Upgrade or not the 24-70 f/2.8, a thousand dollar question.

[martti]

Hello. I have had the old 24-70 f/2.8 for eight years now. It has been repaired three times. Once for no obvious reason but finally I figured I must have bumped it without noticing. It focuses OK, I have no problems with the picture quality but then again I do not see very well with my multifocals.

I have read the articles which show that there are lots of problems with the old version, how the lens elements get off-center at the slightest bump and how it is a very uneven performer in the lab tests.

And how good the new version is. It just does everything so much better. How it is the best ever medium zoom. How it is optically and technically superior to anything else on the market at the moment.

About 60% of my pictures are taken with the 24-70. I do not especially LOVE it but it gets the job done.
I got filters and even a Cokin frame that fits the 76-mm ring.

I am not a professional but I make a nice living doing the job I do.
I am sure there are lots of people who upgraded the same day as the v.2.0 became available.

What might be your opinion, would I be able to leave home without or eventually sell the 24mm L, the 35mm L and the precious Glass Pomelo 85mm L if I got this beauty in my bag?

Please tell me no.

 

[Warrenl]

I love my 24-70. I have stopped using primes except if the light is really bad, or I want razor thin DOF

 

[Dylan777]

I had 3 copies of v1, never happy with any of them. I placed pre-order on v2, couldn't be happier.

Compared it to primes, yes, it's quite close in term of IQ. However, f2.8 feel a bit slow sometimes. Primes are primes, they have their own unique - shallow DOF & Bokeh. I don't think we should compare primes Vs zooms.

To your question, I think v2 is well worth it to upgrade. Here is v2 with Gary Fong lightsphere as fill.

 

[SPL]

Hi martti,
I just received my 24-70 II about a week ago. I absolutely love it. I am up enthusiastic amateur and pondered for several several months about getting this lens as it is expensive. I sold several items in my bag to offset the cost of the lens but I couldn't be happier. The IQ is amazing and the AF is fast! Now, it's a new toy for me, but It has not left my camera body and I see it staying there for quite some time. One downside to this lens is the filter size. But that's just how things go sometimes. Again, I couldn't be happier with the lens!

 

[tron]

You can sell the existing version I and get the new version II which is fantastic (I do have it...).

 

[RustyTheGeek]

I'll save you the time of reading all the posts that will likely say the same thing...

The 24-70 f/2.8L vII is a must have keeper lens you will not regret owning. Buy it and don't look back! And many photographers have sold their primes after using this lens. And buying the 24-70 v2 now, after it has been on the market for over a year, will mean you will pay less than many here who bought it in the first 6 months of its existence. So there's that!

Now that I've summarized what everyone will probably say, I'll say that only you can decide that it will replace multiple primes, the other 24-70, etc. I think we can all agree that each individual photographer has a unique affinity for his/her gear and the way it is used and appreciated. You see, photography gear falls into different mental groups in different ways for most photographers. Some value convenience and weight savings over a larger bag and lens choice. Others will carry a lens 20 miles in a backpack to use it once or not at all. It just depends on your personal needs/wants/habits and desires.

While I agree that primes shouldn't be compared to zooms, everyone does it anyway. Because before you walk out the door, choices must be made on what will be carried. And unless you use/capitalize on the strengths of your primes, thin DOF, faster than 2.8 aperture, low light shooting, innovative/creative shooting styles, etc... you'll likely find the 24-70 v2 to easily replace them. Let's face it, if a piece of gear never gets used, what's the point of keeping it after a long enough period of non-use goes by? That's the phase I'm in now. Sell stuff and try to get better organized.

OTOH, if you find great pleasure in portraiture and special scene photography, you might want to keep at least one prime. You know, compromise. Get the 24-70 v2 and just keep your favorite prime.

 

[takesome1]

What might be your opinion, would I be able to leave home without or eventually sell the 24mm L, the 35mm L and the precious Glass Pomelo 85mm L if I got this beauty in my bag?

Please tell me no.

I never liked the 24-70mm I and would always carry those primes.

Now I have the 24-70 II and it stays on the camera. It is a worthy upgrade.
Now I only want the 24 L and 35 L when I want them for the specific job. Wide aperture and narrow DOF, with the 35mm.

I prefer the 24L over the 24-70 at 24mm when i need that focal length because the 24L has less lens distortion. That however is easily correctable in LR, I would rather have no correction.

I didn't sell mine.

 

[bobby samat]

i had borrowed the original 24-70 from a friend - to use at an event but also to test it out to see if it was a lens i would be interested in purchasing.

as i began taking pictures at the event, i glanced at the screen to make sure my exposure was ok. it was so i kept on shooting.

after 25-30 shots i took a minute to really look at the images to see how sharp they were.

almost none of them were sharp where they were supposed to be. i took off the 24-70, put on my 16-35 2 and took some more pictures. they were all fine.

later that afternoon i was photographing a band at an outdoor wine/art festival. unfortunately i ran into the same situation with the 24-70. hardly any of the shots were editable - all out of focus. the few that were in focus looked great though.

i had haver really heard anything super negative about this lens previously, so i just chalked it up to a bad copy.

a few months later i was sitting in on a class at a local university. after the class i was talking to some of the students about the equipment they were using. all of them mentioned a copy of the 24-70 that the school had bought which had the same problem as the one i borrowed.

after that, i decided that i either had to look at a different brand, or wait until a new canon 24-70 was released.

luckily, the 24-70 2 was announced a few months later and i preordered from b&h.

the copy of the 24-70 2 i bought is amazing. always very sharp at all focal lengths.

i would recommend the 24-70 2 over the original to anyone. i don't see the point of having an AF lens that isn't reliable.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The old 24-70 was good when it was working right, but never great. I had 5 of them over the years, none were keepers.

The curvature of field was something built - into the design, so all have it.

You won't be unhappy with the new one.

You can get a new one for $1699 from a authorized dealer through the CPW street price, so don't pay a $1000 difference.

 

[Hjalmarg1]

i had borrowed the original 24-70 from a friend - to use at an event but also to test it out to see if it was a lens i would be interested in purchasing.

as i began taking pictures at the event, i glanced at the screen to make sure my exposure was ok. it was so i kept on shooting.

after 25-30 shots i took a minute to really look at the images to see how sharp they were.

almost none of them were sharp where they were supposed to be. i took off the 24-70, put on my 16-35 2 and took some more pictures. they were all fine.

later that afternoon i was photographing a band at an outdoor wine/art festival. unfortunately i ran into the same situation with the 24-70. hardly any of the shots were editable - all out of focus. the few that were in focus looked great though.

i had haver really heard anything super negative about this lens previously, so i just chalked it up to a bad copy.

a few months later i was sitting in on a class at a local university. after the class i was talking to some of the students about the equipment they were using. all of them mentioned a copy of the 24-70 that the school had bought which had the same problem as the one i borrowed.

after that, i decided that i either had to look at a different brand, or wait until a new canon 24-70 was released.

luckily, the 24-70 2 was announced a few months later and i preordered from b&h.

the copy of the 24-70 2 i bought is amazing. always very sharp at all focal lengths.

i would recommend the 24-70 2 over the original to anyone. i don't see the point of having an AF lens that isn't reliable.

Time to buy the Mark 2.

 

[martti]

OK, then. You are pretty unanimous that the new 24-70 f/2.8 II really is so much better than the previous model that the upgrade would probably even make a difference in the pictures I am taking.
I really like the 85mm L and the 24mm L.
Then there is the dust pump 100-400mm...another 1000 dollars to upgrade that one also?

 

[tron]

OK, then. You are pretty unanimous that the new 24-70 f/2.8 II really is so much better than the previous model that the upgrade would probably even make a difference in the pictures I am taking.
I really like the 85mm L and the 24mm L.
Then there is the dust pump 100-400mm...another 1000 dollars to upgrade that one also?

Personally I am thinking about it. I have no personal opinion on this though. I trust the tests. Unfortunately the new lens is about 200g heavier though
In addition, the reverse use of rings is confusing and impractical (at least for me).

 

[sanj]

Telling you no. Get it.