Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is a Peerless Performer

[Canon Rumors]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/01/canon-ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-is-a-peerless-performer/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/01/canon-ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii-is-a-peerless-performer/">Tweet</a></div>
<strong>According to DXOMark


</strong>DXOMark has completed their review of the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II lens and have found to be the best zoom lens currently in their database.</p>
<p><strong>From DXOMark

</strong><em>“With an DxOMark score of 26, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 MkII is the highest scoring professional fixed-aperture mid-range kit zoom of any brand in the DxO Mark database and comfortably outperforms rivals as well as the firm’s earlier Mark I version, particularly with regard to the sharpness levels across the frame. We’re used to seeing a noticeable deterioration in performance in the outer fields at longer focal lengths even with high-quality optics from the big-name marques but the new Canon bucks that trend.”</em><strong>

</strong></p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Canon-EF24-70mm-f-2.8L-II-USM-A-Peerless-Performer" target="_blank">Read the entire DXO Mark review</a> | <a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/review-canon-ef-24-70-f2-8l-ii/" target="_blank">Read the Canon Rumors Review</a></strong></p>
<p><strong><strong>Buy the Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8L II at: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/843008-USA/Canon_5175B002_EF_24_70mm_f_2_8L_II.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://www.adorama.com/CA2470.html?kbid=64393" target="_blank">Adorama</a> | <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0076BNK30/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0076BNK30&linkCode=as2&tag=canorumo-20" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[Viggo]

It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it :

 

[infared]

I am not a fan of DxO (miss the) Mark...but after the chunk of change I drop on the II Version...all the good reviews I read make the hole in my wallet feel a little better.
It is nice to go out shooting with a midrange zoom that has much less less compromises and that instills confidence.
I am a primes guy...but this is a great lens.

 

[spinworkxroy]

It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it :

Why so much? It doesn't cost that much..

But yes, this is the only zoom lens that i would actually use without thinking twice...it really is that good and i actually stopped using my primes for shoots because of this...i only touch my 85 now becuase that is still better than this

 

[dave]

Remember everyone that DxO reviews are useless and biased towards Nikon.

So DxO saying the 24-70/2.8L II is great means nothing.

Well it's outstanding regardless. DxO's reviews are still rubbish.

 

[bornshooter]

Yeah but the 70-200 v2 sucks lol dxo sucks.

 

[thepancakeman]

Remember everyone that DxO reviews are useless and biased towards Nikon.

So DxO saying the 24-70/2.8L II is great means nothing.

You are correct. "With a DxOMark score of 26"--and that is supposed to mean something? ???

However them saying that it's a great lens does not mean that it isn't (i.e. just because you're paranoid doesn't mean their not out to get you; a broken clock is still right twice a day; even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then, etc.)

 

[Viggo]

It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it :

Why so much? It doesn't cost that much..

But yes, this is the only zoom lens that i would actually use without thinking twice...it really is that good and i actually stopped using my primes for shoots because of this...i only touch my 85 now becuase that is still better than this

When you live in Norway it does...

 

[PhotoCat]

Nikon's AF-S Nikkor 24-70mm f/2.8G ED with a D3X has a score of 24 whatever that means.
Not that far behind considering the Nikon was introduced 2007!

I think the DXO lens score has a lot to do with which camera it is attached to.

 

[iso79]

It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it :

Just start saving up. I sold my Mark I on Craig's List for 1200 so the Mark II only ended up costing me 1k.

 

[Viggo]

It's great no doubt, but I have to pay 3650 USD to get one, so I simply have to live vicariously through the people who own it :

Just start saving up. I sold my Mark I on Craig's List for 1200 so the Mark II only ended up costing me 1k.

Yeah, only have no mk1 to sell. I was going to sacrfice my 24 f1.4 for it, but I just can't sell that hunk of glass, it's just too awesome iin a way the 24-70 couldn't be. So I'm starting from scratch

 

[pierceography]

Hopefully the price of this lens will drop to a more reasonable level in the next year or so. Otherwise, the mark 1 will work just fine for me.

 

[EvilTed]

I got mine from B&H for $2050

Tested my 24mm F/1.4 II at all apertures against it and the F/2.8 performance and up is better with the 24-70, so I sold the 24mm...

ET

 

[spinworkxroy]

Wow, i had no idea it cost that much in Norway or Sweden..
That's really high tax..
I got it under USD2.3k for a local set but i'm in Asia so i guess it's still cheaper to buy here than overseas

 

[kbmelb]

I'm with Viggo. I personally wouldn't trade speed for sharpness.

 

[that1guyy]

This lens is only "peerless" because dXO hasn't reviewed the Tamron 24-70. It said "no rating" for that lens when I searched their database.

 

[Ricku]

In Sweden incl taxes 3016 USD
As a pro 2400USD with VAT deduction
Theres in no problem to buy the lens from US but Canon Europe does not like to take care of the lens from US if something is wrong. And there are a 25% VAT of gods from US if the lens are declared into Sweden in a proper way

So don't declare. ;D

I actually have a friend from Sweden who travels to NYC twice a year. During every visit, he goes to B&H and packs his bag full of gear. He never declares it when he gets back home. Just walks through the customs with a smile on his face.

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I am more interested in a long discussion and comparison of the Tamron 24-70 vs the Canon 24-70 since the Tamron has received so much positive attention. Is the Canon really worth all the extra $$ over the Tamron? That's the question in my mind...

 

[Viggo]

In Sweden incl taxes 3016 USD
As a pro 2400USD with VAT deduction
Theres in no problem to buy the lens from US but Canon Europe does not like to take care of the lens from US if something is wrong. And there are a 25% VAT of gods from US if the lens are declared into Sweden in a proper way

So don't declare. ;D

I actually have a friend from Sweden who travels to NYC twice a year. During every visit, he goes to B&H and packs his bag full of gear. He never declares it when he gets back home. Just walks through the customs with a smile on his face.

I've done that a few times, not myself, but buddies of mine travelling. The problem is, IF you get pulled over at customes it's YOUR responsibillity to prove to them that it has been either declared (if bought from elsewhere) or that you bought it in your country, Norway in this case. That means if I travel with a Norwegian-bought lens, used or new, and I get pulled over on my way back and can't provide a receipt from Norway for the item in question, I have to pay the taxes of NEW retail price. This is even if I buy the item used and it's 10 years old and it's still in sale. So I might save quite a bit with sneaking it in, but if I'm unlucky, it would cost through the teeth to keep it.

The other thing is you can't sneak anything in unless someone you know is actually going to BH, buy online and taxes are autmatically added, and yes, they add taxes to the SHIPPING costs as well.. Greedy bastards...

I shoot my 24 veryvery much between 1.4 and 1.8 and I've tried a 24mm f2.8 for the same type of shots, and it lacks that nice soft 3D-feel the f1.4 gives. However I could use both, because out shooting with flash or something I could change the perspective in 0.1 seconds by zooming and have much more options for my images.

It took my a while back in the day to realize that 24-70 isn't about getting closer, it's about changing the perspective. By then it was already sold.

 

[HoneyBadger]

Just move to Oregon. I never have to pay any sort of tax on my gear.