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

  • Oleg

    So this is what these red-striped monsters look like, thanks for the review of the L Series lens.

  • Arthur

    I would like to know the opinion of the pros with the analog from Nikon. Although I understand that the pros work either in one way or another. Nikonist himself….

    • Skai

      Nikon's old one was 28-70 - not quite the same fr. But in my amateurish opinion, the lenses are very similar, at an open aperture they will naturally lose to fixes in sharpness.
      Right now it is 24-70, at d90 - 18-55, 18-140, 35 f1.8 - we moved to the closet for permanent residence :-)
      These glasses have one significant drawback - the price. A large weight is even a plus, it is easier to stabilize the camera with a hood in windy weather.

      • Ivan V.

        A lot of weight is even a plus - if this lens is worn only with a camera. And if you have two cameras plus three zooms with a similar weight, then after a while you will forget about this advantage. I wore a 5d kenon, 450d kenon, 16-35 kenon, 24-70 kenon, 70-200 f4 kenon + a tripod in my backpack. The task, in my opinion, is not for the faint of heart. One of the reasons why Kenon 24-70 sold is a lot of weight. The most important drawback, in my opinion, is the lack of sharpness. Arkady, just drew attention to this. Another disadvantage for me personally is the inexpressive bokeh. It is clear that it is a little excessive to demand bokeh from such a zoom, but I still wanted to. In general, I abandoned the 24-70 zooms because they are heavy, expensive, and the first version of the 24-70 has obvious problems with sharpness.

  • Alexey

    Thanks a lot to Arkady, as always a competent, concise review !!!!! Special thanks to Bogdan for providing this TREASURE (I probably will never get used to such price tags))))

  • Oleg

    Good review. But I have a lot more love for this lens. I don’t know what kind of specimen you came across, my lens was purchased at the end of 2003, when tilting the camera down it does not fulfill / does not lengthen. I just took the camera in my hands, even thoroughly shook the camera with the lens down, it still does not lengthen. It stands on my camera as the main one and is used the most. If you want, as previously discussed, I will give it a summer test for a week. Moreover, I am not annoyed at all by the inverted zoom 70-24, because at the same time, the hood always works correctly and does not overlap the viewing angles of the lens.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      On the instance that was on the review, the trunk rides in position 24-28.

      • Oleg

        I checked my 2003 lens again. Checked by pre-setting one of the values ​​of the focal length: 70, 50, 35, 28, and so:
        - with a simple tilt - none of the values ​​changed;
        - when tilted and slightly shaken - and one of the values ​​has not changed;
        - with a tilt and a medium shake: 28 went off at 24, 35 - 28, 50 - somewhere between 50 and 35, 70 remained unchanged;
        - with a strong shake: 28 - 24, 35 - 24, 50 - when like when 35, when 28, up to 24 not before shaking, 70 remained unchanged.

        Yes, I wanted to add that I always have a lens hood, and therefore how and at what focal length the trunk moves is not visible - therefore it is absolutely not unnerving :)

  • Ronin427

    Oooh ... And the price Oooh ... O_O "

  • Nicholas

    Soap on the open for 2k American money? IMHO the buyer pays $ 1k only for the letter “L” and the red stripe on the lens!

    • Ivan V.

      Soap on the open for 2k American money? - the first version does not cost 2 thousand dollars. this lens is not manufactured and b. at. I sold it for 1 thousand.

  • Andrei

    Thanks Arkady for the review. Every time I look at the photos from the reviews, I really like them and I wonder if they are so sharp from the first time and with an exact hit of focus, or do you shoot in series and reject later. If so, about what percentage goes to the basket?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      For review, by itself, more than 15-20 photos are taken in the gallery. The number of successful frames once at a time is not necessary.

  • Sergei

    Hello. I chose a good zoom for Nikon, I wanted to take 24-70 already, but the lack of a stabilizer stopped it (for that kind of money), the weight did not bother. Now I'm waiting for Sigma 24-70 f / 2 OS HSM, I will take it, I have a new Sigma 35 1,4 - I like it very much

    • Andrey Dolzhenko

      After the Sigma 24-70 f / 2.8, I have a very big distrust of this brand. Lens rare ge. I took a Tokina 24-70 f / 2.8 for myself - I'm not happy. If I were you, I would not rush to take a remake from Sigma, I would wait until its true qualities show themselves.

  • Uladzimir

    Well, how if we compare this version 24-70, then it is quite possible to prefer in my opinion an analogue from sigma (I bought one for myself, which is the latest version, not a macro). And to say that when buying an elka we pay only for the red stripe is wrong. The construct of the Canon L is much more reliable than their competitors (sigma, tamron, etc.), therefore, it is more maintainable. Comparing the bokeh of sigma 24-70 / 2,8 and canon 24-70 / 2,8 II found for myself that the pattern in the canon's out-of-focus area is calmer, while in sigma it is all in "curly hair". Not critical, but there is such a trick. Arkady, as always, thanks for the review.

    • Sergei

      I wrote that the new Sigma 24-70 f / 2 OS HSM will be released soon, where aperture 2.0 and an optical stabilizer

      • Arkady Shapoval

        I suppose that the lens will not be announced soon, let alone go on sale. There are even serious thoughts that this lens will not exist at all.

        • Sergei

          It's sad, then I’m aiming at a real Sigma 24-105mm F4 DG OS HSM A

          • Novel

            And what does not suit the same Canon?

            (no sarcasm, just curious, I tested both - I didn't notice much difference, at the very Canon 24-105 f / 4)

  • anonym

    oh how unexpected))))
    really smiled when I saw L-ku here)))
    keep it up !!)))

  • anonym

    Nikonovsky 24-70 still seem better, or not really?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      off topic users of Film, Zeiss has been deleted.

    • alex

      if you compare the new nano 24-70, then Nikon is certainly better, but the boot has a new 24-70 II

  • anonym

    pictures from 24-70 L - "dark horror".

    • Vladimir

      Well, Lightroom in your hands!)

  • anonym

    the impression is that the prints were not made by the author.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      The impression is false.

  • Yuriy75

    Thanks to Arkady for the review, the owner for the lens. When viewing the originals, the quality of the photo was a little upset (for that kind of money I expected better, maybe my monitor is not able to show all the beauty :)). Honestly, I began to respect Soviet fixes more :). And now I'm delighted with my 40mm 2.8 (to hell with them, it's better to surprise them than buy this glass and be disappointed; I think their price is unreasonable). Thanks again to Arkady - I saved so much money :).

  • anonym

    Arkady, you see the pictures brightened a little, and the sky in some of them rose ....

  • Sergei

    Thank you for the wonderful site!
    Arkady, please tell us what is the meaning of Full Time Manual Focusing? It seems to me, on the contrary, it should knock down with normal autofocus - you will touch it with your hand accidentally, etc.
    Perhaps I missed something - for sure there are important practical applications for this thing, you often mention it in reviews.

    • Skai

      I would venture to answer instead of Arkady, it helped me out when shooting in the forest - often the auto focus is slightly to the side, I have to correct it manually.

      • Sergei

        Do you mean front focus, back focus? I thought about it, but it’s strange to spend a lot of money on the lens and not add a little adjustment.
        The only option that comes to my mind is if in a difficult scene the autofocus dulls - to give it up and quickly bring it on myself, without switching and without trying to catch the desired point.

        • Skai

          It is when the auto focus dulls due to the abundance of contrasting objects in the focus area.
          Arkady's article on focusing is described in more detail, but the link was not added ...

          • Sergei

            Thank you for the hint :)
            Now it’s clearer.

  • Alexey

    I was once allowed to shoot him. When shooting at 5,6-6,3 aperture, I was surprised at the lack of detail and sharpness compared to canon ef 50 1.4

    • Dmitry K

      mm, and you compare it with 50 1.8 .. strong zoom versus strong fix — of course the fix will win in sharpness. You would have compared with 50 1.2. Here is the new used version for sharpening to test)) can be comparable to 4 and 5.6. On 2.8, fix 1.4 will definitely win the wang-woo without tests

  • Sergey +

    The lens is really good. I think the second version is especially. Several (many) years ago I also chose the Canon EF 17-40mm f / 4L USM from it. I chose the second one. Both cheaper and wider angle was interesting, landscape. I hardly buy Canon EF 24-70 now, but I always remember about it. :-)

  • Madness scif

    Mlyn comrades, this lens is not made in order to shake it and check which focal lengths its trunk moves out at - this lens is made for reporters who need dust and moisture resistance, very fast autofocus, and good aperture. you cannot compare it with cheap plastic. such lenses reveal their potential on top-end cameras and semi-top 1d and 5d respectively. although on a crop type 70d and 7d, you can make very good half-length portraits, which in contrast, detail and color rendition will RIP all your plastic toys. do not shower me with tomatoes, but I myself am an ardent Nikonist and the owner of an analogue 24-70 2.8 N

    • Madness scif

      and in general, if you want to shoot with high-quality glasses, then evergreen dollars will help you, buy optics from Nikon with a golden letter N and a canon with a letter L.

      • А


  • Gennady

    Please test this lens with a canon 5d.
    I will explain:
    I have since 2008 Kenon 20d and 24-70-2.8l
    I always had a problem with soap on the diaphragm; more than 8 (11,13,16,22) soaped so that the old Zeiss gave heat to this lens.
    But lo and behold, yesterday I bought 5d at your advice, Arkady, and I was pleasantly surprised that the lens behaves in a completely different way with this camera.
    In view of the above, I ask you to do a second test with a 5d camera
    Thank you for the report.

  • C / y

    The author of the article - you damn Can Rockwell unfinished ... Do you at least understand why and how xx-70 glasses are used? So I'll tell you a wretched secret: in most cases these glasses are used on a diaphragm covered by a couple of steps, since the grip is already relatively large, it makes no sense to aperture up to 11-16, in the full frame the sharpness is everywhere already at 8, on the open one they shoot only when very little light or motion freeze. If you buy a 24-70 2.8 ІІ and go shoot landscapes at 2.8? This particular lens is very suitable for all types of photography where focal lengths are needed. If you need to get a high-quality picture, then you need to use fixes without options, and expensive medium zooms are created in order to quickly get a high-quality result. By the way, this lens has the most pleasant bokeh at the long end of all the bright zooms that have ever been created (even in comparison with the 24-70 zooms for Sony).
    P.S. How can I write reviews of such a specific technique just by playing around? Techniques of this level simply do not have any weak points; there are features that sometimes need to be paid attention to.
    P.P.S. It’s better to sell all your photo equipment and buy a place on the market with a gas stove for frying pies and frying pies, so you will be of more use, you are no photographer and you write all kinds of crap that are not compatible with reality.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Are there any specific comments on the review?

      • 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 (at 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.

  • Sin photo

    It is possible for C / Y to finish the sharp twisting ale justly, when looking around at a single decent photograph, it’s not a mess ... I’m 100% good for a C / Y because it’s okay to look around at such a specific technology that people write like it’s trivial hours. Schodo 24-70 / 2.8L (I) - the whole line can give even better result if you need to trim your hands straight and see the robot with her. As for the site itself - in a new lot of pardons that inaccuracies, the press is a great number of cobs that read and correct the wrong posts from the wrong author's posts.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Well, again, this is not an art gallery, but a lens review. Maybe there are still errors regarding the review, inaccuracies? Is there anything to say on the case?

  • Vitaly Gulin

    After such an article, I would never look in the direction of 24-70, but since I am its owner I do not agree with the author, the landscapes on the covered diaphragm are super, 35 mm and 50 mm ring almost like a fix, 24 mm and 70 mm are weaker the lens’s location, many Western photographers use it and make masterpieces. So taking a friend for a day and writing an article is not at all right. You need to live with it and only then draw a conclusion.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      And where do I say something about landscapes, and what do they generally disagree with in the article? with the fact that the photos from the ancient "one" are not so juicy? Probably the tenth who write that they do not agree with the articles and cannot indicate anything concrete what is wrong or what does not correspond to reality.

  • bdoc

    Each time I read your reviews of equipment with great interest. The manner of presentation, which is easy to understand by amateurs and pros, also delights. Of course, in some details, the reviews are subjective, but this only fuels interest, including to the author. I am the owner myself
    some top-end lenses. 24-70 acquired a new one, more for force, but working with it (I myself
    amateur) began to discover his positive qualities. The shortcomings mentioned by Arkady,
    also take place, although they do not bother me. There are no limits to perfection. Once again, thanks to the author

  • Anatoly

    Good day to all. I decided to write because everyone is complaining strongly about this lens. Regarding the soapiness of this lens, it is usually most of all connected with its fall. They mainly buy this used lens, and it is not known what happened to it before. A couple of days ago I adjusted it just after the fall, and the blur on this model is usually associated not with the front-back focus, but with the lens shift. And tweaking it with the exact focus, which is on some Canon models, will do nothing. If the fall fell on the front and the frame bent, then this frame is easy to change, and it will not be visible that the lens has fallen, but it will no longer have focus as in the new one.

    • Mykhaylo

      Good day, Anatoly.
      Dyakuyu for ts_kave dopovnennya. I am grateful about the "active for rent, in the shops of photographic equipment. The sharpness is normal, the drug is mute. Ale now, after reading your information, I am wondering about the amount of rent on Oktivi.
      From the іnshoї side - kupuvati "cat in a teddy" for serious pennies may not want.

Add a comment

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

English-version of this article

Versión en español de este artículo