EF 24-70 F/2.8L II USM on 7D

[magic koala]

I've been shooting Xmas card portraits the last 3 weeks and I always bring the people to the same park with the same equipment.
I have the 135mm on the 5DMK3 and the new 24-70mm on the 7D. I prefer the 135mm when I'm outdoors but I have the zoom just in case I need to go a little wide and a little closer.
I don't make money off my photos and I do very little post processing. I can't really tell any difference in practical image quality with the 24-70mm against my 24-105mm and 17-55mm.
Of course, I appreciate the f/2.8 over the f/4, the weight and the build/reach over the 17-55.

I'd say the 24-70mm works great on the 7D but if you're an amateur like me and would like to save some money, other zooms might fit your needs for less money.

I will say that I can tell the difference between the new 24-70mm and the prior 24-70mm. I really disliked using the older version due to its weight and it just was not responsive in low light. I definitely have more keepers wit the new one.

[gcmj45acp]

Hi everybody,

I have 7D + EF-S 10-22mm & i plan to buy the new EF 24-70 F/2.8L II USM, but im not sure this lens can give the top IQ on crop sensor like 7D.

Anybody 7D owner have this lens? maybe you can share your photo/review about this lens.

Thanks.

From all I've heard, the new 24-70LII is a significant step up from the original 24-70L I have run on my 7D.  If that's the case, I think you'll be quite happy.  If I knew then what I know now, I don't know that I'd have bothered dumping my 10-22mm since I basically paid twice as much money to get similar performance out of the 16-35LII on my 5DmkII.

[Zlatko]

17-55mm all the way cracking lens. Unless you plan on going full frame, then i would say get the 24-70mm MKI because the MKII IMO isnt worth another £1000!!!! Insane. Regardless how much better it is it isnt £1000 better.

I had bad luck with the 17-55 as the IS motor failed while still under warranty.  Image quality was excellent, but my impression was that the lens didn't seem to have a build quality to match its price.  The new 24-70 II is expensive, but both image quality and build quality seem to be a match for the price.

[EYEONE]

IQ wise it'll be a fine lens on a 7D.

Focal range wise (as most are saying) it'll be weird at best and annoying at worst. Or maybe I just have a stronger opinion about this than most people. But I found the 24-70mm to be very frustrating on my 7D. It is this strange 38.5-112mm range that almost makes it not usable for it's designed purpose. I guess you have the 10-22mm to give you the UWA/WA shots, but it seems it would force you to change lenses a lot.

I'd recommend the EF-S 17-55mm or EF 16-35mm (25.6-56mm) if you have FF plans farther down the road.

[SJ]

I've been shooting Xmas card portraits the last 3 weeks and I always bring the people to the same park with the same equipment.
I have the 135mm on the 5DMK3 and the new 24-70mm on the 7D. I prefer the 135mm when I'm outdoors but I have the zoom just in case I need to go a little wide and a little closer.
I don't make money off my photos and I do very little post processing. I can't really tell any difference in practical image quality with the 24-70mm against my 24-105mm and 17-55mm.
Of course, I appreciate the f/2.8 over the f/4, the weight and the build/reach over the 17-55.

I'd say the 24-70mm works great on the 7D but if you're an amateur like me and would like to save some money, other zooms might fit your needs for less money.

I will say that I can tell the difference between the new 24-70mm and the prior 24-70mm. I really disliked using the older version due to its weight and it just was not responsive in low light. I definitely have more keepers wit the new one.

thanks friend...

actually i start do some wedding photography as a part time job, u can see my work at www.borneocandid.com.
Keep in mind, i still newbie

[SJ]

IQ wise it'll be a fine lens on a 7D.

Focal range wise (as most are saying) it'll be weird at best and annoying at worst. Or maybe I just have a stronger opinion about this than most people. But I found the 24-70mm to be very frustrating on my 7D. It is this strange 38.5-112mm range that almost makes it not usable for it's designed purpose. I guess you have the 10-22mm to give you the UWA/WA shots, but it seems it would force you to change lenses a lot.

I'd recommend the EF-S 17-55mm or EF 16-35mm (25.6-56mm) if you have FF plans farther down the road.

Thanks..

[SJ]

IQ wise it'll be a fine lens on a 7D.

Focal range wise (as most are saying) it'll be weird at best and annoying at worst. Or maybe I just have a stronger opinion about this than most people. But I found the 24-70mm to be very frustrating on my 7D. It is this strange 38.5-112mm range that almost makes it not usable for it's designed purpose. I guess you have the 10-22mm to give you the UWA/WA shots, but it seems it would force you to change lenses a lot.

I'd recommend the EF-S 17-55mm or EF 16-35mm (25.6-56mm) if you have FF plans farther down the road.

how about my ef-s 10-22 combo with prime like sigma 35mm f/1.4 & ef 50mm f/1.4. but i thought it become more challenging because i never use a prime before. i just use my 10-22mm for landscape & 18-135 for general

[Random Orbits]

how about my ef-s 10-22 combo with prime like sigma 35mm f/1.4 & ef 50mm f/1.4. but i thought it become more challenging because i never use a prime before. i just use my 10-22mm for landscape & 18-135 for general

Primes are nice although I would suggest getting them one at time to see if it works for you.  I currently use primes for the midrange and zooms for the wide and telephoto focal lengths.

[Area256]

IQ wise it'll be a fine lens on a 7D.

Focal range wise (as most are saying) it'll be weird at best and annoying at worst. Or maybe I just have a stronger opinion about this than most people. But I found the 24-70mm to be very frustrating on my 7D. It is this strange 38.5-112mm range that almost makes it not usable for it's designed purpose. I guess you have the 10-22mm to give you the UWA/WA shots, but it seems it would force you to change lenses a lot.

I'd recommend the EF-S 17-55mm or EF 16-35mm (25.6-56mm) if you have FF plans farther down the road.

+1 I used the 24-105mm on a 60D for a while, and also had the 10-22mm - and I found myself changing lenses a lot, and carrying them both around all the time.  The 16-35mm, or even the 17-40mm would seem to make for a better crop camera lens (if you want to leave the full frame option open).

Of course a lot depends on what you shoot.  If you want to have access to the longer range, and don't care much about having the wide angle, the 24-70 could work well..

[azezal]

17-55mm all the way cracking lens. Unless you plan on going full frame, then i would say get the 24-70mm MKI because the MKII IMO isnt worth another £1000!!!! Insane. Regardless how much better it is it isnt £1000 better.

I had bad luck with the 17-55 as the IS motor failed while still under warranty.  Image quality was excellent, but my impression was that the lens didn't seem to have a build quality to match its price.  The new 24-70 II is expensive, but both image quality and build quality seem to be a match for the price.

Similar experience steered me off the efs route,used to love the 17-55,thankfully it wasn't my lens

[M.ST]

The EF 24-70 2.8 II L performs very well on the 7D.

It´s is better than the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS, but the focal lenght start at 24 mm. You have to chance often to the super wide angle lens.

Compared to the price of a 7D and the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS I can´t recommend the lens for APS-C.

If you have the money, want the lens and add a FF camera to your 7D in the next year then get the lens. The image quality of the lens on APS-C is amazing and much better than on FF cameras.

[SJ]

The EF 24-70 2.8 II L performs very well on the 7D.

It´s is better than the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS, but the focal lenght start at 24 mm. You have to chance often to the super wide angle lens.

Compared to the price of a 7D and the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS I can´t recommend the lens for APS-C.

If you have the money, want the lens and add a FF camera to your 7D in the next year then get the lens. The image quality of the lens on APS-C is amazing and much better than on FF cameras.

Thanks friend

[serendipidy]

Recently got the new 24-70L II. At my age, not much looks sharp even with my glasses . Haven't been out much but I did take this photo yesterday. It was very cloudy and windy with some drizzle and haze. 7D @47mm,  f/8.0,  1/1000s,  ISO 100 handheld. PP in Canon DPP.

[BrandonKing96]

I was basically in your situation, except with a 60D (i've got a 10-22 as well as a 70-200 f/4 IS).
I was thinking of getting a 17-55 IS, and I was pleased with the results using it on a 60D for a day.  But then I actually bought the 24-70 II (without even testing it) and I'm not regretting it.  But then again, I am planning to upgrade to full frame in the early quarter of next year.

Even on a crop sensor camera, this lens still has so much potential.  It's just full frame can bring out all it's potential.

Plus, with your 7D (if you're keeping it for a while), you've got a good coverage of focal lengths- 10-22 + 24-70.

[SJ]

I was basically in your situation, except with a 60D (i've got a 10-22 as well as a 70-200 f/4 IS).
I was thinking of getting a 17-55 IS, and I was pleased with the results using it on a 60D for a day.  But then I actually bought the 24-70 II (without even testing it) and I'm not regretting it.  But then again, I am planning to upgrade to full frame in the early quarter of next year.

Even on a crop sensor camera, this lens still has so much potential.  It's just full frame can bring out all it's potential.

Plus, with your 7D (if you're keeping it for a while), you've got a good coverage of focal lengths- 10-22 + 24-70.

My friend BrandonKing96, how about this lens perform at low light?

i mean when you shot using this lens at low light place like church, hall & etc (without using speedlight) at f/2.8, ISO around 800-1600 & shutter 1/125 (base on focal X 1.6 to avoid camera shake when hand held) its still enough light? or need to boost ISO over 1600?

im sorry asking this noob question, because i dont have any lens faster than f/3.5 

btw, thanks for sharing