Canon EF 24-70 VERSION 2 WHEN?
- Thread starter terence19
- Start date
Blur Shadow
Senior Member
The lens just got reviewed by Photozone
avsquare
Senior Member
Thanks for the heads up. Read it, just not convinced.
TigerOyster
New Member
U mean $2850? Which shop has it in stock now at that price? Thanks
avsquare
Senior Member
Comparing it with the Mark I and Tamron:
The Mark II have improved with it's field curvature issue and it's MTF is definitely the best of all 3. But at the the price you are paying for the Mark II compared to the Tamron, the difference in MTF isn't really that much. The Tamron is already better that the Mark I by a VERY good standard, especially at the 70mm end which the Mark I had a major issue on.
Totally surprised about the CA of the Mark II - it is the worst of all 3, and when you compared to the Mark I, the amount of CA have increased at every focal length and every aperture tested. It is badly hit on the wide and and wide aperture; at 24mm f/2.8 it had increased by 0.47 which is 61% increase. On the other hand, the Tamron also took at hit at the 24mm end but not as bad as the Mark II BUT it did much better from the 35mm end onwards compared to the Mark I.
Overall, with no doubt that the Mark II is the best performer of the 3 lens, but we have to consider the reason why people want to change from the Mark I. Field curvature and weak 70mm are the most commonly reported issue with it and both the Mark II and Tamron did a great job over the Mark I. The Mark II is the sharpest of all 3 but not significantly superior to the Tamron, which is already a big improvement over the Mark II, especially at the 70mm end.
So come to think of it, does the Mark II justify that amount of dent on your wallet? You've to decide for yourself. Other positives of the Mark II is the probably slight improvement on barrel distortion compared to the Mark I. The Tamron improved on the 70mm end but was terrible on the 24mm end. But the CA performance of the Mark II, when compared to all 3, was rather a concern to me, especially at that price point the Mark II is asking.
Of course, the Mark II carries the latest AF algorithm in which the 5D Mark III and 1DX and 1DC can fully make use of (remember, if your body is not on the latest 61-pt AF system, the newer lens's algorithm doesn't really mean much to you), but again, the Mark I is already pretty fast. If you shoot quite a share of action in this focal range and you do own one of the 3 bodies offering the latest AF system, then maybe the Mark II have a significant meaning on you. Else, the VC of the Tamron really makes it a very interesting lens, especially as a walk around lens or a 1-lens-solution travel lens compared to the 24-105L. The extra stop of light together with VC will be very helpful when you want to take some travel photograph at night or shooting night streets handheld.
VC is also useful if you do a little of videography. Some people may say VC is never needed at that focal range, but hey, since you are already paying that price, if it comes with it it's certainly a plus. But hey, whether it's worth it to pay that extra SGD$1k for the red ring, it's up to you and what you shoot then
MechaEd
Member
To put it into some perspective though, 10 years ago the mk I was launched at USD2100 so them asking for USD2300 for the mk II isn't all that surprising.
Photozone is the first review I've read that doesn't rave about the sharpness. Digital Picture also mentioned some variation in lenses. Doesn't bode well about Canon's QC huh?
Photozone is the first review I've read that doesn't rave about the sharpness. Digital Picture also mentioned some variation in lenses. Doesn't bode well about Canon's QC huh?
Comparing it with the Mark I and Tamron:
The Mark II have improved with it's field curvature issue and it's MTF is definitely the best of all 3. But at the the price you are paying for the Mark II compared to the Tamron, the difference in MTF isn't really that much. The Tamron is already better that the Mark I by a VERY good standard, especially at the 70mm end which the Mark I had a major issue on.
Totally surprised about the CA of the Mark II - it is the worst of all 3, and when you compared to the Mark I, the amount of CA have increased at every focal length and every aperture tested. It is badly hit on the wide and and wide aperture; at 24mm f/2.8 it had increased by 0.47 which is 61% increase. On the other hand, the Tamron also took at hit at the 24mm end but not as bad as the Mark II BUT it did much better from the 35mm end onwards compared to the Mark I.
Overall, with no doubt that the Mark II is the best performer of the 3 lens, but we have to consider the reason why people want to change from the Mark I. Field curvature and weak 70mm are the most commonly reported issue with it and both the Mark II and Tamron did a great job over the Mark I. The Mark II is the sharpest of all 3 but not significantly superior to the Tamron, which is already a big improvement over the Mark II, especially at the 70mm end.
So come to think of it, does the Mark II justify that amount of dent on your wallet? You've to decide for yourself. Other positives of the Mark II is the probably slight improvement on barrel distortion compared to the Mark I. The Tamron improved on the 70mm end but was terrible on the 24mm end. But the CA performance of the Mark II, when compared to all 3, was rather a concern to me, especially at that price point the Mark II is asking.
Of course, the Mark II carries the latest AF algorithm in which the 5D Mark III and 1DX and 1DC can fully make use of (remember, if your body is not on the latest 61-pt AF system, the newer lens's algorithm doesn't really mean much to you), but again, the Mark I is already pretty fast. If you shoot quite a share of action in this focal range and you do own one of the 3 bodies offering the latest AF system, then maybe the Mark II have a significant meaning on you. Else, the VC of the Tamron really makes it a very interesting lens, especially as a walk around lens or a 1-lens-solution travel lens compared to the 24-105L. The extra stop of light together with VC will be very helpful when you want to take some travel photograph at night or shooting night streets handheld.
VC is also useful if you do a little of videography. Some people may say VC is never needed at that focal range, but hey, since you are already paying that price, if it comes with it it's certainly a plus. But hey, whether it's worth it to pay that extra SGD$1k for the red ring, it's up to you and what you shoot then
Thank you for the review!
avsquare
Senior Member
Put it in another perspective. 10 years ago when the Mark I was launched, there wasn't any really 3rd party company that can challenge it. Now you have the Tamron VC
Again, 10 years ago, when you need absolute IQ, FF and MF are probably your choice. Now, you have really awesome m4/3 and APS-C mirrorless products that challenges entry to mid range DSLR quality.
Tucksoon
Senior Member
There is an ongoing discussion in another section bro. There seemed to be some QC issues with this lens in US.
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/sigma-tamron-tokina/1071351-tamrons-new-24-70mm-f2-8-vc.html
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/sigma-tamron-tokina/1071351-tamrons-new-24-70mm-f2-8-vc.html
raydio
Senior Member
avsquare
Senior Member
G-man
Senior Member
avsquare said:
Actually i did a google search on this issue and only came across lensrental.com's article. Other than that there haven't been talk about this. Perhaps we need to take into consideration the price point and the fact that the lens gets shipped around many times.
Yes cause for concern but don't lose sleep over it. Just use normally. How many of us ship our lenses multiple times or abuse them in a normal shooting scenario. Not me.
avsquare
Senior Member
I won't lose sleep over it. I own none of the 24-70mm ;p
Halfmoon
Senior Member
Comparing it with the Mark I and Tamron:
The Mark II have improved with it's field curvature issue and it's MTF is definitely the best of all 3. But at the the price you are paying for the Mark II compared to the Tamron, the difference in MTF isn't really that much. The Tamron is already better that the Mark I by a VERY good standard, especially at the 70mm end which the Mark I had a major issue on.
Totally surprised about the CA of the Mark II - it is the worst of all 3, and when you compared to the Mark I, the amount of CA have increased at every focal length and every aperture tested. It is badly hit on the wide and and wide aperture; at 24mm f/2.8 it had increased by 0.47 which is 61% increase. On the other hand, the Tamron also took at hit at the 24mm end but not as bad as the Mark II BUT it did much better from the 35mm end onwards compared to the Mark I.
Overall, with no doubt that the Mark II is the best performer of the 3 lens, but we have to consider the reason why people want to change from the Mark I. Field curvature and weak 70mm are the most commonly reported issue with it and both the Mark II and Tamron did a great job over the Mark I. The Mark II is the sharpest of all 3 but not significantly superior to the Tamron, which is already a big improvement over the Mark II, especially at the 70mm end.
So come to think of it, does the Mark II justify that amount of dent on your wallet? You've to decide for yourself. Other positives of the Mark II is the probably slight improvement on barrel distortion compared to the Mark I. The Tamron improved on the 70mm end but was terrible on the 24mm end. But the CA performance of the Mark II, when compared to all 3, was rather a concern to me, especially at that price point the Mark II is asking.
Of course, the Mark II carries the latest AF algorithm in which the 5D Mark III and 1DX and 1DC can fully make use of (remember, if your body is not on the latest 61-pt AF system, the newer lens's algorithm doesn't really mean much to you), but again, the Mark I is already pretty fast. If you shoot quite a share of action in this focal range and you do own one of the 3 bodies offering the latest AF system, then maybe the Mark II have a significant meaning on you. Else, the VC of the Tamron really makes it a very interesting lens, especially as a walk around lens or a 1-lens-solution travel lens compared to the 24-105L. The extra stop of light together with VC will be very helpful when you want to take some travel photograph at night or shooting night streets handheld.
VC is also useful if you do a little of videography. Some people may say VC is never needed at that focal range, but hey, since you are already paying that price, if it comes with it it's certainly a plus. But hey, whether it's worth it to pay that extra SGD$1k for the red ring, it's up to you and what you shoot then
Hehe.... seems you have a much better review of 24-70mm II than what I have read...........
I am still undecided due to the reviews.... so will wait a while and think if I want to HOOT............. at the moments, seems like many good review online... and only issue I thought to me was the 70mm sharpness...... Hmmmm.... :think:
