24 - 70mm f/2.8 L I or II

[Aperture]

I am an advance hobby photographer, mostly I shoot landscapes, family portraits and some macro

currently I own 16 - 35 f/2.8 II L, 70 - 200 f/2.8 II L and 100 mm f/2.8 L macro and a 5D Mark II

I have been thinking of adding 24 - 70 to my list for shooting both, family portraits and landscapes when I travel,

My dilemma is should I get version I or II ?

I wonder if version II is worth the price $2300, also version I is a proven lens and is already perfect

Please help me understand why one should pay extra $1000 more for version II

Thank you

 

[Random Orbits]

I'd wait for the reviews to come out for version II before buying anything in that range, especially if you can afford version II. Version I is not perfect and can use some improvement. The MTF comparison suggests that the difference should be significant but we'll find out once it comes out.

 

[birdman]

Such a large price difference. I would probably go with the older 28-70L, which is said to be super, super great.

 

[Bosman]

I am an advance hobby photographer, mostly I shoot landscapes, family portraits and some macro

currently I own 16 - 35 f/2.8 II L, 70 - 200 f/2.8 II L and 100 mm f/2.8 L macro and a 5D Mark II

I have been thinking of adding 24 - 70 to my list for shooting both, family portraits and landscapes when I travel,

My dilemma is should I get version I or II ?

I wonder if version II is worth the price $2300, also version I is a proven lens and is already perfect

Please help me understand why one should pay extra $1000 more for version II

Thank you

If you have to have the best like me you get the new one. However, i have been using the version one since 2006 and i have to say it really is perfect. I am not upgrading to the new 24-70. Id rather get a 24 1.4. Ive checked my metadata and the most used focal lengths are 24, 50, 70, 135, 200. I could use the 24 on one 5d and the 50 on another for most shots and use the 70-200 for some portraits and wedding journalism. all with incredible bokeh.

 

[Jettatore]

I have version I and a great copy of it. It's sharp, focuses fast, feels great. It's not a beast like a big tele-lens, but it is heavy and depending on how much you shoot even the slight weight reduction of the new version might be worth it in the long run not to mention what other benefits it might have to IQ. If you are not worried about the weight, a good copy of version 1 is an amazing lens so I would not worry. I've taken a lot of great shots with it and have seen the results of photographers much better than myself do simply amazing things with it.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=173736&page=615

I'd also give the 24-105 IS some serious consideration. Unless subject stopping + zooming in low light is required, it's also a top performer. http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=142974&page=347

 

[roumin]

I had a similar dilemma, but since the 24-70 version 2 is still not out, I picked up a like new version one from craig's list for $1,100. Worst case scenario: if I don't like it and want to buy version 2, I could easily sell it for close to what I bought it for and buy the new one.

On a side note, I am not a professional photographer and can't justify my obsession with high-end gear. I just tell myself that I am worth it - and that is why UPS is bringing me my 5D3 tomorrow (like i really need it)

 

[fotoworx]

I love my 24-70mm V1......no way in the world would I fork out more $$$ just to own VII when V1 is for me perfect.

 

[wickidwombat]

I would say neither get a good 50mm
the 16-35 owns the wide end and from 70 up you have the 70-200
a 50 fill the gap nicely

 

[Bosman]

I had a similar dilemma, but since the 24-70 version 2 is still not out, I picked up a like new version one from craig's list for $1,100. Worst case scenario: if I don't like it and want to buy version 2, I could easily sell it for close to what I bought it for and buy the new one.

On a side note, I am not a professional photographer and can't justify my obsession with high-end gear. I just tell myself that I am worth it - and that is why UPS is bringing me my 5D3 tomorrow (like i really need it)

HAHAAHHAHA! Send me some cash and have a new obsessions of helping people financially!

 

[roumin]

Bosman, You got it. Would like some frensh fries with that too

How about I send you a picture of the cash with my new 5D3 in stupid high ISO.

 

[Trevor]

Get the version II

It's smaller and apparently amazing MTF results ... you'll keep it for 5 years - think of the cost per year of ownership.

 

[Seamus]

Thanks guys, I was torn between getting version1 now or waiting for v2. I decided to wait and see the reactions when v2 is released. That will give me time to think about getting the 16-35 instead...

 

[Kamera Obscura]

V 1 taken today.

dario.

 

[Kamera Obscura]

V1 taken today 2.

dario.

 

[dturano]

short answer, v1 is a great lens, get it used or new or white box and you'll enjoy it, no budget issues v2 all the way.

long answer
Seems like you have a pretty good range of focal lengths with your current equipment. I have the V1 and love it, if i had the coin I would get V2 in a minute, the good thing my V1 has great value and when i have some extra coin i can sell and get a v2. Personally I would grab a V1 used if i was on a budget, if not V2. Im actually really interested in the new Tamron when more info comes out, i have never really liked tamron, i always had sigma, when i got extra money i got canon but recently borrowed a sigma 70-200mm 2.8 and fell in love. reminding me you can find great value in 3rd party vendors. I have the 7d, i went from the old sigma 24-70 which was great, to the 24-70mm v1 but it sits off my camera because i got the canon 17-55mm f/2.8 and love it. With my 5dmk3 on the way the 24-70mm will be back off my shelf and in action. Selling the 7d, 17-55mm but still have some simgas that will work great on the new camera.

I have no clue when this is set to launch but seems promising.
Tamron develops full-size, high-speed standard zoom with built-in image stabilization – SP 24-70mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A007)

Either way you'll be happy, i always find pros and cons in a new lens. I love places like this to post and ask other users, but unfortunately i find reviews online are very strict, copies vary, and people expect to much from different products. I find always better to take all infer and reviews with a grain of salt, if possible go to a good local store, and ask if you can use a 24-70mm v1 and v2 bring your camera and take sample shots in the store. I actually bring a friend, niece, nephew, wife, etc to have some subjects. Good thing about that is you can ask the salesperson to not sell the copy they let you try incase you love it you know you can get that copy. Or if you don't have access rent one and see what you think.

 

[JR]

get the mark II if you have the budget...it will last a long time...I am waiting to try it myself and maybe replace a couple of prime by it!

 

[vuilang]

V 1 taken today.

dario.

WAAAWWWW..... Cant believe you post such a poorly processed photo as an example and be proud of it.. the photo itself is not bad, just the Post.

 

[Kamera Obscura]

Well, we all look at art differently. I like it on my screen.

Am I proud of it? as you say I am?

dario.

 

[7enderbender]

I am an advance hobby photographer, mostly I shoot landscapes, family portraits and some macro

currently I own 16 - 35 f/2.8 II L, 70 - 200 f/2.8 II L and 100 mm f/2.8 L macro and a 5D Mark II

I have been thinking of adding 24 - 70 to my list for shooting both, family portraits and landscapes when I travel,

My dilemma is should I get version I or II ?

I wonder if version II is worth the price $2300, also version I is a proven lens and is already perfect

Please help me understand why one should pay extra $1000 more for version II

Thank you

Good question. Looks as if Canon tried to make an excellent lens even better optically. Given that it is lighter I'd be concerned that the new version doesn't have the build quality any longer like the version I. Yes, I know even that one had issues on occasion. Making things more plasticky seems to be the way these days.

The lenses are good optically but I'm still underwhelmed with the feel and some details of my EF lenses - including L lenses. The original 24-70 seems to be on the better side with this.

 

[psycho5]

I sold both a 28-135 IS/USM and 70-200 F4L IS/USM to help fund the new lens. I used to have v1 and sold it a year ago since the 28-135 seemed to have the equivalent sharpness, but missed f/2.8.

that being said, the MTF charts look amazing and i'm sure the price justifies it. the focus lock is welcomed. Something I hated with the 28-135 is the lens creep is downright disgusting. it wasn't that bad with the old 24-70, but still happened.

if you compare the MTF charts between the old version and the new from canon's website, there is a strong contrast between the two and IMHO, the new one is silly sharp. The MTF even outshines the MTF of the new 70-200 2.8 is II.

I'm confident once people start using the new version once its out, any other lenses they have between 24 and 70mm will end up on ebay.