I have the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Standard Zoom Lens for my 5DMark 2. Is this lens better than my zoom set to 35mm?
476282
Well according to dxo mark, this lens not only has image stabilization but its also a lot sharper than the 24-70 II
1170784
I have the same dilemna. However, I am currently thinking that the 28-135mm is better suited on the basis that it is USM and therefore quicker to focus. I've had non-USM lenses before which tend to aimlessly go back and forth trying to focus when shooting in normal to low light. Since you have an APS-C rather than full frame camera, the 28-135 is equivalent to a 45mm-216mm which to me is enough zoom since I am not into sport photography. Hope this helps
501122
Thanks for the feedback. I ended up getting the Canon 17-55/2.8IS. It was more expensive, but I had come across some extra money. I've had that lens for several month now and it's awesome. The zoom range is excellent, it's great having f2.8 through the whole range, and the IS adds probably at least 3 stops. It's very sharp when I do my part, especially when it's stopped down a couple clicks. I would still love to get a lens like I described in my OP, but I'm looking at a wide angle zoom and a better telephoto lens before that one.
523657
I have been using the 24-70 2.8 for a while now on my 7D and I find that the range is not optimal for outdoors. I can get some great shots at 70 mm, but at 24 mm the shots just are not wide enough - close but not there. Upgrading (or downgrading) to the 17-55 2.8 IS USM this week. I think it will be a way better lens for a cropped sensor camera. It will allow me to get some landscape shots that I was just not able to achieve with the 24-70.Side note: tried the 24-70 2.8 on my friend's 5D MII and it was awesome - It would be my lens of choice if I had a full frame camera.
622728
The kit zoom lens is f 3.5-5.6 depending on the focal length it is set at. It's a good snapshot lens. No kit lens is as good as prime lenses in my opinion.
518359
Question doesn't say anything about usage of lens. 135 has the fastest focusing probably from all Canon EF lenses, it's sharp and produce shallow DOF. But it's fixed. The other two 24-70 and 24-104 are zooms = more versatile lenses. 24-70 is f2.8 what's advantage for focusing in a dark and produce shallower DOF than 24-105. 24-105 has extended range and IS. So if you need universal lens and you shoot a lot in dark conditions - 24-70 f2.8 If you travel a lot or you need longer end than 70mm and focusing speed isn't critical to you - 24-105 f4 If you need longer lens with fast focusing for concerts, headshoots, or you live in darker world - 135 f2 If your concern is technical quality you can't miss with any of them. Marian
523659
The 24-105mm isn't very wide for a walk-around lens. I'm more inclined to recommend the 15-85mm IS USM for its very nice optics, extra wide angle view and overall versatility.The EF-S 17-55mm f2.8 is an excellent zoom that is particularly useful in low light. It doesn't offer the range of the 24-105 or 15-85 but you won't find a better standard zoom for a Canon crop camera.
503709
I have only shot it with the 14-35 f/2 and it was VERTY fast to AF even in indoor conditions. It is much much faster than the E-M5 from what I hear. Maybe not as fast as the E-5 but the 14-35 was plenty fast for me. I can not comment on other lenses as I have not tried them, and probably will not be as A: I am not a fan of large lenses and B: I can not afford to buy them all to test them :)
2256733
I usually think of zooms for versatility, but if you were just interested in a prime, I'd say this one was the best combination. 14mm is too wide. 35mm a bit too close (remember it's actually closer to 50mm when you take into account the cropped sensor). 23mm is a bit more flexible as well as being a great lens.
1032376
Only the 18-55mm EF-S IS STM Lens + EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Telephoto Zoom Lens are Canon brand. The others (wide angle and 58 mm telephoto) are a brand I wasn't familiar with and actually we haven't used them yet.
1813610
Yes the image quality is much better. This lens is over all sharper and has a much better build quality. I own and use this lens on my Canon 70D.
933399
This is one of the best lenses I have ever owned. I am not sure about the 35-70 2.8 version because there is no macro application on the 24-70. I use this lens for both fx and dx cameras how ever I would assume that it is a little sharper than the 35-70 due to the fact that it is newer technology. I can't find any current reviews for your lens. I agree with Marty in LA, buy the Nikon 105mm or 200mm if you want macro and if you need a versatile wide angle buy the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 in either F2.8 or F4...
1716985
What version of the 24-70 are you referring to? If you do not need f2.8 then I would steer you to the new f4 version that has IS. The 28-70 is an old lens no longer supported by Canon and you will find it difficult to find someone to fix it if you ever have problems.
445408
It depends on the lens. In US market, there are only two lenses available: EF-M 18-55mm with zoom 55/18=3, and EF-M 22mm (a prime lens).
1561300
So now I am wondering just what I am missing with regards to buying this lens for use on a DSLR like the Canon EOS 5D versus the much more expensive "EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM for EOS SLR"???
2004639
I've tried both and I like the 24-70 far better. It is a sharper, faster lens.
498788
Hello! Canon has two new versions of Canon EF 700-200 f/2.8 USM. Both with image stabilization ( Canon EF 700-200 f/2.8 IS I USM and Canon EF 700-200 f/2.8 IS II USM). There is a new third lens with similar feature, but with F/4 of aperture (Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM Lens). So I called as "old version" or a "basic version".