Canon 24-70mm MK1 and MK2?

Messages
155
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

has anyone had either of these lenses? The price between the two is like 50-70% higher for the MK2 but is it worth it or will the MK1 be fine for general shooting?

Cheers
 
i own the mk2 and i've phenomenal in terms of sharpness, image quality (contrasty and vibrant) and focus speed. Haven't tried the mk 1 but i did used to have the nikon 24-70 in my nikon days. The canon mk2 is definitely better...but obviously comes at quite a hefty price. I'd say for 'general shooting' the mk1 will definitely be more than fine - it's still a quality lens and well regarded.
 
+1 for the Mark1 24-70f/2.8 L.
I know it sounds corny, but its my walkabout lens that's always on my 5D Mk2. A great all rounder.
 
Sample variation on the mk 1 is so poor, I'd have not bothered and gone with the mk 2. I went through several mk 1 until I was happy (and at a certain financial loss), before upgrading to a mk 2 which is much better again (but obviously dearer).
 
I saved and went for the mkii it's lovely! Can't comment on the mki I'm afraid. If you're debating it get the mkii otherwise you'll probably end up getting it anyway at some point.
 
I had both canons and tamron 24-70mm. Newest canon beats all of them by a mile in all fields. Second place I'd give to Tamron but mainly for VC which can be really useful in some situations. It has awful onion bokeh though, so you can forget about nicely blurred lights at night. Last place for mk1 Canon. Its the biggest and heaviest of all and at least for me, not sharp and contrasty enough.
 
Back
Top