I'm sorry, I just can't understand ratings that aren't 5/5 for this lens. It flat out rocks. Let me just get a few things straight regarding this lens vs. the newer 24-70mm lens that replaced it:
1. This lens is more stout than the 24-70mm, yes, but it is also noticeably shorter which to me is preferable. This means it has a nearer/lower center of gravity and is easier to manage for long periods of time. The 24-70mm is basically like handling a telephoto zoom (i.e. 70-200mm or 80-200mm) with its center of gravity further out, harder to handle for long periods and easier to knock into people with.
2. The 24-70mm is a very sharp lens. I understand that. This lens is at least as sharp, however, and in my opinion slightly sharper. This becomes important in point number 3 below.
3. This lens can be picked up for roughly 2/3 the price of the 24-70mm. To me that settles the issue. Now, if the 24-70mm had VR then maybe it would be a different story but it doesn't. Again the 24-70mm is harder to handle, longer, no sharper and costs at least 50% more ($1,000-ish vs $1,5000-ish)
I hope I have made a good case for getting one of these over the newer 24-70. This is a top notch solid professional battle ready piece of equipment here. Don't listen to the talk of it being "too big" or "too heavy." First of all, as I said it's much easier to maneuver than the longer 24-70, and second of all the heaviness of this lens is overrated. If you are coming from a kit lens yes you will find it heavy. If you are used to shooting with pro glass this will not seem extraordinary heavy. It is in line with professional Canon and Nikon glass I have used over the years in terms of weight. Unless they decide to put VR on the 24-70mm I am not going to take another look at it while I can still find these for 2/3 the price.
0 comments:
Post a Comment