Canon 24-70mm L F/2.8 a worthy purchase?

5

5bjoshua

Messages
25
Edit My Images
Yes
Hey Guys,

May buy one of these lenses if my mate buys my Sigma 17-70 of me!

Couple of questions though;

Is it worth the money?

Are there any better lenses for a cheaper price like a sigma equivalent?

Would anyone recommend a different lens totally?

Thanks in advance!

Josh
 
Petemc has one and I think he loves it. Personally I would if I could afford it.
 
5bjoshua said:
Is it worth the money?
Click to expand...

Yes

5bjoshua said:
Are there any better lenses for a cheaper price like a sigma equivalent?
Click to expand...

Not im my opinion for a f 2.8, you pay your money for the quality

5bjoshua said:
Would anyone recommend a better lens totally?
Click to expand...

Not a better Lens, as for a zoom thats just about as good as it gets, you could go prime or, If you dont need the f2.8, have a look at the Canon 24-105 f4 L IS and its a bit cheaper.

I take mine everywhere the camera goes, its design and handling and picture quality are superb
 
King_Boru said:
Petemc has one and I think he loves it. Personally I would if I could afford it.
Click to expand...

That I do. I've had the Sigma too and well it is a cheap alternative. It lacks USM and the build quality isn't as good. If you can go for the Canon. I only really use 2 lenses these days. This and the 10-20.
 
It does seem like a good investment then!

Think once ive sold the Sigma 17-70 ill have to purchase one, may have to be second hand though.

Looking at the Sigma 10-20 as i type, also the Canon 10-22.

Josh
 
petemc said:
That I do. I've had the Sigma too and well it is a cheap alternative. It lacks USM and the build quality isn't as good. If you can go for the Canon. I only really use 2 lenses these days. This and the 10-20.
Click to expand...

Ever thought about getting the 70-200 variant?
 
I have one and I love it. I had the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 and the optical quality was pretty close but it was slow to focus and noisy.

If you can justify it, get one.
 
I'm currently giving some serious consideration to this lens, as the Sigma equivalent doesn't have the best of reviews. However I'm struggling to justify spending such a huge ammount of money on a lens when I'm no pro, and never will be. Photography is a hobby. I'm not particularly good at it, but I love it!

My dillemma is I can afford the lens due to being very good at saving, even though I'm only on a low wage (I still live at home so I have no bills etc) But I feel a bit silly getting such a pricey bit of kit when it is just a hobby.

I'm also confused on the technical side of things (so I'm hoping someone could explain) the 24-70mm is a full frame lens? but I have a cropped (?) camera; Canon 400D, so the 24mm would become 38.4mm?. My kit lens is the 18-55mm. Now what I'm not sure of is if on my camera it's actually a 28.8mm - 88mm or if it's designed for the cropped camera making it a 18-55mm. I don't really want to loose to much at the wide end so I really need to work this bit out before I give serious consideration to any lens.

Hope no one minds me sort of hijacking this thread with all my Q's but seemed daft to start a new thread when this one is quite recent.

Thanks.
 
:thinking:

Almost as good as the Canon 24-105 F/4L :clap:(y)
 
The Sigma 24-70 is pretty damned close optically. So if you can justify the extra £500, get it. You won't be disappointed. It's a fantastic lens. Sharp throughout, built like a tank, unbelievably quick AF, versatile, and can resell it in a split second for near asking price.
 
The only way to describe the 24-70 is a class lens

I never take it off one of my bodies
 
stellarbeam said:
Hope no one minds me sort of hijacking this thread with all my Q's but seemed daft to start a new thread when this one is quite recent.
Click to expand...
I think it's generally recommended here that one (a) searches to see whether one's questions have been asked and answered previously; and (b) if not, start a new thread. Hijacking a new thread is no different to hijacking an old thread.

Anyway, read this thread and then, if you still have questions, I suggest you start your own thread.
 
5bjoshua said:
Hey Guys,

May buy one of these lenses if my mate buys my Sigma 17-70 of me!

Couple of questions though;

Is it worth the money?

Are there any better lenses for a cheaper price like a sigma equivalent?

Would anyone recommend a different lens totally?

Thanks in advance!

Josh
Click to expand...

Is it worth the money? Yes

Are there any better lenses for a cheaper price like a sigma equivalent? No

Would anyone recommend a different lens totally? well this depends on what you want the lens to do and your budget (if you can add these then you will get better answers) the 24-70 is a heavy lens and expensive - you should look at the option of the 24-105 f4 IS + the 50mm f1.4 (for low light) as a possible alternative for around the same cost. for quality the only thing that will beat the 24-70 (for canon) is a good quality prime lens.
 
I've got one. It's now my favourite lens. I first used it on my 30D with the crop factor which was good but I felt myself resorting to my 10-20 sigma in a lot of situations as it wasn't really wide enough.

I've now got a 5D and the first thing it truely revealed was that it was back focussing. I got that fixed, one month out of warrantly too, but they still covered it (thank you Canon!) and on the 5D it's just great. A good combination of wide and telephoto. It's now sharp as a tack and good in low light a 2.8. On a crop sensor it was good. On my 5D after the Canon adjustment it's outstanding and the combination I take out with me in most situations.
 
StewartR said:
I think it's generally recommended here that one (a) searches to see whether one's questions have been asked and answered previously; and (b) if not, start a new thread. Hijacking a new thread is no different to hijacking an old thread.

Anyway, read this thread and then, if you still have questions, I suggest you start your own thread.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the link, I'm going to have a read of it now.

I did do a search but couldn't find what I was looking for (even though I was sure my questions had prob been asked previously)

I decided to ask my questions in this thread, as opposed to creating a new topic as this thread was new and relevant.

Apologies for any annoyance caused by my post. I do try to have good forum ettiquitte but sometimes I make mistakes. :shrug:

Again thank you for the link...I'm now off to read it.
 
It's not my most used lens but it's almost certainly my favourite. Everything about it is quality.
 
it's my walkabout zoom and a great lens. i wouldn't be without it.
 
Have you considered the 17-55 is 2.8, though not quite the same range is a good walkabout. The casing is not as high quality as the 24-70 but this guy thinks it is sharper.
 
yes it is a great lens but only if you get a good one. after trolling the web for many weeks trying to decide on the 24-70 or 24-105 i found out a few things about the 24-70

1) There seems to be a QC issue with the 24-70. Many people have to send it back for another copy
2) The 24-105 beats it when you look at the MTF charts (Frim several different sites)
3) It's dammed heavy!
4) Is 2.8 fast enough for low light indoor photo's? You'll be suprised how many times you wish you had the option of shooting at 1.8 or 1.4
5) I decided to go with the 24-105 50 1.4 combo, same money but better performance and greater flexibility

Having said all that it's still a very good lens if you get a good copy ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top