24mm f/1.4L, 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.2L and 85mm f/1.4L lenses, no doubt.

If you really want IS, the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM comes VERY close to matching the f/2.8 II lens' image quality. Of course, it can't render quite as strong background blur. However, the f/4, IS lens is considerably less expensive ($900 instead of $1600), smaller, and lighter. Plus the f/4, IS lens is exceptionally close focusing. It's able to to do near macro 0.70X magnification. This is more than 3X higher magnification than is possible with any of the f/2.8 lenses, Canon or third party.

Compare the lenses for yourself... You can see how these two lenses perform at different focal lengths and apertures with magnified test shots side-by-side using the Image Quality tool. You also can compare them with the various third party options:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=823&Sample=0&CameraComp=453&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Bryan's reviews of both the 24-70mm f/2.8 "II" and the 24-70mm f/4 "IS" lenses are comprehensive and informative, too:

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-II-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Personally I've got the earlier version of the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L (still a superb lens, too).... I will be buying the f/4L IS lens eventually. (I'll pair it up with EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM and EF 100-400mm L IS "II" lenses as a reasonable size/weight kit for hiking and travel.)

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Those rumors have been floating around for years.

The most recent news is that there will be an RF 24-70mm f/2.8L with IS (for the full frame mirrorless Canon, not their DSLRs). Canon filed a patent for this lens in January and confirmed it in a mid-February announcement. The full announcement of this and five other RF lenses (in addition to the four existing ones) currently slated to become avail. can be seen here: https://global.canon/en/news/2019/20190214.html

There is no indication other than vague rumors and some wishful thinking that there may be or ever will be a similar EF lens in the works for the DSLRs.

MountainDave

I was considering the F4 IS but the reviews noted it was weakest at 50mm which is what I use most. I suspect it is pretty comparable to the 24-105 F4L IS II which I found disappointing, especially compared to the 16-35 and 100-400 you mention which I also own.