Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 30, 2004, 3:19 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2
Default Canon 24-85 vs 24-70L for D60

Please help,


I have a D60 with very cheap Sigma zoom (28-135). I am not impressed with the results off this lens and am considering a Canon 24-85 or 24-70L (I also like the idea of the slightly wider lower end). Can anybody offer any advice as to whether the 24-70L gives good enough results compared to the 24-85 to justify the much higher price? I would intend that the lens I choose will become my 'standard' lens and spend most of it's time on the camera.

Thanks

Paul
Paul Gabbitus is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 30, 2004, 6:58 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
ohenry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,676
Default

The 24-70L is very sharp throughout its range
ohenry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 22, 2004, 12:22 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 26
Default

Once you have experienced the L, it will be hard to shoot with anything else.
rextilleon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 24, 2004, 12:29 PM   #4
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 30
Default 24-85 v 24-70 L

I have the 24-70L and had the 24-85 for the 300D. I recently sold the 24-85 and wish I had not. It is a very capable little lens that is perfect for every day use.

The 24-70 L is huge and heavy--not practical to walk around with. While the quality of its photos are better, especially with the added flexibility of f/2.8 across the range, if I had everything to do over again, I would have kept the 24-85 and not bought the 24-70 L. The 24-70 L is just too big, heavy and expensive for every day use and in some instances picture quality, is not as good as some cheaper lenses (especially at telephoto).

I also have the 50MM f/1.8. I have found the picture quality on this $70.00 lens much better than the 24-70 L.

See my posting "Tweaking the 24-70 L".
fsm2i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2004, 12:01 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

fsm2j,

Did you ever test your 24-70L? If it doesn't perform at the long end then there's something wrong. Definitely not typical for that lens.

Yes, weight is something to consider for sure. It is all a tradeoff :-) A f2.8 zoom lens is heavy, no way around that.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 26, 2004, 11:48 AM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 26
Default

First of all, the lens is not "huge and heavy"----We are not talking point and shoot here---I use it as an every day lens with no problems, There is just no comparison between the L lens and the 24-85--none whatsoever. Secondly, at telephoto the lens is brilliant---I dont know what tha poster is talking about. Sometimes you have to wonder.
rextilleon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 28, 2004, 5:17 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 30
Default "the poster"

First of all, yes it is huge and heavy for an everyday, walkaround lens. For those of you who have not seen one or held one, go to your local camera store and check it out. Or, go to canonusa.com and compare the 24-70 L against the specs of all the other canon lenses in its "standard zoom" lens class and it's by far the largest and heaviest. (I recommend seeing it and holding it first hand if you plan to shell out the dollars for it as an everyday lens.)

I have had my 24-70L for over month and have tested it against several of my other lenses and at far distances it's soft. That said, I am sending it back to Canon to have it checked as a $1000+ lens should perform much better. As I told the Canon rep, at long-distance shots, my photos come in clearer if I manually focus which should not be the case.

At closer distances, say within 10-20 feet my 24-70 L outshines my other lenses with the exception of my 50mm f/1.8.

I hope Rextillion is right and that maybe I just got a bum lens. It happens I guess. But even if I got it back and it performs just like Rextillion says it does, I would still only bring out for special occassions. Again, it's too cumbersome for everyday.

The 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 is nice little lens that you can take anywhere easily and picture quality is pretty good too. (Most lenses in this range from the 3.5-5.6.)
fsm2i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 1, 2004, 9:51 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 26
Default

Trust me, you got a bad lens or there is a problem with your camera--send it back to Canon. What can I say--lift weights---I dont find it hard to handle and I am not a big guy. Tonight I shot hand held for about two hours with my 70-200mmL now thats not an every day lens.
rextilleon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2004, 2:23 AM   #9
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 30
Default L

I sent the 24-70 L back to a Canon servicer and I am hoping I get it back like you say I should.

I'm not a big guy either. But I did kickbox and lift weights. It's still big and heavy
fsm2i is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 6, 2004, 2:25 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 239
Default

You want to talk about HEAVY? Heck, for years I carried around 2 - New Style Canon F-1's with 5fps motor drives (they hold 12-'AA' batteries in the motor & several different fixed lenses - the heaviest being the 80-200mm 4.0L. Used a monopod all the time with that lens! To top that off, sometimes I had my Canon T90 or a Mamiya 645 & 1 lens on it. And, I was 58 when I traded them for my EOS system & not in the best of shape(working on that now)! That my friend is Heavy - but they were SOLID as a rock!
Railfire is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 2:26 PM.