EF 24-70 f/4L IS & EF 35 f/2 IS Sample Images

[Jesse]

lol they couldn't find a better model or a better photographer?

[Zv]

Amateur hour   

[tron]

Amateur hour   

Hmm, "amateur" lens, pro price 

[Kernuak]

something not right about those 24-70 sample images. no way there is that much distortion. the images have been squashed or something surely? 

Look at jpg, it's all right. Thumbnails are wrong scaled.

Yep, if you look at the large images, the dimensions are completely different and the distortion at 24mm is exceptionally good for a wide to short tele zoom, there certainly appears to be much less barrel distortion than the 24-105.

[lastcoyote]

yeah i was looking at the full rez of the photos.
still seems strangely distorted to me. particularly on the model one.
oh well 

[RLPhoto]

The 24-70 F/4L is more DOA than previously imagined.

[Viggo]

It seems strange to me apparently no one remembers that the Canon sample images have nothing to do with reality. The editing and smearing is crazy.

Please find the 1d X sample pictures of that model in the blue dress or whatever and TELL ME that has anything to do with what the 1d X is capable of producing, I think not.

Those sample images from Canon is only to be looked at for their subject, they might as well be shot with a Ixus V2.

[neuroanatomist]

Those sample images from Canon is only to be looked at for their subject, they might as well be shot with a Ixus V2.

The sample images do definitively show that the lens actually exists (if you believe the EXIF).  Beyond that.....

[Hill Benson]

 That Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 is looking better and better imo!

[Albi86]

Surely doesn't look that sharp @f/5.6 - which is impressive (in the most negative way).

[tron]

The 24-70 F/4L is more DOA than previously imagined.

Very true.

[well_dunno]

  I cannot really see something that justifies the price for an f/4 lens but then... Canon... 

On a separate note, I have been looking at Canon lenses vs da Nikons on photozone. Seems like noinks have significantly more CA. Klaus seem to disregard it suggesting it can be corrected in post-process or da cams can correct it but still, their lenses cost more than canon's corresponding lenses (at least they used to to this year I  think    ) without anything superior but decently placed CA? 

Cheers!

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Darn the one I really wanted to see at full size, the 24mm shot, is the only one they decided to only post at a major downscale.... Same for the 35mm, both are extreme down samples, so you can tell nothing at all about sharpness. Colors look rich at least.

They sure went insane with the NR settings on those 70mm samples, jeez, total wax works. I don't know what is up with Canon and their love for nasty NR. Those, certainly the girl, bright daylight shots with tons of light.

[neuroanatomist]

Darn the one I really wanted to see at full size, the 24mm shot, is the only one they decided to only post at a major downscale....

Downscale...or crop?  If the latter, it would minimize barrel distortion at the wide end.  Would Canon deceive us like that?   

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Surely doesn't look that sharp @f/5.6 - which is impressive (in the most negative way).

Looks like they set sharpness at 0 and NR on High even though the model looks to have been shot at low ISO!