Header banner
Revain logoHome Page
Anson Chen ᠌ photo
1 Level
108 Review
83 Karma

Review on Canon 24 70Mm 2 8L Standard Zoom by Anson Chen ᠌

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I do not cease to rejoice at the purchase, a very good deal!

Most people will be able to use the lens well, with the exception being portrait photographers who are paid for their work (this category will have to carry fixes, although they themselves already know this). The fact that there isn't a superior tube means that everyone else can, in theory, tolerate paying more for a good tube. The likelihood that you won't need a light filter is very high, so hold off on buying one right now. Because plastic is not the same as metal and because this lens is very expensive, you should not take it into the mountains or the forest. We only have one life to live after all, so you took a steam bath for a month, buried the toad of greed in your spirit, and bought it. majority of the time overexposed. The results of the glass will be greatly enhanced by the usage of flash and a thorough understanding of flash. Even if you don't have a bucket full of remedies, this lens will generally help you solve problems. After making the purchase, the only accessory I'm thinking about getting is a 24-1.4 fixed lens (for photographing large gatherings), not another 16-35 lens, which is good in its own right but in such a wide angle there doesn't seem to be much of a need for it (for those who already own a 16-35 lens - these lenses are like brothers, only the corners are different, they have all the features in common, in general, think about whether you need it - maybe it's And because it is so simple to make a mistake at 600, it is best to use this lens on a penny or no less. Its general "fragility" can be very bothersome at times; you start to question whether you could use something less expensive for shooting (like a 24-105/4 from a whale), especially if you are required to shoot practically for free at the management's request. Moreover, you might start to consider taking something less expensive for shooting (like a 24-105/4 from a whale).

Pros
  • This "zoom lens" type of lens achieves a very high level of sharpness. Fixes with an aperture ratio of 1.4 (except for half a lens of 1.8) and more on their focal lengths will be able to do this zoom by 100% (in reality, they will be better by about 30%, but not any more). Fixes with an aperture ratio of 2 or less unquestionably lose to him in everything when compared to him. For the first two months after buying it, the autofocus was accurate on both the crop (600D) and full (5Dm3) settings. However, after that, it began to struggle to focus on challenging targets (a sideways glossy white stripe on a light background). In terms of performance, it is on par with any fixes thanks to the outstanding color rendering. The fact that I began to blur autofocus is a benefit of what was just described; filters are already pretty expensive. I used to use manual focus more regularly when shooting at dusk before there were so many sentiments.
Cons
  • The only negative aspect is the price! In actuality, it shouldn't cost more than 70% of the cost of a brand-new 70-200 II 2.8/f lens. And you're right; the hood isn't doing very well. However it appears that the tilt of the entire frame is to blame for this. Even if it's only a feature, this is unquestionably necessary. When used at 70 millimeters, this tube is inferior to the Canon 70-200 II 2.8/f. Filters could be quite expensive. Dusk is not the best time to concentrate, so you must use the handles to complete all tasks. Higher quality fixes are definitely preferred, but you have to carry the whole bucket.

Comments (1)

Please, sign in to write a comment
July 14, 2023
Some pros: Working focal lengths 24-70 mm f2.8-f11, an excellent picture. Cons below: mm and aperture f3.5-f8 Perhaps this is not my lens.