Canon 24-70 2.8 mkII reviewed by DRev

Rojin · 13 Oct 2012 at 20:28

Interesting to see actual user responses to the lens now its out there. People are selling their 24L II and 35L lenses now they have the new 24-70. Examples are showing excellent wide open performance in the centre with little improvement when stopping down (like the 70-200), there does seem to be sample variation which is disappointing considering the price. I might wait a while to pick one up like I did with the 70-200, although to be honest I'll probably pick up a nice copy of the mkI as I much prefer the zoom/hood design.

A 17mm TSE, 24-70 mkII and 70-200 mkII is gonna make a nice versatile kit. Add a 1.4x TC as well!

Raymond Lin · 13 Oct 2012 at 21:28

Guess these people don't need the extra stops.

mrk · 13 Oct 2012 at 23:02

I agree, I don't think I'd be able to handle a mid zoom any more for daily use.

Primes forever!

ElDude · 13 Oct 2012 at 23:03

Indeed. I'm glad I didn't get it now, and went with the 35L and 85L instead. The extra yum is far too good to give up. I can see why people would buy it though, and given the money I'd definitely get it. The only negatives I have against the 35L & 85L is that they're not weather sealed (which I assumed they were until I bought them

)

Rojin · 13 Oct 2012 at 23:24

Raymond Lin said:
Guess these people don't need the extra stops.

mrk said:
I agree, I don't think I'd be able to handle a mid zoom any more for daily use.

Primes forever!

I don't disagree, but these are people who shoot landscapes\travel so it's pretty indicative that the quality is there. I still like my primes, but if I'm feeling lazy an f2.8 quality zoom on a FF camera ain't a bad place to be!

It's obviously not a replacement for primes if you shoot wide open, but then you knew that already

It's not like te 70-200 mkII replacing the 135L for a lot of people, 1.2\1.4 is a much further difference than f2.

dannyjo22 · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:10

I find people constantly shooting wide open primes as lazy and uninspirational as selective colouring and long exposure water.

It's as over used as the other camera memes I mention, whether a picture or portrait requires it, it gets the 1.2/1.4 treatment. I accept the skill in nailing focus especially if moving but im bored of seeing everyone shoot wide open every time.

mrk · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:13

You're forgetting shallow DOF is how it all started to begin with. Manual film cameras of their day had bokeh even on landscape photos that was far nicer to the ye than any modern lens.

I don't think it's over used but I accept that some people seem to consider the lack of focus on more areas of a frame instead of just the subject a bad thing which it really isn't. Edit* It's on the same lines as the talk on TP at the moemnt where one guy shoots with creative comps and bokeh so you get the usual "that's not standard I don't like it" brigade. That's getting old^^

The benefits of shooting wide open outweigh the benefits of what you might or might not like

An Exception · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:14

I found my 24-70 useful on the dance floor tonight, but that's about the only time I think I'll end up using it.

Just love being at 1.4 most of day, and that's what my clients like.

dannyjo22 · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:20

I accept the benefits, I just think it stops some people thinking about how much of a frame should actually be in focus. For example I see shots that would work better stopped down a tad to bring slightly more of an object in focus but its lazy to not think of how much depth of field you actually need and 1.4 time after time.

mrk · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:31

But you're forgetting again that even if you feel that someone's image might have looked nicer with a bit looser dof, that's not what they wanted.

I can't speak for everyone but the guys I personally know and even myself, we tend to think about what we want in focus before we even look at it through the viewfinder.

Given your thoughts on this, you could say that people with zooms are even lazier because they just stand their twisting their wrists - Which we all know isn't the case for most people!

An Exception · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:31

dannyjo22 said:
I accept the benefits, I just think it stops some people thinking about how much of a frame should actually be in focus. For example I see shots that would work better stopped down a tad to bring slightly more of an object in focus but its lazy to not think of how much depth of field you actually need and 1.4 time after time.

I agree with that, sometimes I see shot's that 'I think' would look better stopped down a stop or two, including a few of my own. However 2.8 isn't fast enough for me most of the time. And boy do you notice the difference in low light, although the Tamron version should actually be better in lowlight than a 1.4 prime.

Rojin · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:38

An Exception said:
I agree with that, sometimes I see shot's that 'I think' would look better stopped down a stop or two, including a few of my own. However 2.8 isn't fast enough for me most of the time. And boy do you notice the difference in low light, although the Tamron version should actually be better in lowlight than a 1.4 prime.

Only if you are shooting something that isn't moving... IS\VC I find useless at these lower focal lengths unless people are being really really still...

Rojin · 14 Oct 2012 at 00:58

dannyjo22 said:
I find people constantly shooting wide open primes as lazy and uninspirational as selective colouring and long exposure water.

It's as over used as the other camera memes I mention, whether a picture or portrait requires it, it gets the 1.2/1.4 treatment. I accept the skill in nailing focus especially if moving but im bored of seeing everyone shoot wide open every time.

Sorry but that is just complete tosh, and just seems to be the "OMG it's all just an internet fad and not photography at all" that you see on some forums. Shooting wide open has always been there, it's what a lens does and it is designed to do (as well as stopping down). I was shooting with faster lenses 30 years ago than I was when I first bought a DSLR 3 years back, admittedly I didn't know enough about it back then, but I've seen plenty of of 50s 'n 60s photos all shot wide open. It's just a look\style\artistic look to a photograph that you can attain, it's not a fad or being lazy. To be honest shooting at f8 for a scene has to be the height of being lazy surely? At least shooting wide open takes a bit more thought in where you place the focus point. I can't see how you can be bored of seeing pictures being wide open, but not bored of seeing pictures stopped down and all in focus (which is what you are implying). If you don't like the style\look that's fine, but saying it bores you (and the whole frame being in focus wouldn't) just doesn't track with me to well.

Sure, there are a lot of shots out there taken with a shallow depth of field just for the sake of it. When people first buy a prime lens or FF body it's almost a given it's the first thing they do. However you are conveniently forgetting all of the > f5.6 pictures they've also taken when they first got a camera (or using a compact\camera phone), and these far out number your boring wide open shots.

I should say that personally I don't mind anything in photography (really bad HDR gets close though), if I don't like it that's fine, but as for techniques they all have their place. I can see why people don't like selective colouring, but to look down on it and to scorn it is just juvenile.

James J · 14 Oct 2012 at 01:00

ElDude said:
Indeed. I'm glad I didn't get it now, and went with the 35L and 85L instead. The extra yum is far too good to give up. I can see why people would buy it though, and given the money I'd definitely get it. The only negatives I have against the 35L & 85L is that they're not weather sealed (which I assumed they were until I bought them )

I thought the 85L was weather sealed?

In regards to selling primes for a standard zoom, not sure I'd do it myself. Why not own both? They have vastly different uses for a start!

Its like my 28-70 F2.8 and my 50mm F1.8G lenses. I wouldn't sell the 50mm because I have the zoom as they do different things to the subject I'm taking a photo of in terms of DOF and perspective control. I often find I get lazy when just using zooms compared to primes as you need to think more with the later imo, yet there will be people who say the opposite!

Selling primes for a zoom is madness though, regardless of what you shoot.

dannyjo22 · 14 Oct 2012 at 01:04

mrk said:
But you're forgetting again that even if you feel that someone's image might have looked nicer with a bit looser dof, that's not what they wanted.

Fair enough, then any image you critique or have an opinion on can be countered with "that's what I wanted".

I just find people that shoot a whole set wide open incredibly lacking in variety and imagination. Of course sometimes it works and if that's what they want fair enough but sometimes I just think one trick pony, how about some variation or learn something different.

Btw I'm not directing this at anyone in particular just the images I see all over, just the same with wispy water

An Exception · 14 Oct 2012 at 01:06

Only the 50L is weather sealed from what I can gather. Seems a bit weird that all of them are not weather sealed.

James J · 14 Oct 2012 at 01:13

An Exception said:
Only the 50L is weather sealed from what I can gather. Seems a bit weird that all of them are not weather sealed.

Ouch, especially at the price of the 85L!

dannyjo22 · 14 Oct 2012 at 01:14

Rojin said:
To be honest shooting at f8 for a scene has to be the height of being lazy surely? At least shooting wide open takes a bit more thought in where you place the focus point. I can't see how you can be bored of seeing pictures being wide open, but not bored of seeing pictures stopped down and all in focus (which is what you are implying). If you don't like the style\look that's fine, but saying it bores you (and the whole frame being in focus wouldn't) just doesn't track with me to well.

In not saying I want to see everything at f8, nor have I implied shooting wide open doesn't work :confused:

I just get bored of seeing every picture in a set wide open instead of thinking differently or how much the picture would work better stopped down slightly.

At no point have I said I wanted to see the whole frame in focus :confused:

Oh we'll I give up arguing points I didn't make, it too difficult two finger typing at 1 am on an iPad

An Exception · 14 Oct 2012 at 01:14

James J said:
Ouch, especially at the price of the 85L!

Yeah, weather sealing has come in handy this year.

James J · 14 Oct 2012 at 01:22

dannyjo22 said:
In not saying I want to see everything at f8, nor have I implied shooting wide open doesn't work I just get bored of seeing every picture in a set wide open instead of thinking differently or how much the picture would work better stopped down slightly.

At no point have I said I wanted to see the whole frame in focus

Oh we'll I give up arguing points I didn't make, it too difficult two finger typing at 1 am on an iPad

Sometimes the picture wouldn't work if it was stopped down, which is why most shooters keep the lens wide open. Sure theres a few exceptions to this, like blurring out someones nose due to having a DOF thats too thin on a portrait shot, yet thats a technical reason, not an artistic one.

Plus you have to remember, no one in their right mind is going to spend over £1000 on some of the best primes (each in some cases) and not shoot nearly exclusively wide open.

The only types of photography where stopping down is pretty much required now is macro, landscape and some street photography if the backdrop is interesting.