So Im asking those of you who have the Canon 24-70 L lens how you like it? I have had mine for a year now and I can not say I love it. I really thought I would and I dont? I know some of my friends rave about it and I just dont see the results. I told this to the sales guy at the photography store that sold it to me and he assured me once I went full frame on my camera body I would see a huge difference? I guess my thing is it just doesnt get sharp images for me? It does not have IS and its huge and bulky. Another factor I do not like? Not saying it isnt a great lens, but any others feel this way or is just me? Perhaps my lens has something wrong with it, or its just photographer error on my part;) I do have the Canon 70-200 L F4 with IS and love it! I almost bought the Canon 24-105 f4 with IS instead of the 24-70, but went with the smaller aperture settings on the 24-70. Of course in a perfect world I would own the 70-200 2.8 …but I bought what I could afford at the time.
Thanks for any insight and help, Im really thinking of selling my 24-70...
An amazing lens in my opinion. It's a tool an I've used it go get some great images. I have shot a lot with the 24-105 and it's good too. The 70-200 is one of canons best lens - and for the price the F/4 version is INCREDABLE.
Both tools have different uses, and are cabable of amazing shots! :)
Sorry, but I do not have the 24-70. I do however have the 24-105L, 16-35L 2.8, and 70-200L 2.8 and used them with my old Rebel before I got the 5D Mark II. I can tell you that there was a world of difference in quality when I went full frame. And as far as IS, I find that I really don't use it much anymore and is no longer a must-have on future lenses I get; the high, clean ISOs on modern DSLRs give me quick enough shutter speed that camera movement isn't too much of a factor.
@jcambridge@grizzlysghost Thanks for your input and advice. I have heard the same, once you go full frame, you will see a world of difference. Also not needing the IS as much either. I do have an older Rebel body…sigh. Waiting to purchase my full frame when Im home in the states…until then I will just keep happily shooting along….and practicing more with my 24-70 ;)
@agima Thanks, my friend that uses it for her business and loves it….I do think its my camera and myself….I guess I just need to keep practicing with it.
can you tell me what photos in your album are with the 24-70 L? Im curious also what camera body you are using ...
i used to use the canon 1000D xs and on a few occasions rented L series lenses (70-200 2.8 & 16-35 2.8) at the time I was impressed! they were much better than the kit lens, but now i look back and feel the price is just too high (although pro paid photographers seem to be pretty well to do).
After getting a tax refund last year i was able to take advantage of the huge 30% off of the mk ii, I mostly use the nifty fifty lens and I can honestly say I really enjoy the pair.
If canon lenses are not for you, there are still options ...
-convert the mk ii to attach a leica f/1 (about 3g for the conversion and 3 g for the lens)
@agima oh I am sure its top of the line ... trust me if I could afford it I would boast the entire L series of lenses ... but to be a bit more clear Im living with low income most of my life. And my last sentence of my previous comment was just to say ... anything is possible ... here is the link where i got the idea for conversion. http://www.petapixel.com/2012/10/06/canon-5d-mark-ii-goes-under-the-knife-emerges-as-a-leica/
@eryck I personally love my 70-200 but have the f4 version, cheaper than 2.8, but if you can splurge go for the 2.8. I will look when I get a chance on my photos as to which time I used the 24-70. I think like Brendan said its key good lighting and iso with this lens. I use the Canon XSI body, not the best in low light at times either. I plan on purchasing a Canon full frame in the Spring….thinking the Canon 5d ii or 6d…not sure yet. I just can not get my mind around paying for the Canon iii right now….not making any money, still learning. I could be charging but I dont. I just utilize everyone wanting photos for practice. I will be taking photography classes soon enough.
@staci2171 the detail in those you mentioned are great, Im no pro but it looks like your on the right path. oh and my friend has the 6d and compared to the mk ii ... the mk ii has really awesome qualities. since your already investing in EF (full frame lenses).
I did rent the 24-70 L once with the full frame camera and I did notice some issues with "bad" light but i didnt mention that in the first place since my project was cancelled and all i did was a photo-walk around the block on an overcast day, so I didnt get a fair impression of that lens.
@eryck So you think the Canon 5dii is better in comparison to the Canon 6d? Curious. as they both seem about the same to me, but I have not used either one to know. Thanks for your insight!
I have the 24-70 f/2.8L and it's the lens I use more than any other. I do have a 5D MIII - an upgrade from my old 40D - and there's a definite difference in quality between the two cameras.
Regarding softness, there are tons of factors. First suggestion is to compare it shooting at f/8. On most of the Canon cameras, that will be your sharpest aperture.
Other considerations:
- Set just one focus point instead of allowing the camera to select it. If you control where it focuses, you may find the image to be sharper since it matches your expectations of what should be sharp.
- Don't let the camera do any noise reduction. That is done at the expense of sharpness.
- Use a low ISO.
- Use a shutter speed faster than 1/100th.
- Try test shots using a tripod.
If, with all that, you're still getting soft images, you may indeed have one of the 24-70 lenses that suffered from a soft focus problem. That was supposedly resolved in newer lots, but it was heavily discussed on the Canon forums when it first was released.
@kannafoot Thanks, I do remember hearing about the lens having soft focus problems…hoping mine is not one of them? I get great shots when its on a tripod or my aperture is set a bit higher…Im wondering if I need to have the lens checked and see if there are any issues…cant hurt to get it checked.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
Both tools have different uses, and are cabable of amazing shots! :)
I do know what you are saying with the sharpness, I had this issues when I first got it but found it was really my camera settings.
i used to use the canon 1000D xs and on a few occasions rented L series lenses (70-200 2.8 & 16-35 2.8) at the time I was impressed! they were much better than the kit lens, but now i look back and feel the price is just too high (although pro paid photographers seem to be pretty well to do).
After getting a tax refund last year i was able to take advantage of the huge 30% off of the mk ii, I mostly use the nifty fifty lens and I can honestly say I really enjoy the pair.
If canon lenses are not for you, there are still options ...
-convert the mk ii to attach a leica f/1 (about 3g for the conversion and 3 g for the lens)
http://www.petapixel.com/2012/10/06/canon-5d-mark-ii-goes-under-the-knife-emerges-as-a-leica/
Im sure there are more but have to run. There is a great one of my cat, but I took that with my 50 1.8, I think? lol.
I did rent the 24-70 L once with the full frame camera and I did notice some issues with "bad" light but i didnt mention that in the first place since my project was cancelled and all i did was a photo-walk around the block on an overcast day, so I didnt get a fair impression of that lens.
Regarding softness, there are tons of factors. First suggestion is to compare it shooting at f/8. On most of the Canon cameras, that will be your sharpest aperture.
Other considerations:
- Set just one focus point instead of allowing the camera to select it. If you control where it focuses, you may find the image to be sharper since it matches your expectations of what should be sharp.
- Don't let the camera do any noise reduction. That is done at the expense of sharpness.
- Use a low ISO.
- Use a shutter speed faster than 1/100th.
- Try test shots using a tripod.
If, with all that, you're still getting soft images, you may indeed have one of the 24-70 lenses that suffered from a soft focus problem. That was supposedly resolved in newer lots, but it was heavily discussed on the Canon forums when it first was released.
Thanks for your insight!