Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

RuneL

EOS RP
Nov 23, 2010
201
0
Just thought I'd add something that was missing.
First: 24-70MM @24mm F/7.1
Second: 24-70MM @46mm F/2.8
Third: 24-70MM @57mm F/2.8

Edit and afterthought: Don't know if only new/rumored lenses should be here... Can add 70-200 2.8, 50 1.2 and 16-35 2.8 if needed.
 

Attachments

RuneL

EOS RP
Nov 23, 2010
201
0
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

Felt I should add something further that shows a bit more detail.

This is taken 70MM 2.8 lighting is a soft box.



@ 70 mm, f 4
 

Attachments

D

dwward

Guest
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

I've got it bad for this lens. :p

I have the EF 24-105 f/4L which I love and use as my 'walking around' lens. The 24-70 is bigger and heavier and overlaps the range of the 24/105, albeit faster. So, every time I'm about to hit the buy button on Amazon, I talk myself out of it because I just can't think of why I need the faster lens. And now, with talk of an update,....

But I'm about to begin a project of photographing Saint Louis at night. I want to spend a lot of the coming summer doing this. My camera for this job will be the 5DM2. Don't I REALLY NEED the 24/70 for that project? My 50mm 1.4 won't be enough, right? And the 24/105 is too slow, right? In fact, maybe I need the new 5DM3 with the new 24-70 II?
 
R

RichFisher

Guest
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

dwward said:
I've got it bad for this lens. :p

In fact, maybe I need the new 5DM3 with the new 24-70 II?
Go for it. Eat mac & cheese if a month if you need to cut costs. Turn down the thermostat and wear and extra sweater. I'll buy both if (when) they are announced - but only after a few months so the early productions models are gone.

Rich
 
L

Lamper

Guest
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

Its a great lens - no question about it.

The 24-105 is equally as good and the the debate over 1 stop is pretty useless as the 24-105 has IS.

What is important though is the Depth of Field and the quality of bokeh. At f/4 you will need some distance behind your subject to get as much blur as you would have at f/2.8 - hence its popularity as a wedding lens.

As stated before - wear more jumpers, eat less, sell your body - its L quality glass and you get what you pay for!!
 

Moderator1

EOS 6D MK II
Nov 30, 2010
841
7
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

dwward said:
I've got it bad for this lens. :p

I have the EF 24-105 f/4L which I love and use as my 'walking around' lens. The 24-70 is bigger and heavier and overlaps the range of the 24/105, albeit faster. So, every time I'm about to hit the buy button on Amazon, I talk myself out of it because I just can't think of why I need the faster lens. And now, with talk of an update,....

But I'm about to begin a project of photographing Saint Louis at night. I want to spend a lot of the coming summer doing this. My camera for this job will be the 5DM2. Don't I REALLY NEED the 24/70 for that project? My 50mm 1.4 won't be enough, right? And the 24/105 is too slow, right? In fact, maybe I need the new 5DM3 with the new 24-70 II?
The 24-105mm L was the first I bought for my 40D. I tried five times to upgrade it to a 24-70L, and each lens had a worse IQ. i tested them on sturdy tripods with mirror lockup and fast shutter speeds to get the best possible IQ. The IQ was reasonably good, but not by comparison with my 24-70. At the time I also had a 5D and the FF images looked better, as you would expect. Finally, I gave up and still use my 24-105..

If you buy one, be sure that you can return it or exchange it a few times until you get a good one. good ones can be great, but I never was able to find one.
 

akiskev

EOS RP
Dec 11, 2010
329
4
www.flickr.com
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

I haven't tested extensively the 24-105, so I can't compare it with the 24-70 but I can tell you what I like about 24-70.
1. f/2.8.
2. Pleasing colors and contrast without the need of post processing.

Sharpness was never an issue to me because I'm not a pixel-peeping nerd. I just want to take nice shots.


24-70 @24mm f/2.8.
 
H

Heidrun

Guest
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

I almost never use my 24-70 on f.2,8. But if they did make the 24-105 with the same hood as the 24-70. I would maybe change because i would then have a bigger zoom range than the 24-70.
Anyway. Here is a shot with the 24-70
 

Attachments

Redreflex

EOS T7i
Feb 21, 2011
90
0
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

Heidrun said:
I almost never use my 24-70 on f.2,8. But if they did make the 24-105 with the same hood as the 24-70. I would maybe change because i would then have a bigger zoom range than the 24-70.
Anyway. Here is a shot with the 24-70
Very interesting effect. How did you convert it from an image to this?
 

akiskev

EOS RP
Dec 11, 2010
329
4
www.flickr.com
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

Redreflex said:
Heidrun said:
I almost never use my 24-70 on f.2,8. But if they did make the 24-105 with the same hood as the 24-70. I would maybe change because i would then have a bigger zoom range than the 24-70.
Anyway. Here is a shot with the 24-70
Very interesting effect. How did you convert it from an image to this?
It's called HDR and destroys nice images everyday :D:D:D:D
 

Redreflex

EOS T7i
Feb 21, 2011
90
0
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

akiskev said:
Redreflex said:
Heidrun said:
I almost never use my 24-70 on f.2,8. But if they did make the 24-105 with the same hood as the 24-70. I would maybe change because i would then have a bigger zoom range than the 24-70.
Anyway. Here is a shot with the 24-70
Very interesting effect. How did you convert it from an image to this?
It's called HDR and destroys nice images everyday :D:D:D:D
I don't see HDR in the programme I use - Aperture for Mac. It's a Photoshop function?
 
H

Heidrun

Guest
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

Its not HDR. I use aperture and uses some of my own technique
 

akiskev

EOS RP
Dec 11, 2010
329
4
www.flickr.com
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

Redreflex said:
akiskev said:
Redreflex said:
Heidrun said:
I almost never use my 24-70 on f.2,8. But if they did make the 24-105 with the same hood as the 24-70. I would maybe change because i would then have a bigger zoom range than the 24-70.
Anyway. Here is a shot with the 24-70
Very interesting effect. How did you convert it from an image to this?
It's called HDR and destroys nice images everyday :D:D:D:D
I don't see HDR in the programme I use - Aperture for Mac. It's a Photoshop function?
I ll help you a bit.
 
H

Heidrun

Guest
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

akiskev said:
Redreflex said:
akiskev said:
Redreflex said:
Heidrun said:
I almost never use my 24-70 on f.2,8. But if they did make the 24-105 with the same hood as the 24-70. I would maybe change because i would then have a bigger zoom range than the 24-70.
Anyway. Here is a shot with the 24-70
Very interesting effect. How did you convert it from an image to this?
It's called HDR and destroys nice images everyday :D:D:D:D
I don't see HDR in the programme I use - Aperture for Mac. It's a Photoshop function?
I ll help you a bit.

So wrong can you be
 

Redreflex

EOS T7i
Feb 21, 2011
90
0
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

akiskev said:
Redreflex said:
akiskev said:
Redreflex said:
Heidrun said:
I almost never use my 24-70 on f.2,8. But if they did make the 24-105 with the same hood as the 24-70. I would maybe change because i would then have a bigger zoom range than the 24-70.
Anyway. Here is a shot with the 24-70
Very interesting effect. How did you convert it from an image to this?
It's called HDR and destroys nice images everyday :D:D:D:D
I don't see HDR in the programme I use - Aperture for Mac. It's a Photoshop function?
I ll help you a bit.
What do you mean?
 
H

Heidrun

Guest
Re: EF 24-70mm 2.8L

Redreflex said:
Heidrun said:
Its not HDR. I use aperture and uses some of my own technique
Care to share? Thanks
I pull some handle. Remove the colours ad put them back in again. Uses many of the things that is in aperture 3