Header banner
Revain logoHome Page

Reviews

Global ratings 32
  • 5
    19
  • 4
    8
  • 3
    5
  • 2
    0
  • 1
    0

Type of review

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I was surprised by the quality for the price.

Those who compare it with the first model and scold about the plastic case, do not forget that the plastic allowed to reduce weight, and I'm not going to hammer nails and drop it on the floor. If the case were made of metal, then the subject would be heavier than the first model, because. He has more lenses. I agree with one of the commentators that in terms of sharpness this lens is on a par with budget fixes, perhaps even not only with budget ones. From 30 mm to 70 mm - very good, I shoot…

Pros
  • The best zoom on these focal lengths, in my opinion and according to many reviewers. Stunning sharpness, gorgeous color reproduction, aperture. The assembly is cool - I have never seen the owners of this subject carry it into alignment, like other glasses. I didn’t need adjustment either, although I passed it, just in case :)
Cons
  • Price (although you have to pay for quality and pleasure); there are small distortions at 24mm, which are corrected by software.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

A valuable purchase, some advantages!

None of my lenses were so delicate and fragile. For 2 months, there are scratches and scuffs on the case, despite the fact that I shoot in the studio, and not on the front line of hostilities. And today, from a light blow on the rack, the hood scattered. Whoa? Can a lens of this level and price be like this ? I dread what will happen next year. Will the lenses fall out? Exhortations that everything is for the sake of the client and to reduce weight are ridiculous. Make it 100 grams heavier, but

Pros
  • Fast, sharp, light.
Cons
  • Fragile.

Revainrating 3 out of 5

There are deviations, generally tolerable.

when I bought it, it cost around 70 gray of course. and that's what I want to say . it's not worth the money! this is indisputably the highest quality glass of all that I have, but if you expect highly artistic masterpieces from it, then it will disappoint you. this is an excellent glass for reporting, weddings, funerals, etc. but no more. it does not distort at the edges, it does not chromate, we can say that it is sharp on open ones, but the postulate that fixes are better than zooms is…

Pros
  • workmanship, no distortion and ha.
Cons
  • price, picture.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Do not hesitate to buy, the quality is amazing for the price.

Very sharp at 2.8! For me, this is one of the most important principles. When I was choosing a lens, I reviewed a bunch of conflicting information, even somewhere in the depths of my soul I was ready to forgive the blurryness in the frame, like in the first version, still the zoom and all that ., but when I put it on my 3 nickel, I was shocked! Now I consider this lens ideal for myself - the most popular focal lenses with sharpness like those of fixes. Now the price seems very reasonable for…

Pros
  • sharpness, focus
Cons
  • before buying I thought that in the price, now they are not

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I am delighted, the product is really worthy.

In general, the lens will suit everyone except for professional portrait photographers (this category will have to carry fixes, although they themselves already know this). For everyone else, an excellent tube, in principle, for lack of a better one, you can put up with an inflated cost. Do not buy a light filter right away, most likely you will not need it. You shouldn’t drag this lens into the forest-mountains, after all, plastic is not metal, if you break it, you’ll be upset, because it’s…

Pros
  • The main thing is the sharpness for the type of "zoom lens", just super! Someone compares with fixes, everything is relative, more specific: fixes with aperture ratio of 2 or less indisputably lose to him in everything, with aperture ratio of 1.4 (except half a lens of 1.8) and more on their focal lengths, they will do this zoom by 100% (in reality they will be better by about 30%, but no more). I got a tube with accurate autofocus both on crop (600D) and on full (5Dm3), the first two months the autofocus was accurate, then occasionally it does not focus on difficult targets (a sideways glossy white stripe on a light background). The color rendition is also on top, in reality it does not lose to any fixes. A plus to what was said earlier: I began to smear autofocus ((, Filters are expensive enough. At dusk, I now use manual focus more often - before there were more emotions.
Cons
  • The only downside is the price! Well, in reality, it should cost no more than 70% of the cost of the new 70-200 II 2.8 / f. And, yes, the hood is really unsuccessful. but, apparently, this is due to the angle on the full frame, just a feature, but it is undeniably necessary. at 70mm this tube loses to the 70mm Canon 70-200 II 2.8/f. Filters are expensive. Focusing at dusk is wrong - you have to do everything with handles. Good fixes are clearly preferable, but you have to carry a whole bucket.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Great product, a pleasure to use.

It takes time to adjust and get used to the distortion at the edges of the frame, but you quickly adapt to this. Especially if you are a practicing photographer, and not a fan of reading reviews and comparing numbers. Prior to that, I constantly used 24-105 F4 on freelance shoots for more than 5 years and 24-70 F.4 for 4 months. As a staff member 24-105, over time, even after cleaning and adjusting, he began to miss and soap, and this is very unpleasant to rake and watch later. It also makes no

Pros
  • An excellent choice for a stock lens. Sharp, tenacious, due to the lack of a stub, it does not infuriate, does not make noise, and does not twitch, the move is very smooth.
Cons
  • As disadvantages, I would single out only the price and weight, but it is useless to complain about the price, and the weight is unlikely to change in the near future due to the design of the lens.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

Excellent quality, absolutely not expected for such a price.

I bought a lens in Pixel24. Reviewed several copies. Chose. Bottom line - I don't like the lens. ________________________________________________________________________ 12/14/2022 Addition to the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens review. After a trip on vacation, I decided to make an adjustment. Linking a Canon 5DMark III camera and a Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM lens. Adjustment is free under the warranty card. After alignment in the service center Copy-Hong Kong (official Canon…

Pros
  • Working focal lengths 24-70. At a focal length of 50-70 mm f2.8-f11, an excellent picture.
Cons
  • Lack of stabilizer. I personally did not like the picture at a focal length of 24-35 mm and aperture f3.5-f8. It is not possible to agree with the lens yet. Perhaps this is not my lens.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

A really necessary purchase, I'm glad I found this product.

Finally, they made a small lens hood, the old one (on the 1st version) constantly occupied the floor of the backpack. The best zoom (for me) is at focal lengths of 24-70mm, if aperture of 2.8 is important. Comparing with used analogues: - with the 1st version - the 2nd has faster and more accurate focus, sharper picture, higher contrast. - with Sigma 35 and 50mm Art fixes, I will say that they will win in terms of sharpness and, possibly, colors. But not for convenience and accuracy of…

Pros
  • A zoom that allows you to simultaneously capture landscape and people in low light conditions. A zoom with precise and stable focus (archi! important to me). A zoom capable of separating the model from the background. A zoom that produces a sharp picture with excellent color reproduction. A zoom that can compete with budget Canon 35 / 2.0 and 50 / 1.4 primes
Cons
  • Flaws Rather controversial points, when everyone decides on their own: -plastic fastening of filters, of course, not like the metal one in the 1st version, but now it is easier to remove the polarizing filters (on the 1st version, the filter "got stuck" and was removed with great difficulty) - many people complain about the plastic in the case, but thanks to the plastic it was possible to reduce the weight, which is a plus. For me personally, tactile sensations in comparison with the 1st version have not changed. The lens still feels tight-knocked down. - the diameter of the filters is 82mm, for me it did not become a problem either - from the Sigma 24-70 f / 2.8 IF EX DG HSM there was a complete set of corresponding filters. - the lack of a stabilizer is not a problem for me, but rather an inconvenience that makes me carry a tripod to shoot landscapes in the evening / at night. It is problematic to shoot people even with a stub in low light conditions. -price. March 2022: new - 118.5k for Eurotest; 142.9k for the PCT. - Not the best value for money. With an eye on the price, you can give preference to the 1st version, which has long been discontinued and is limitedly available at flea markets at a price of 45-47k for a used one.

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I'm amazed! It was definitely worth the money!

Canon has the best zoom at this focal length. The perfect choice for a reporter. The perfect wedding choice. At a wedding, you can use it as the only one and not take a portrait lens out of your backpack if you wish - the final quality of even portraits does not leave the feeling of "hack work". Ideally fast and tenacious autofocus when combined with 5DM3. I have the first version of Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM. The second version is a big step forward: sharpness like a fix, soap and noise is…

Pros
  • - sharp as a fix, except for jokes - quick - all diaphragms are working, honest 2.8 - Virtually no chromatic aberrations – perfect match for 5DM3
Cons
  • – bokeh worse than Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM - less artistic than Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM

Revainrating 4 out of 5

Well done, but I won't buy any more.

I was looking for a magical lens that takes "those very photos." Unfortunately, it is precisely this little bit of magic that this lens lacks. There are magical photos on lenses 70-200, 135, but here the photo is as it is. Good. Nothing to complain about, this is one of the best lenses in the world. Yes, and there is not much alternative at these focal lengths. If you are an amateur and are looking for that very picture, then first try the 135th, 70-200, and then this lens.

Pros
  • Clear picture. Universal focal lengths. Made well. It feels like a Thing.
Cons
  • Price / picture ratio.

Revainrating 3 out of 5

Not my best purchase, you could have found something else.

We all know that the stub can be turned off. This is 35-40% of its cost. But if you need to shoot in the "waltz rhythm" with a calculation of more than 1-2 meters, you need a tripod h roofing felts, thousand for 15-20, and even take a stepladder, + hire an assistant, then the cost of the picture will already frighten the client, and you will look like a beginner. medium lighting. and there is noise microshift excitement-the human factor, and then the whole invention with a new requirement for…

Pros
  • Good cool amateur lens
Cons
  • no stub - no professional lens

Revainrating 5 out of 5

I definitely recommend buying, I didnt notice any disadvantages.

Amazing zoom. Bokeh draws great. Even sometimes I don’t want to wear a half-length, because I’m sure of the result of 24-70 and its beautiful bokeh. Much sharper than the first version. Sharpness across the entire image field. Yes, the price tag is expensive, but it's worth it and you don't have to cry that there is a lot of plastic. The plastic is solid, nothing backlash. Someone complains that the zoom rubber peels off, but according to the same reviews, this is quite common in gray lenses.

Pros
  • Razor sharp when open. Aperture 2.8. Lighter than the first release lens by 150 grams. Contrasting, colors are amazing.
Cons
  • I'm expensive myself. The hood is flimsy. Light filters for 82 are expensive.