Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM review

According provided by Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM (Ultrasonic) huge thanks to Bogdan.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

In the line of professional high-speed Canon zoom lenses, among the standard (in terms of focal lengths) lenses, there are 3 models:

  1. Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM, 1993-2002, 16 elements in 11 groups, of which 1 element is aspherical.
  2. Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM, 2002-2012, 16 elements in 13 groups, including 2 aspherical and 1 UD element.
  3. Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L ii USM, 2012-present, 18 elements in 13 groups, including 3 aspherical and 3 UD-elements.

All lenses were manufactured and are manufactured exclusively in Japan.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM is a large and very heavy lens, which with its weight pleasantly stretches the hand and looks impressive on any camera. Its weight is 950 grams, i.e. kilogram, minus the weight of the chocolate bar;). From the bundle of this lens with the camera Canon EOS-1DS Digital, on which I took test shots for review, and which itself weighs under 1.5 kg, you can very, very tired in just two or three hours of shooting :). And when using the Canon 24-70 / 2.8L with the camera Canon EOS 350D Digital, the lens takes on the role of the heaviest element. Canon 24-70 / 2.8L uses large 'professional' light filters with a diameter of 77 mm, the thread for the filter is metal, like the lens barrel itself.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon 24-70 / 2.8L focuses quickly, but obviously loses in focusing time from MDF to infinity and back to its second version. Internal focusing, there is a window with a focusing distance scale in meters and feet with additional marks for shooting in the IR spectrum (at 24, 28, 35, 50 and 70 mm) and a mode switch - 'AF / MF'. The MDF is 38 cm and the maximum magnification ratio is 1: 3.5.

When the focal length is changed, the lens trunk does not rotate, and the rear lens remains stationary, which eliminates the 'vacuum effect' of the camera. The focusing ring, like the zoom ring, is rubberized and rotates 135 degrees. Due to the fact that the lens is quite 'chubby' and the ring is wide, manual aiming is not difficult.

The lens has one feature - the lens trunk lengthens with decreasing focal length. Sometimes it is a little unnerving, it is customary that the longer the trunk of the lens, the longer the focal length is set, but it was not there. That is why they often joke that Canon 24-70 / 2.8L has a focal length range not '24 -70 ', but '70 -24' :). By the way, another unpleasant feature of the specimen, which I visited for review, is the spontaneous change in the focal length under the own weight of the lens. Perhaps new lenses, just released at the factory, do not suffer from such a disease, but, as practice shows, the disease progresses over time.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

In Canon USM lenses, I do not like the lack of full-fledged constant manual focus control (the so-called FTM mode  — Full Time Manual Focusing). Although, not everything is so rosy. FTM mode does not turn off automatic focusing when the focus ring is rotated and in some situations you have to “fight” with the camera for control over the focus area. An example describing such an inconvenience can be found in the review Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

The lens uses the EW-83F hood, which is attached not to the trunk, but to the lens body. The lens is just huge. In addition to its direct function - protection against flare, it also protects the trunk of the lens from water ingress when shooting in difficult weather conditions. The lens hood is so huge also for the reason that at 24 mm the lens trunk is pushed forward as much as possible, while the hood does not create vignetting. At 70mm, the lens hood protects the lens very well from flare. I consider such a lens hood and zoom device a very good solution. When used on cropped cameras, the hood can theoretically be made even larger. EGF lens on Canon APS-H cameras is 31-91 mm, and on Canon APS-C 38-112 mm.

Optical design Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Optical design Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

The optical design has 16 elements in 13 groups with two aspherical (Aspherical elements) and one element made of low-dispersion glass (UD - Ultra Low Dispersion). The lens aperture consists of eight rounded blades (I would like 9 blades, of course). On closed diaphragms in the area of ​​confusion, the diaphragm creates fairly even circles of confusion.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM

But with the image quality, the lens from this review let us down a little (I'm talking about a specific instance that I got for review). The main drawback is poor sharpness at F / 2.8, especially at 70mm. The rest of the lens is very good: excellent glare resistance, contrast, color rendition. Excessive distortion by 24 mm is possible. Vignetting is easily handled by the processor of modern cameras that have this function.

Here link to the archive with the originals - 513 MB, 61 photos in the format RAW from cameras Canon 350D и Canon 1DS, part of the photo was taken using polarizing light filter.

Professional fast wagon

Choosing a good high-speed universal lens is one of the most important for a large number of photographers. I pay a lot of attention to this issue, because I prepared this list of all full-frame universal (standard range of focal lengths) fast autofocus lenses:


Bayonet EF:

  1. Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-70 mm 1: 2.8 L USM
  2. Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70 mm 1: 2.8 L USM
  3. Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70 mm 1: 2.8 L II USM

Bayonet R:

  1. Canon Lens RF 28-70 mm F2 L USM, since September 2018
  2. Canon Lens RF 24-70 mm F2.8L IS USMsince August 2019


Bayonet F:

  1. Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70 mm 1: 2.8 (MKI)
  2. Nikon AF Nikkor 35-70 mm 1: 2.8D (MKII)
  3. Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-70 mm 1: 2.8D ED SWM (two body color options)
  4. Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70 mm 1: 2.8GN ED Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Asphericalsince December 2007
  5. Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70 mm 1: 2.8EN ED Nano Crystal Coat SWM IF Aspherical VR

Bayonet Z:

  1. Nikon Nikkor Z 24-70 mm 1: 2.8 S
  2. Nikon Nikkor Z 28-75 mm 1:2.8 (the scheme is similar to Tamron a036, animation)

Tokina (for different mounts)

  1. Tokina AT-XAF 28-70 mm 1: 2.8 (Tokina AT-X 270 AF)
  2. Tokina AT-X PROAF 28-70 mm 1: 2.6-2.8 (or 1: 2.8, Tokina AT-X 270 AF PRO)
  3. Tokina AT-X PROAF 28-70 mm 1: 2.6-2.8 (or 1: 2.8, Tokina AT-X 270 AF PRO II)
  4. Tokina AT-X PRO 28-80 mm 1: 2.8 Aspherica (Tokina AT-X 280 AF PRO)
  5. Tokina AT-X PRO SV 28-70 mm 1: 2.8 (Tokina AT-X 287 AF PRO SV)
  6. Tokina sd 24–70 F2.8 (IF) FX AT-X PRO Aspherical

Sigma (for different mounts, in chronological order)

  1. Sigma 28–70mm 1: 2.8 Zoom, from May 1992 (Vivitar 28-70 / 2.8 VMC was made on its basis)
  2. Sigma 28–70mm 1: 2.8 Zoom EX Ashperical [+ -D], from the end 1998
  3. Sigma 28–70mm 1: 2.8 Zoom EX Aspherical DF [+ -D]since February 2001
  4. Sigma 24–70mm 1: 2.8 Zoom EX DG Aspherical [+ -D], [DF version], since February 2001
  5. Sigma 24–60mm 1: 2.8 Zoom EX DG [+ -D], from May 2004
  6. Sigma 24–70mm 1: 2.8 Zoom EX DG Macro [+ -D], From september 2004
  7. Sigma 28–70mm 1: 2.8 Zoom EX DG [+ -D], From september 2004
  8. Sigma 24–70mm 1: 2.8 EX DG HSM, From september 2008
  9. Sigma 24–70mm 1:2.8 DG HSM OS A (ART), from February 2017, Nikon F, Canon EF, Sigma SA
  10. Sigma 24–70mm 1: 2.8 DG DN A (ART)since November 2019, Sony E, Leica L, the layout is similar to Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 2.8 / 24-70mm, animation
  11. Sigma 28–70mm 1: 2.8 DG DN C (Contemporary)since February 2021, Sony E, Leica L
  12. Sigma 24–70mm 1:2.8 A DG DN II (ART), from May 2024, Sony E, Leica L

Tamron (for different mounts)

  1. Tamron SP AF 35-105 mm 1: 2.8 Aspherical Model 65D
  2. Tamron SP AF Aspherical LD ​​[IF] 28-105 mm 1: 2.8 Model 176D
  3. Tamron SP AF Aspherical LD ​​[IF] 28-105 mm 1: 2.8 Model 276D
  4. Tamron SP AF Aspherical XR Di LD [IF] 28-75 mm 1: 2.8 Macro Model A09 (Model A09N & Model A09N II) (scheme like Konica Minolta AF Zoom 28-75mm 1: 2.8 (32) D и  Sony 2.8 / 28-75 SAM)
  5. Tamron SP 24-70 mm F / 2.8 DI VC USD Model A007
  6. Tamron SP 24-70 mm F / 2.8 Di VC USD G2 Model A032
  7. Tamron 28-75 mm F / 2.8 Di III RXD Model A036, (15/12), only for Sony E / FE, the scheme is similar to Nikon Nikkor Z 28-75 mm 1:2.8, animation
  8. Tamron 28-75 mm F / 2.8 Di III VXD G2 Model A063, (17/15), only for Sony E / FE, Fall 2021
  9. Tamron 35-150 mm F / 2-2.8 Di III VXD Model A058, Sony E / FE only, Fall 2021


Sony / Minolta A mount:

  1. Konica Minolta AF Zoom 28-75 mm 1: 2.8 (32) D (scheme like Tamron 28-75 / 2.8)
  2. Minolta AF Zoom 28-70 mm 1: 2.8 (32) G
  3. Sony 2.8 /28–75 SAM (scheme like Tamron 28-75 / 2.8)
  4. Sony Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 2,8 /24–70 ZA SSM T *
  5. Sony Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 2,8 /24–70 ZA SSM II T* (circuit from the previous lens)

Sony E-mount:

  1. Sony FE 2.8 /24–50 G (G, SEL2450G)
  2. Sony FE 2.8 /24–70 GM (G, SEL2470GM)
  3. Sony FE 2.8 /24–70 GM II (G, SEL2470GM2)

Pentax (K)

  1. Pentax SMC FA 28-70 mm f / 2.8
  2. Pentax HD Pentax-D FA 24-70 mm f / 2.8ED SDM WR


  1. Angenieux zoom F.28–70 1: 2.6 AF (for Nikon F, Minolta / Sony A, Canon EF)


  1. Vivitar Series 1 28-70mm 1: 2.8 VMC AUTO FOCUS ZOOM, different mounts, presumably a copy Sigma 28–70mm 1: 2.8 Zoom


  1. Panasonic Lumix S PRO 1: 2.8 /24-70 mm, from August 2019, Leica L


  1. Leica Vario-Elmarit-SL 1: 2.8 / 24-70mm f / 2.8 ASPH., from May 2021, the optical design repeats Sigma 24-70mm 1: 2.8 DG DN Art (animation)


  1. Samyang AF 24-70 / 2.8 FE, aka Rokinon AF 24-70 / 2.8 FE, from October 2021, only for Sony E / FE
  2. Samyang AF 35-150/2-2.8FE, from April April 2023, only for Sony E/FE

Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link, or in the price block below:

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment.


The Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM is a good 'L-class' lens, highly regarded by professionals, known as the 'workhorse'. Personally, I think that replacing the 24-70 / 2.8 is very difficult to find and such a lens should be in every photographer who needs a similar focal length range. Of course, if the means allow, then I would prefer the second version.

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Please, if this material was useful to you, help my project. And don't forget that everyone can write your review for one or another photographic equipment.

Add a comment:



Comments: 77, on the topic: Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM review

  • Pastor

    For a long time no one has written something here ...
    Unlike the specimen, the trunk does not fall out of my review, although the glass is no longer new. I also met with soap at 70mm on the open, but rather soap in the corners, in the center sharply. In addition, the soap is noticeable in comparison with the fixes, and if you look, for example, at Tamron 17-50 2.8 (I understand that the crop glass, but it seems that the focal glass is the same), then the soap does not immediately scare you. Artistry in 24-70 is not special, in any case, so it is customary to say. But in my opinion, it is quite good for portraits, moreover, the softness of 70 2.8 is just right for female portraits. But in the form of a workhorse, the lens is very pleasing. At 7d in any terrible downpour, you can shoot at least the whole day - the kit is indestructible. On the full frame, I used it only on the first dime - a very nice picture (though more thanks to the dime here). But because of the insecurity and slowness of the nickel, it was not necessary to report from 24-70.

  • Andrei

    tell me, how for video shooting, will there be a big loss if you replace your 24-105 f4 L?

    • Pastor

      I would leave 24–105... For video, high aperture is not as important as stub and focal lengths. Many DSLR operators love 24-105 4lis. But to shoot at 24-70 2.8L is a rarity. This lens is more for photography than for video, I think.

  • Alexey

    “But with the image quality, the lens from this review let us down a little (I'm talking about a specific instance that I got for review). The main drawback is poor sharpness at F / 2.8, especially at 70mm. ”
    Arkady, this lens has a feature - front (front) lens and there is an adjustment lens. any, even a minor blow - and the centering / alignment of the lens unit gets lost. Therefore, it is always necessary to check exactly at 70mm by 2.8 - if it is frank soap, then the lens must be re-adjusted. In the second version, the design was changed. In addition, the guides wear out strongly, which loosens the fastening and the lens again begins to soap at the long end. Repair and adjustment - about $ 170
    Compared to the second version, the first has a significantly more beautiful bokeh, which is better than many fixes.

    • Pastor

      I agree, the old 24-70 2.8l bowl is more interesting. I thought about changing it to a new one, but then I realized that I was too lazy to chase sharpness, and the rest of the old man is no worse, and bokeh is better. Not even the colors more. The case when a newer version turned out to be worse for me than the old one. In the case of 70-200, on the contrary, the new one turned out to be more interesting than the old one both in sharpness and in bokeh.

      • Anton

        The first version gives a more tube image, the second is dry and boring for me

        • Pastor

          Are you talking about 70-200 or 24-70? If 24-70, then I completely agree, she gives a warm lamp color - yes :)

  • Anton

    I have been working in the industry for about 6 years. This is the most popular lens among both reporters and fashion photographers, including in the West. In general, just # 1. Those details, all sorts of stabilizers, etc., the pros don't care about that, take them and take them off until you wipe your hands ...

  • Pastor

    Recently I decided to compare this 24-70 2.8 ff with the sigma 18-35 1.8 on crop. Given roughly the same flu of these sets, it was interesting to compare how much ff would be better. And what was my surprise when the sigma produced higher sharpness and, in general, no less interesting bokeh. All other things being equal, a new crop with a zoom of 1.8 will be cheaper than an old ff with a zoom of f2.8, which means that for less money you can get at least no less high-quality image. Sigma, having released 18-35 and 50-100 with f1.8, hints that ff is not so necessary. And also in sigma a pleasant trifle was the ability to work on ff from 28 to 35mm only with a vignette, without black corners. It turns out, having bought a cheaper 18-35 you get almost a replacement for sigma 24-35 f2, but with a slightly higher aperture.
    I really hope that in the near future someone will be able to provide Arkady with an overview of at least one of the three new superlight sigma zooms.

    • Alexander

      I now have 200d and stgma 18-35, so I'm thinking of switching to full frame and 24-70 2.8, but is it worth it? In fact, I will get 15 mm more focal length, ala fifty kopecks 1.8 on a crop, but you can buy fifty dollars on a crop or 85 1.8, I don’t even know, I shoot videos in 95 percent

  • anonym

    I do not believe

  • Fighter


  • Mr. Boggy

    A good zoom for ff but on new crop it is necessary to adjust, and indeed now in these crop it makes no sense after you test ff. Only where detail and a tele-range are needed. For everyone who wants to buy this glass for the first time, do not forget that this is a zoom, just a zoom. On the crop, this glass will still be a little odd, a small mirror and a sprinkled focus sensor, plus small pixels — these are all factors this lens does not really like. It's like a taxi driver used to working on a Toyota sedan to offer a de-matiz assuring that she also drives no worse, he will immediately send you to the forest and away.

  • Mr. Boggy

    And in general, if the company’s kenon itself does not have a distinct zoom under the crop except for the rattle 17-55 2.8 in which the wind is walking, then it's time to release the available ff in the 1000d form factor. Everyone will start right away with ff and not be tormented by the pangs of choosing glasses, because even film glasses on ff bypass circumspect shitheads.

    • koba

      Sftsht will never release something normal for cropping, otherwise it will not be able to sell full-frame lenses and systems for high prices. The companies work only to make a profit and not to make customers happy, this is always secondary for them, objects of simple advertising and nothing more. Defects in top-end lenses are clearly planned in the standardization departments of companies so that they fail on time, otherwise they receive less money both for sales and for service. Only Leica works without defects on goods, but of course he sets prices 10 times higher than the cost price in order to get what others get due to high circulation. And since manufacturers of photographic equipment do not see any threat from Chinese manufacturers, since the fluorescent equipment, due to some features, is almost completely protected from fakes and the appearance of cheap alternatives, they are very arrogant, with a purely Japanese disregard for everyone else in the world (who has been to Japan knows that the Japanese are worse than the Zionist Jews [not ordinary Jews!] - they don't even consider anyone else to be human!), and they do everything as we show them their own marketing, how to rip off more money from the rest of the world. All photographic equipment is sold for about five times the price, such markups have not existed for a long time in other areas of production. And the imaginary competition between Japanese companies is for foreigners, there is a large clan behind each manufacturer and they divide everything perfectly, some are even relatives. You say this glass has problems with sharpness, so what? All the same, everyone will go and buy it, now the second version, slightly improved.

  • Andrii

    Privit. Tell me the decal of running gears that are not expensive objects for canon 6d 2? I respect you more beautifully than beasts, but who are not more beautiful than brothers?

    • Basil

      For you for any purpose? Budget?

      • Andrii

        For commercials?

      • Andrii

        Thinking like I’m taking a zoom, I don’t know which one? Kenonivsky chi third-party?

        • B. R. P.

          For inexpensive third-party calls, please make Tamron 28-75 2,8, so you need to zoom in in such a range.

  • Mr. Boggy

    This lens was created in the era of 1D and Ds, and the crop was 6 megapixels. No one even thought that the crop would have 10 or even 20 megapixels, even the ff sensor with 21 megapixels appeared much later ... Therefore, there is no need to demand much from this glass, there is also a fluorite insert introduces its own artifacts - it has a pronounced crystalline structure, it is then noticeably in the photo. But in any case, this lens is good as an artistic zoom, 2.8 is quite working.

  • Dmitry Kostin

    Yesterday I read reviews about this lens on the foto_ru club / vlador / olegasphoto / lensclub, and noticed that the lens has enough different polarities.
    Some praise the constructiveness and restrainedly write about the lack of sharpness, others scold them write soapy and so on.
    I also saw such a statement that in comparison with the 24-70 / 2.8L II USM, its first version, as well as the 28-70 / 2.8, are “firewood”.
    Recommendations are very frequent to look at the second version, which costs 1.5 times more expensive than Sigma ART 24-70 / 2.8 and Tokina 24-70 / 2.8.
    I wanted to ask - is there a difference in quality among these lenses?
    Is he really that soapy in full frame?
    What are the main problems with the 24-70 / 2.8 besides the backlash of the trunk (and as a result of replacing the guides)?

    • Zhukhvan

      24-70 “firewood that should burn in the ovens” like the opinion of Tsaplin, who had a similarly rickety lens, extrapolated to all existing specimens. A normal lens, they shot on it until the second version and were happy.

      • Zhukhvan

        and on problems - chromate, and not as sharp on open 24 as fixes.

  • Anatol

    Thanks to the author for the detailed information. I have been using this lens since 2010 and am very pleased with it.
    The information in the article is not entirely clear to me: - “there is a window with a focusing distance scale in meters and feet with additional marks for shooting in the IR spectrum
    (on 24, 28, 35, 50 and 70 mm)”
    These marks indicate the focal length of the lens and are needed to set the hyperfocal distance for landscape photography. I turn off autofocus, crop and determine the actual focal length for this picture, in the focus distance window I combine the infinity sign with the red mark of the current focal length of the lens. With an aperture of F11-F16, everything will be sharp in the picture from the minimum distance to infinity. A simple and ingenious solution, there is no need to calculate the hyperfocal distance using a formula or a calculator.

Add a comment

Copyright © Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2023

English-version of this article

Versión en español de este artículo