Anyone got a Canon 24-70 L f2.8?
Discussion
If so what's your verdict? How sharp is it.
The reason I ask is that my 28-135IS is going back(for the second time) to the repair shop. It's not a particularly sharp lens anyway, and is definatly the weakest link in my equipment.
I know it's expensive, too, but I've got to keep up with Phil Brett!
Martin.
>> Edited by V6GTO on Friday 6th May 16:02
The reason I ask is that my 28-135IS is going back(for the second time) to the repair shop. It's not a particularly sharp lens anyway, and is definatly the weakest link in my equipment.
I know it's expensive, too, but I've got to keep up with Phil Brett!
Martin.
>> Edited by V6GTO on Friday 6th May 16:02
ehasler said:
I've got it - very nice lens, as you'd hope for the price!
It's a lot more solid than the 28-135, which I also have, although I've not beenand compared the two, so can't say if one is sharper than the other.
It feels very nicely balanced on a 1D-type body, although it's noticably heavier than the 28-135. I've not had any complaints with my 28-135, and I've taken many pleasing photos with it, but the 24-70 is another next step up.
The 70 end is a bit short though, which is where the 70-200 f2.8 comes in- again, another very nice lens, complements the 24-70 perfectly, and the IS is fantastic! It is quite heavy though, and when you're lugging the 24-70, 70-200 and a body around, you do sometimes yearn for the 28-135 again
I hear what you say, ED, but I can't help thinking It's the right replacement for the 28-135, considering the other lenses I have. (12-24 Sigma DG HSM, 100mm f2.8 macro and 100-400L IS.
Phil...in answer to your question, the lens was never right from new, in as much as it was very notchy on the zoom. I put up with it rather than have the hassle of getting it sorted immediatly because at the time it was the only lens I had. Last year it seem to dimantle itself on the inside, which took an age to get fixed. Now, three months ish after getting it back the auto focus works going from close to far but it won't come back again. I'm going to demand it's fixed FOC but I know I wikk not have the lens for at least 10-12 weeks. I'm fed up with it now, hence my plan to get the 24-70L and sell the 28-135 when it's fixed.
Martin.
ehasler said:
I hear what you say, ED, but I can't help thinking It's the right replacement for the 28-135, considering the other lenses I have. (12-24 Sigma DG HSM, 100mm f2.8 macro and 100-400L IS.
If you won't miss the extra focal length from 70->135mm, then the 24-70 would be a great upgrade for the 28-135. If the extra focal length @f2.8 is important to you, then all you need to do is add the 70-200 to your stable as well
100-400 is an ok partner for this lens, but I personally prefer the 70-200 for "normal" type shots, and will generally only fit the 100-400 if I'm using the 300-400 end of it.
Maybe I'll have a look at the 70-200 in a litle while..when I can't control my "PhilBrettSyndrome" any longer and need to buy something!
Martin.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff