ggenova64

Thanks.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Honestly you may consider the Tamron, it is an excellent lens and it is stabilized. Maybe you should compare the two lenses on DXO Mark, you will see resolution results etc.

markngolf Loc: Bridgewater, NJ

Whoops!! Miss read it. (Originally thought it was 70 - 200 f/2.8 V I & V II) No IS on either version. I had V I and now have V II. I think it is much improved over V I.
Mark

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

The Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L, both version I and II, do not have IS.

Edit: Just saw your correction.

clickety

I purchased the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 G2 to get the stabilization which is very helpful to me. I'm generally quite pleased with the images but make a conscious effort to not go too far beyond 50-60 mm as I feel it softens a bit.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

EF 24-70mm f/2.8L... NO IS
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II... NO IS
EF 24-70mm f/4L IS... not "III" or "II" (there's only been one version of it to date)

All three are superb lenses.

The 24-70/4 is the newest (December 2012), smallest, least expensive and is incredibly close focusing (0.70X). It is the only Canon 24-70mm with IS, uses a 9-curved-blade aperture, weighs 600 grams and uses 77mm filters.

The 24-70/2.8 II was introduced just a little earlier the same year (September, 2012) and many reviewers still call it "one of the very best of it's type". Some said it was like a "bag full of sharp primes". It uses a 9-curved-blade aperture and can focus to 0.21X. Canon revised the lens hood so it's not as huge as the one on the earlier model. This lens is more expensive, weighs 805 grams and uses bigger, more expensive 82mm filters.

The 24-70/2.8 original was intro'd in 2002, was one of the best of it's day and can focus to 0.29X. It uses an 8-curved-blade aperture, uses a rather big lens hood (which works well), weighs 950 grams, and uses 77mm filters.

All three have excellent image quality. Better than any of the third party options, especially when used on full frame cameras that don't crop away lenses' soft corners. Between the two f/2.8, I think the newer one gains a bit of sharpness at the wide end, compared to the earlier... especially when both are used wide open. But in all fairness, 24mm is very, very good even on the earlier lens and they are quite similar through the rest of the range. Wide open the f/4 lens has some very slight softness in the corners around 50mm and just a hint of it at 70mm, but otherwise pretty much matches the sharpness of the two f/2.8 lenses. Stopped down to f/5.6 or f/8, much of the differences disappear.. Of course, the f/4 lens cannot blur down backgrounds quite as much as the f/2.8 lenses.

See for yourself: https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0

Finally, I'd note that the guys at Lensrentals.... who have experience with a large number of each of these lenses.... noted that the original 24-70/2.8 would get out of calibration and need occasional adjustment. Of course, their lenses spend a lot of heir lifespan bouncing around in the back of delivery trucks, going to and from renters. They also probably aren't as carefully treated by renters, as they'd be with their own lenses.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

You already spent a bundle on the original lens. If reviews haven't convinced you that the new version is far superior, why spend more money? I doubt you would notice an improvement in your images. Of course, there are always bragging rights.

"Cost of new lens, $2,300. Bragging to fellow photographers, priceless!"

rydabyk Loc: Florida Panhandle

I don't have the original and I want this lens but I was trying to decide between the two versions. I'm going to pull the trigger later on today or tomorrow on the new version II.

Thanks for all of the replies/help.

Walt

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

I do not have either version, but from what I've seen, read, and heard, version II is far superior, and the differences are not subtle. However, If you want to save some money and some weight, and f/2.8 is not critical, the f/4 version is supposedly a terrific alternative, and as a plus also has image stabilization

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

The newer one focuses a little faster, and is a little sharper. The higher the resolution of your sensor, the more that will matter.

If I recall, neither of these has Image Stabilization. If that is important to you, look at the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2.

rydabyk Loc: Florida Panhandle

Thanks, IS is not critical to me at all :)

rydabyk Loc: Florida Panhandle

Thanks, I was considering the f/4 version pretty hard but since my 16-35 is also an f/4 I think I'll be using this lens quite a bit at night.

Bill Emmett Loc: Bow, New Hampshire

When I was looking for a 24-70mm lens I first checked Canon since I am a confirmed Canon shooter. I immediately looked into my need, and it was for hand held shots in poorly lighted areas. I looked very hard to using the Canon version 1, it did have f2.8, but no IS. So, I looked at competitors, and found Tamron had the lens I was looking for. The Tamron SP, f2.8 VC USM lens fit my bill for my current project at the time. There are other things you have to consider when using a lens which is a low light lens (f2.8) or a lens you my want to save money on, with a f4 aperture. One of these considerations is what you will accept as a photographer. You can up your ISO, and possibly introduce unwanted sensor noise to your images. Use a higher shutter speed and possibly a dim image. Tamron has since my purchase come out with a even better SP f2.8, VC USM, known as G2. I'm strongly considering buying the G2, to replace my current G1 lens. SP is Tamron's monicker for "special glass", which may have reached the level of Canon's "L" quality glass. If you think you are strapped for the cash to buy the lens you need, rent the Tamron G2, and see what it does for your level of photography, and equipment.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

I paid A LOT less than that. From american distributor with US warranty>>>>>>Greentoe

Haydon

You can buy it for 1499 with a US warranty presently. The 2300 was originally listed on release.

A good breakdown can be found at lensrentals which I trust as a source.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/canon-24-70-f4-is-resolution-tests/

The F4 version does have more barrel distortion than the 2.8 although the IS and 0.7 macro mode along with the price difference might shift what to buy.