A Brief Hands On: Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II

[clicstudio]

I have  no doubt this lens is going to be super sharp..
However, for someone like myself who don't shoot for a living and already own a 24-105, i can't justify buying it with this pricing (although not launched, we know it's expensive)
Maybe when using the the 5Dmk2 or APS-C cameras, an F2.8 will be helpful in low light situations. In fact the i bet if you could use something like an f1.8 or lower it would be even better but this is as good as a zoom gets.

But with the 5Dmk3 (which i own), i'm finding myself not in need of such a lens. I don't find the 24-105 blur, maybe not as sharp but definately sharp enough for most shoots. And with the 5Dmk3's high ISO capabilities, there's really no need for an F2.8 UNLESS you can afford one…the IS on the 24-105 almost makes up for the 1 stop difference. I've shot at ISO12800 with the 24-105 many times with no probems and that's why i took my interest away from the 24-70mk2 simply because i think although it's good to have the f2.8, i don't really need it and won't sacrifice the 105mm just because of it and well, more importantly, the price.

Wait until the new one comes out and get a used 24-70 2.8L. U will be amazed.

[clicstudio]

Well, even if I was in the market for new zoom,
The price is awfully high...
and... the deal breaker for me... (believe it or not) extending zoom.
That hood will be absolutely useless at 70mm... and my money says that canon will make a specific hood for it at 70mm as well.

The most brilliant design that canon EVER came up with..imo... was the hood/zoom system for the 28-70mm (and later the 24-70)

I try not to be a hater... but canon seems to be making some bonehead decisions this year.

I totally agree!

[drjlo]

I try not to be a hater... but canon seems to be making some bonehead decisions this year.

I totally agree!

Can't argue with that unfortunately. 
Pick up the 24-70 II and the new 24 f/2.8 IS, you are ALREADY at $3100 

[JoeDavid]

After cleaning up the 24mm shot a little, the image is not that impressive.  The center is sharp enough but it looks to me like curvature of field is nailing it on both sides of the image.  It's impossible to compare it to the 24-105L since the max f4 aperture DOF would hide some of this.  Maybe he'll buy some of the Tamron 24-70mm VC lenses for the lens rental business and can do an A/B comparison for us.  I'd give up a little center sharpness for better sides/corner performance at the wider apertures plus the VC would be a nice addition (and then there's the price...).

As for the noise, the OP needs to comment on that one.  The noise levels out of my 5DM3 bodies isn't nearly that bad unless underexposed and then corrected...

[1982chris911]

Well seeing those two pics I am just not impressed by the sharpness in the far out corners. That is in no way as good a 70-200mm f2.8L IS II and the hood design of the new lens is also not that great if you think about great protection from raindrops the old design offers. Guess my 24-70 MKI will stay with me for much longer ( I am probably one of the happy few who really got a great quality copy, as I did never experience any problems with it)... It also works very well on the 5D MKIII so no need to update ...

Seeing this mini review it looks like my money will go into a 17mm TSE instead of this one as I really don't see a point in getting it if the corner sharpness is not completely stellar compared to the older MKI design...   

[canonian]

Not impressed by these sample images.  Feeling like they're just snapshots without any aim for really testing the lens.  Also, it's probably still a prototype version.  My version 1 of the 24-70 was great when I first bought it, but after a few years of heavy use it really started becoming unreliable and more than half the images shot with it were soft.  Sent it in 3 times to get re-calibrated but it continued to just s_ck 

I have the version II on pre-order and wish Canon would get to shipping them.  When announced, it was supposed to start shipping in April, for cryin' out loud!

[pwp]

That certainly isn't the prettiest hood on the block but who cares? Will your clients even notice? If the IQ is there as expected, I might finally get a 24-70 that is worth keeping. I've been Mr Unlucky with the 24-70 f/2.8 classic, three copies and all huge disappointments. Right now I use an unexpectedly good 24-105 f/4is as a stop-gap until the 24-70II ships. And I'll be keeping the 24-105 when I get the 24-70II, for some jobs I value it's reach and of course the IS.

PW

[Canon Rumors]

All images were straight conversions without adjustment from a default LR4 setup. I had NR turned off in the camera.

It was a horrible environment to make a photo, and in no way did I intend this to be a true test of the performance of the lens.

[Daniel Flather]

...no way did I intend this to be a true test of the performance of the lens.

This is the Internet, and everything you read and see is true; your snapshots will be taken as scientific evidence. 

[birtembuk]

Cant' wait to get one. Even if this means I have to buy a 5d3 together with it ... 

[FunPhotons]

I used to have the 20-70 I until I sold it. Nice lens, heavy though and the new one is spendy. I now have the 24-105 that I got with my 5DMKII. I didn't think much of it (gah, must be mediocre since its a kit lens) until I realized that my best shots were coming with that lens. Now it's the  one most often on my camera (next to the 16-35 II when I'm doing landscapes)

No interest in an updated 24-70, more expensive, heavier, limited focal range, no IS, but it's 2.8 (no biggie) ...

[Dylan777]

That certainly isn't the prettiest hood on the block but who cares? Will your clients even notice? If the IQ is there as expected, I might finally get a 24-70 that is worth keeping. I've been Mr Unlucky with the 24-70 f/2.8 classic, three copies and all huge disappointments. Right now I use an unexpectedly good 24-105 f/4is as a stop-gap until the 24-70II ships. And I'll be keeping the 24-105 when I get the 24-70II, for some jobs I value it's reach and of course the IS.

PW

+1....after 3 copies - I have no luck with v1. I have alot of hope in v2. If not, 50mm L or 35mm L will be on my purchase list.

[Jamesy]

I was at the same show on the same day and played with the same combo and it seemed very well balanced on the 5D3. I also played with it on the 1DX shooting at 14FPS - holy smokes - it nearly jumped out of my hand it is so fast!

Back to the 24-70, as I said it seemed nicely balanced and the zoom/focus rings were smooth. I asked if it was a 'production' model and was told yes. FWIW, I also played with the Tamron 24-70 IS at the same show and the IS seemed very smooth in the view finder and once I turned it off it was shaky - so that is positive. Optically the Canon 24-70 Mk.II will kick its butt.

[pwp]

Just had another think about that unpretty hood as I looked glumly at the gaffer tape holding the hood onto my 24-70 f/2.8 MkI. If the new hood actually stays put like the one on the 70-200 f/2.8isII I'll be thrilled.

It's hard to tell from the photos, but I hope the larger top & bottom petals are flat enough to be able to put the lens down face first with the hood on without it falling over. This is handy when changing lenses. Lenses that topple over like the 24 f/1.4II are mildly irritating in this regard. But hey, if the new hood will stay on the lens without gaffa tape much will be forgiven.

PW

[Jamesy]

The hood look almost identical to the 17-55 hood, which was fine however I never placed the camera on it and left it that way unless one hand was holding the body - unlike the hoods on my 85/1.8, 135L and 70-200/4/IS - I routinely will leave the camera lens down on those hoods.