I'm going to write up a more thorough review in the future, but i have absolutely no (ZERO) complaints about this lens. It feels great in the hands, and I have no problem with the weight of this lens. (It is built like a tank) Image quality is top notch. If you're thinking about buying this lens, don't think- buy it.

First few shots (minor pp, slight contrast adjustments):



100% Crop





100% Crop. (Eh. You can tell it's out of focus, but the main yellow stem part is sharp.)



I'll include some more once i find the time.

Hope this helps.

I too was pleasantly surprised with my copy. I'm also going to write a review when I get time, but it's a kick ass lens. I upgraded from the sigma EX DG to the L. The sigma was great for it's price (a great kit/starter lens if you can afford it) but if you can afford the L you absolutely get what you pay for in build and AF gains. The IQs are super close though.

Ben

I was going to do this today, but I searched!

The 24-70L f2.8.

What is there to say that hasnt been said already. This is my absolute favorite lens. Ask Leah, Ben, Luca, or anyone else who knows me as a photographer they will agree. I have this on 90% of the time. It is a bit on the heavy side, but I find that paired with a medium size body, its perfectly balanced. It is off weight on the XTi but very manageable and after a few shots, you wont notice it anymore.

IQ is top notch, the lens is great with colors and is spot on sharp. If you do research on the lens, there have been some complaints with back focusing issues. I have yet to see this and IMHO feel it is mostly user error.

The AF is very fast and very precise.

The focal length is perfect for portraits on a crop body effectively giving you a 38-112mm focal range. Paired with a FF body you have a fantastic walk around lens with a happy medium with a wide end and zoom end.

As BC already said, Dont think, buy this lens. You wont be disappointed!

On the XTi for size reference.


Ill put other shots of the lens later, Just temp for now.



Sample Images.

2 samples with the 1D from yesterday:

Another sample from Sunday.

Those that have this lens--specifically on a FF camera--how much do you use it?

I know you said specifically on FF camera... but I generally rotate between the 24-70, 17-55 and 50 1.4 for 90% of my shots. Been using the 17-55 more lately to get myself used to the fov when the 5d2 arrives, but id say this is my most essential focal length, If I could have one lens, this would be it.

I have very rarely needed a zoom in this range in the past, and the 50 has filled the gap between my 17-40 and 70-200 very capably. But, after chasing my 20 month old nephew around at Thanksgiving, having a flexible, fast-ish midrange zoom would really be helpful...

well I used to own this, but no longer do.....

seriously, I go back and forth like you mark. The brick is soooo ****ing big/heavy (especially as a hood user) it gets old fast. I got rid of all my 2.8 zooms in favor of f4s and the 17-40 is close enough to the 70-200 I don't need that gap filled with more than the 50mm.

But as you know, I ordered my 5Dii with the 24-105 just to see how I liked that lens. Typically I haven't felt 24mm is wide enough for my personal habits, but lately, after being stuck on a crop for 2+ months, 24 will probably feel nice and wide again. So we'll see. Basically for me the 24-70 is too big/heavy for what I want and the other zooms I have cover enough of that ground. Maybe consider one of the 3rd party 2.8 zooms that cost 1/3rd the price but focus slower?

Yeah I have been thinking about this lens a lot.
Right now, it would be a great addition and with the 2.8 I could probably toss my 28-135 IS that I usually use for walking around.

I know the range would be useful after using my 28-105 at thanksgiving--I just don't really like that lens...

To add my two cents to the review--this is a total beast of a lens, and a real gem. My first impressions are that it's really top notch glass. However, I have a couple of niggles. The first is that it's SO big and heavy--I compare it to my 50 f/1.4, which I usually use to cover the midrange, and it's just a joke. If I want to go small/light, the 50 will still be the ticket.

Secondly, I find the zoom ring to be a bit stiff/imprecise at the wide end. But those are pretty minor things. It's a great lens that I think will get heavy use as Isaac begins to be mobile.

Oh come on, it's not that heavy.

Originally Posted by tardypizza

Oh come on, it's not that heavy.

It's 200 grams heavier than my 70-200 f/4 IS!!

You don't even know how heavy a gram is.

Originally Posted by tardypizza

You don't even know how heavy a gram is.

So true! And really, it's not that bad, but I was still surprised by its heft.

Its performance more than makes up for it, though.

True dat. I actually like heft in my cameras.

Originally Posted by tardypizza

True dat. I actually like heft in my cameras.

Same here. I leave the grip on my 20D all the time for that reason.

And hey, it makes for a great bludgeoning weapon in case of zombie attack.


-A

While I like heft while shooting, it's a bitch when carrying gear for a day...

and Mark, that snake shot is SICK!

oh, and for reference:
canon 24-70mm: 950g
canon 28mm: 308g
canon 50mm: 290g
canon 85mm: 422g
total: 1020g

so the 3 primes way just a tad more...

For ACL I shot 10 hours a day with the 5D + 24-70 and the 40D + 70-200 2.8, and carried around the Rebel, 17-40, and fisheye in the bag. It's not that bad.

950g is 2 pounds. 308g is 2/3 of a pound. We're talking about 1 1/3 pounds here, it's not a big deal.

Now I shall stop beating this dead horse.

At the risk of being pedantic: 2lbs = 908g.

tardypizza is big strong donkey-man


-A

Alright Mr Pedantic.

Grams are a measure of mass. Pounds are a measure of weight, or gravity's effect on mass. You take that lens to the moon and it will still be 950g but it will only weigh 1/3 of a pound.

So for all of you whiners, I say to the moon with ya!

...and you're planning on taking the lens to the moon when?


-A

lol way to get all technical on us TP


yeah that's right, i just called you TP
hehehehe

ugh mark, I'm hating you right now.....

I really need to get out and shoot with the 24-105 to see if it's any good. But my initial knee jerk reaction is that it's not for me. My first shots were f/4 @ 24mm (wide open wide angles, HELLO!?) but that's where it vignettes the worst... The corners were almost black. But I've only shot ~5 frames with it, so I'll need more to make any real conclusions. If it's out, then it's between this, the tamron version and the new siggy once it's out. Or just skip the mid range again.

Dude, this lens is great... Though I wish I'd had my 17-40, too.

(this is my first post from my iPod touch!)

Originally Posted by Idjiit

Glad you're digging it. That lens rocks particularly hard on a FF camera.

True dat, it rarely leaves the 5D.

Originally Posted by Markitos

(this is my first post from my iPod touch!)

I can't type for crap on those.

ugh, all this bumping makes me want to use this lens more!

Originally Posted by riderofbmx4130

lol way to get all technical on us TP


yeah that's right, i just called you TP
hehehehe

he even went metric.

more samples.

i love this lens so much i havnt taken it off yet!