The Raw Data: The EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is the Sharpest Zoom Canon Has Ever Made

[victorwol]

I find it hard to believe these "test results"
Partly because i love primes. And if they can make a zoom lens that good they better update every single prime lens they make to be much better cos' they seem to have better technology than before to design lenses.

If canon made a zoom lens that good it's fine with me but it should not be possible to beat primes.
I'm voting for this one to be a hoax! IT IS POSTED ON A RUMOR WEBSITE. It's not really official info.
I can make my own tests and say the 50mm 1.8 is sharper than the new 400mm 2.8L IS II USM.

The link is on a rumor site, and a very respectful one, the author is from a rental house, which as far as I know, it does not sell lenses and does not need a silly hoax to rent them. You can make your tests of course, but who know you? Which reputations have you built for people to believe you? This guy have a reputation and very good reviews and posts about equipment and knows what is talking about. Yiu might disagree, but for that I believe you should have the lens on your hand to call him a liar.

 

[Axilrod]

I don't believe these findings at all...

One... claiming the 24 TS/e is the sharpest lens canon has created....
two... they forget that canon made a 28-70mm 2.8 that consistently beat the 24-70I in all tests...but neglected to track down a copy and compare.

I think this is promo-hype to try and sell an overpriced piece of glass.
$1800 sure...
but 2300 is obscene.

One, you didn't read that correctly, they said the TS-E is the sharpest 24mm Canon has ever produced, which it absolutely is. Two, the EF 28-70mm is long discontinued, why compare it to a lens that no one can easily get and hasn't been in production in 10 years?

And whether or not the price is "obscene" or not is totally subjective, this lens is backordered into oblivion so obviously not everyone feels the same way as you. And the last of the 24-70mm v1's were being sold at $1599, I don't see how you can expect such massive improvements to a lens to only be worth $200.

 

[dave]

Picking this thing up in the morning, we'll see if these results are indeed accurate.

Will you be able to sleep?

 

[drmikeinpdx]

Did you notice that Roger Cicala did not say if the new lens has the magic magnetic rotation detector? You know, the little part that allows the 5D3 and 1DX to have a closed loop autofocus system.

In the comments after the article, Roger hints that he's holding out on us. I'm watching his blog like a hawk until he reveals this critical piece of information!

Fun.

 

[dirtcastle]

It sounds like a perfect rental lens.

 

[M.ST]

I can fully agree to Rogers test. Thank you very much for testing.

If you are a professional photographer get the lens.

In my opinion it´s not to expensive. If you have only to work a day or less as a professional photographers to buy the lens, the price is not a big problem.

 

[Aglet]

Re: The Raw Data: The EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is the Sharpest Zoom Canon Has Ever Mad

Enjoy your onion rind bokeh with the Tamron.

really only a problem with large OOF highlights from what I've seen so far.
The IS is a major selling feature.
-

 

[pwp]

If multiple reviewers come up with similar results and conclusions, Canon has a very welcome winner on it's hands. A single, gushing review generally makes me inclined to wait on verification from other reputable independent reviewers, plus real world photographers feedback.

When the 24-70 f/2.8 replaced the admittedly awful 28-70 f/2.8, the first reviews gushed in a similar tone. But it sure looks like a very strong first impression.

-PW

 

[pj1974]

That is sure one impressive lens from the data that Lensrentals has produced. I didn't expect it to be THAT sharp!!

Canon has in recent years really raised the bar with zoom lenses, some of those with great sharpness include:
EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6
EF 24-105mm f/4 L
EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8
EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 L

Then it appears this lens which came out with an even more exceptional standard in terms of sharpness:
EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L mk II
and this new
EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L mk II continues (or even exceeds?!) that standard.
I had a decent copy of the 28-135mm, but at the long end it needed to be stopped down 1 EV to increase sharpness, saturation and contrast.

Well done Canon with these new lenses. It's definitely a shame for non-pros about the prices... but often one truly does get one pays for. I have the Canon 15-85mm and Canon 70-300mm L, and a bunch of other lenses. The 15-85mm and 70-300mm L that I have are both great, sharp copies. As I'm not looking to go FF at any stage soon, these 2 will do me for a long time to come! 8)

If I was a pro with a FF, I can imagine I'd probably get the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L zoom.... it would be great for many applications... along with a few nice 'big glass' primes!

Paul

 

[Marsu42]

Enjoy your onion rind bokeh with the Tamron.

Well, the Canon mk2 has it too (but to a lesser extent), ye know? But don't let get facts in the way.

Canon has in recent years really raised the bar with zoom lenses

Canon probably knows that the future brings higher mp sensors, and that on both ff and crop very sharp lenses are needed to outresolve the sensor. So while the 24-70ii should be great on 22mp, it'll show its true potential and the difference to the mk1 on a 40mp sensor.

 

[wockawocka]

For those calling shenanigans because the 24-70 beats the primes you guys gotta remember that Canon is consistently developing it's products.

The 24mm TS-E is now three years old. The Mk1 of the 24-70 is what? 10 years old?

These are results perfectly in line with expectations. The 70-200 MkII for example is prime sharp as well. So I expected the 24-70 MkII to be as good if not better as a result.

Do you guys remember just how bad the 24mm TS-E mk1 was? That is a prime but even a kit zoom lens is sharper than that.

 

[Marsu42]

For those calling shenanigans because the 24-70 beats the primes you guys gotta remember that Canon is consistently developing it's products.

... and "updating" the price tag, so if a successor is much more expensive it really is to be expected to have better performance, not just because of technological advance. If Canon had targeted $2000+ when they designed the 24-70mk1 or older primes they would have probably have designed them differently, too.

 

[romanr74]

can't wait to receive my copy. pre-ordered back in march. based on the MTF data and my experience with the really really nice 70-200 f/2.8 II (the MTF data of the 24-70 f/2.8 II is even more impressive) this should be a wonderful lens. i am perfectly aware of the fact that MTF charts don't tell the whole story, but roger's test data seems to be perfectly in line with what the MTF data suggests.

 

[wockawocka]

For those calling shenanigans because the 24-70 beats the primes you guys gotta remember that Canon is consistently developing it's products.

... and "updating" the price tag, so if a successor is much more expensive it really is to be expected to have better performance, not just because of technological advance. If Canon had targeted $2000+ when they designed the 24-70mk1 or older primes they would have probably have designed them differently, too.

What Canon lists their price and and what actually gets charged is completely different.

Example. Speedlite 600EX-RT - List price RRP is what? £629?
But I can buy it in the UK, with a VAT receipt for £429.99

The list price of the 70-200 mkII on launch was £2499, I paid £1349 - UK purchase, VAT receipt given.

The estimated price in the UK from my supplier is £1800 for the 24-70 MKII, which is a £500 increase over the Mk1 but it's only just came out.

Digital Rev are price scalping by charging £2499 which is £200 more than the RRP.

I wish everyone would stop bitching about pricing. Like the RRP means a damn thing.

It's the same as how a lot of guys in the UK complain about Ipads being cheaper in the states. The fools look at the prices less sales Tax. Account for that and the prices are almost the same as the UK.

 

[infared]

I find it hard to believe these "test results"
Partly because i love primes. And if they can make a zoom lens that good they better update every single prime lens they make to be much better cos' they seem to have better technology than before to design lenses.

If canon made a zoom lens that good it's fine with me but it should not be possible to beat primes.
I'm voting for this one to be a hoax! IT IS POSTED ON A RUMOR WEBSITE. It's not really official info.
I can make my own tests and say the 50mm 1.8 is sharper than the new 400mm 2.8L IS II USM.

you are a clowning i guess...

first... the test where not done by a rumor site.

second... new materials and technology help making better lenses.
look how old you beloved primes are....

and yes...some people need to be in denial. LOL! Roger is MUCH respected in the Canon community. Rightly so. He also always gives us the great insight he has in handling MANY samples of the same lens. Which is invaluable and is information that I can RARELY get elsewhere.

 

[Peter C Photography]

I don't have any new numerical data to add to the discussion for sharpness etc, but I will say that after checking one out at my local camera shop this afternoon (I was a little stunned that they still had one as they only got one copy and no one had jumped on it yet), the "user experience" is absolutely fantastic. I admit that I haven't shot with the mk1 version of this zoom but the new version is lightning fast while focusing (and that's on a 5d mark II, the shop didn't have a 5dIII out for me to try with). The balance and feel are both wonderful and I ended up across the street scouring through Lightroom on my laptop to see what % of pictures i've taken with my 24-105 f/4L that were at a low enough shutter speed that they would have benefited enough from the IS to make a real difference. I've been wishing I had a bigger aperture on the 24-105 for a while and I think I'm probably going to pull the trigger on this one and sacrifice the extra reach on the zoom for the bigger aperture and what most data point to be a sharper lens.

- I haven't shot at 70mm on a non IS lens before, can anyone provide any feedback on how slow they liked shooting on the mk1 version of this lens?
- When Canon has released lenses that have technical flaws or faults that they eventually fix, how long after the release are these typically discovered? In other words, how much of a danger is there in being a first mover here? I know we don't know until we know, but there are a lot of smart people on this forum with far more experience than me, so I'm always looking to learn off you guys.

 

[Marsu42]

What Canon lists their price and and what actually gets charged is completely different.

I don't know about the US, but in Germany the street retail price of current Canon products unfortunately is near the list price, maybe a couple of €100 or so off depending on how shady the dealer is - but certainly not "completely different" :-o

 

[romanr74]

What Canon lists their price and and what actually gets charged is completely different.

I don't know about the US, but in Germany the street retail price of current Canon products unfortunately is near the list price, maybe a couple of €100 or so off depending on how shady the dealer is - but certainly not "completely different" :-o

In Switzerland official list price and effective street price are very different, in this specific case > 25%

 

[dstppy]

Enjoy your onion rind bokeh with the Tamron.

Well, the Canon mk2 has it too (but to a lesser extent), ye know? But don't let get facts in the way.

I think you're spot-on here; I think the *real* news is that the Tamron is so dang sharp.

Anyone with a hair of faith (maybe gullibility) could have believed the part about the Canon II being the sharpest, since that's pretty much what they said. Yes, yes, we shouldn't blindly believe it, but now that we have confirmation, it's sort of obvious

Honestly, I think the Tamron is going to be an excellent candidate for the "only own one lens" crowd, even with it's price.

 

[Dylan777]

For those calling shenanigans because the 24-70 beats the primes you guys gotta remember that Canon is consistently developing it's products.

... and "updating" the price tag, so if a successor is much more expensive it really is to be expected to have better performance, not just because of technological advance. If Canon had targeted $2000+ when they designed the 24-70mk1 or older primes they would have probably have designed them differently, too.

Don't expect to drive Benz S500 series at KIA price.