April 16, 2014, 01:10:51 PM

Author Topic: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS  (Read 14181 times)

mackguyver

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1472
  • Who Dares Wins
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #45 on: December 30, 2013, 04:03:45 PM »
I'm guessing Canon were unable to produce the improvements seen in the 24-70 f4L if they had given it the 24-105 range without the lens having to retail as the level of the 24-70II.

Given the level of engineering expertise Canon has, I somehow doubt that - but I find it much more likely they want people to have more reason to buy a "natural" focal length addon of 70-200 or 70-300 ... with the overlapping 24-105 you can do ok, but as stated above a lot of times 24-70 is too short for a complete setup.
...and the 16-35 will become a 16-24 for the same reasons ;).  Well, then again, it worked for Nikon by adding 2mm...
EOS M | 5D III | 1D X
EF 24 1.4L II | 50 1.2L | 85 1.2L II | 180 3.5L Macro | 300 2.8L IS II 16-35 2.8L II | 24-70 2.8L II | 70-200 2.8L IS II
TS-E 24 3.5L II :: Extender 1.4x III | 2x III :: EF-M 22 2 | 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #45 on: December 30, 2013, 04:03:45 PM »

Hjalmarg1

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 68
  • Photo Hobbyist
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #46 on: December 31, 2013, 01:31:54 AM »
I was wondering if I should sell my old 24-70mm 2.8L and get this new lens. Has anyone make a side-by-side comparison in terms of IQ?

Regards
Hjalmarg1
5DIII Body, 16-35mm f2.8L II, 24-70mm f2.8L, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, 100mm f2.8L IS, 35mm f2 IS, extender EF 1.4X II, Flash 580EX II & 270EX II

ahsanford

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 510
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #47 on: December 31, 2013, 01:41:43 AM »
I was wondering if I should sell my old 24-70mm 2.8L and get this new lens. Has anyone make a side-by-side comparison in terms of IQ?

Regards


All of it is here (at least from a sharpness perspective):
http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/01/canon-24-70-f4-is-resolution-tests

As you'll see the F/4 IS is better than the 24-105 and 24-70 I, but not as good as the 24-70 II.

I made the jump from the F/2.8L I to the F/4 IS and I'm quite pleased.  I don't shoot indoor sports, and I don't shoot portraits with that lens, so I had little need for F/2.8 in a standard zoom.

The new F/4 in comparison to the F/2.8L IS is sharper, lighter, shorter in length, and has a very serviceable macro mode if you are in a pinch.  It's a perfect all-in-one lens for travel, hiking, etc.  I am very pleased with the pickup.  And on a lesser note, it doesn't push me to need to get 82mm filters.  Unless I'm shooting with my 100L macro, all my lenses are 58mm or 77mm, which is a nice convenience.

Be advised that the lens does take a toughness downgrade compared to the venerable 24-70 F/2.8L I.  The Mark I is a tank with a lot more metal.  The 24-70 F/4L IS is not poorly constructed by any means, but it's not built for war.  I'd liken it to the 24-105 or the 100L macro -- it's plasticky, but solidly assembled.

- A



Marsu42

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 4089
  • ML-66d / 100L / 70-300L / 17-40L / 600rts
    • View Profile
    • 6D positive spec list
Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #48 on: December 31, 2013, 01:47:25 AM »
I was wondering if I should sell my old 24-70mm 2.8L and get this new lens. Has anyone make a side-by-side comparison in terms of IQ?


Upgrading might make sense if you want to lose weight & gain IS Ășnless you often shoot f2.8 - for sharpness comparisons always look at this widget:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=823&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Hjalmarg1

  • Canon AE-1
  • ***
  • Posts: 68
  • Photo Hobbyist
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #49 on: December 31, 2013, 02:50:40 AM »
I was wondering if I should sell my old 24-70mm 2.8L and get this new lens. Has anyone make a side-by-side comparison in terms of IQ?


Upgrading might make sense if you want to lose weight & gain IS Ășnless you often shoot f2.8 - for sharpness comparisons always look at this widget:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=823&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=101&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0


Thanks! I very seldom shoot protraits with this lens. I found myself most of the time shooting f4-f5.6 for social and family pictures.
Hjalmarg1
5DIII Body, 16-35mm f2.8L II, 24-70mm f2.8L, 70-200mm f2.8L IS II, 100mm f2.8L IS, 35mm f2 IS, extender EF 1.4X II, Flash 580EX II & 270EX II

dilbert

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 2358
    • View Profile
Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #50 on: December 31, 2013, 08:39:36 AM »
So why introduce the 24-105 in the first place?

My only guess it were other times back then when Canon had a different marketing approach, they wanted a complete ff 5d2 solution with one lens to keep the system affordable. Not that everyone and his cat has a cheaper 6d ff camera and Canon is on the money grab they probably feel customers can be nudged into buying two lenses.

The 24-105 was introduced with the original 5D in 2005.

The 24-105 vs 24-70 L IS really is a matter of personal preference. Greater range vs subtly better resolution. I have both ( through Building Panoramics ) and I'm torn between the two. The new lens is definitely better but as a general purpose 'do everything' lens I use 105 a lot.

And having such a good general purpose lens more than likely led to fewer lens sales.

I'm with others that see the 24-105 meaning less telephoto zooms sold and thus bad for business.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Review - Canon EF 24-70 f/4L IS
« Reply #50 on: December 31, 2013, 08:39:36 AM »