Canon 24-70mm F2.8L The One Lens Everyone Should Own

How much different is the 24-70mm F2.8L compared to the II version. What is different? Is the first version not worth buying?

Difference stroke for difference folks. There is no such thing call one lens do it all. It is all boiled down to which type of photography your are after. Zoom lens is good for run and gun, that’s it. Where prime lens will make a photographer visualize and frame every shot carefully in their mind before they execute the shot. That’s what we called art/skill.

I still love my primes, especially vintage ones. But most of the time, I use 24-70, it's just that good!

This “age old” question is and never will be relevant to anyone ever. Photography has always had choices and always will, why do people ask these irrelevant questions?

You are half right. That lens is the Canon 24-70 f4 IS, not f2.8 II. The f4 has been my workhorse for the last 8 years

Of all my lenses the 24-70 is the workhorse but for portraits alone the 70-200 is the best. If could only have 2 lines it would be these 2. I use an adapter for R5 as I have a 5D Mark 4 secondary body.

But you don't love it :)

If you love this thing wait till you get the RF version

Bought mine used- love it!

Loved this lens. Only sold it when I switched to Sony. Wish I could have afforded to keep. Great video review!!!

How is this lens for video?

I noticed you showed the EF-S 24mm which is for a crop sensor. Wondering why?

We are in agreement.

Changing composition with your feet changes the background. How am I a rookie and i know this. Taking a portrait with 300mm looks WAY better than one with a 50 or even 85mm

Video so inspirational, I'm running to the store

I really enjoyed this review!! Thank you!!

Your photos are beautiful, so stunning. I’m thinking I need to get this lens too. I’m one of those people who have to zoom in and out with their feet when using a prime 50mm lens 😂

Your videos are great, especially like seeing how you don't have the latest gear but your stuff is all top notch.

I use this on Canon 80D. Beast lens!

My most used lens is a 400/2.8 followed by a 600/4.0.

Just got mine for 550 at a pawn shop! I run a m50 mkii so it's definitely not the best for that but I still get some mean images with it. I love it already and I couldn't be happier to have found that deal!

Have always loved my lens and like you say it’s fantastic 👍🏽

The main point exactly is "when you can't use your feet to zoom and this happens so often outdoor".

EF 24-70 F2.8 ii + R6 = value for money

What fonts are you using in this video? 🫣 And definitely going to buy this lens after convincing my girlfriend to skip one vacation 😂.

At the moment I am willing to invest in lens. I do not have the Canon 5D MK iv (YET), but I have been eyeballing it for a long time. I do have a Canon 90D with a 32.5 megapixel crop sensor. I am going to mount the 24-70mm f/2.8 on that, and see what happens.😬

Does this lens have IS? The new 2.8 Mark 2 does

I agree with everything you said. I recently got into astrophotography and those primes are way more important at f1.4 verses the zoom and f2.8. That is the only problem I have trying to pull the trigger on the 24-70. So I remain with none of them. Thx

the leather jacket squicking in the back is just the best :)

Great video, may thanks. Just a note, it is the perfect lens for FULL FRAME. M4/3 cameras need something much wider at the low end. For full frame you are right, this lens covers most situations really well, it is a classic. I also always carry a 50mm "f1.8" for anything really low light.

great video you conviced me

I used to rent this lens, now, I own it. It is for lack of better words the Holy Trinity of lenses. I originally used it on the 5D MK1, now it lives on a R6MK2. My go-to every day 1.5 lb baby. If I had 1 lens to be stuck with, this is it.

This would be a lot better without the music.

For portraits, there is nothing like a 70-200 2.8 😍😍😍

I shoot people almost exclusively; and for me the "Holy Trinity" of lenses is the 24-105 F/4L IS -- 24-70 F2.8L-- and the 70-200 F2.8L IS. I used to shoot weddings for many years and those three lenses were, pretty much, all I ever used at a wedding. I now shoot a lot of graduating seniors, models, headshots and portraits. In the studio I typically use the 24-105 and on location the 70-200. I don't do that much with wide angle so instead of the 16-35 (rounding out the "holy trinity") I have the 17-40mm F4. I used it to shoot establishment shots, the church, or place where the wedding was occurring, etc., now I use it to shoot establishment shots at large venues at events. The 24-105 comes in really handy on location executive portraits or headshots because of its focusing versatility. You did an excellent job and I, like you, believe that a person would need an electron microscope to discern any difference between a prime or zoom lens--at least with Canon lenses. You do excellent work, I'm certainly not a landscape photographer but I recognize good work when I see it.

Very much appreciated Lewis! Very informative and I learnt a lot from your video! God bless you and good luck!

Aren’t prime lenses more for portrait photography anyway? So there’s more reason to use the 24-70mm than a prime for sure in thus case. Also question, doesn’t the shorter focal lengths make images distorted? I have a aps-c camera so I don’t know if having a full frame makes distortion less obvious or not just need some clarification.

Hello Sir, I've a question...

Let's say I get a 24-70 f2.8 as my first lens for portraits and as an overall lens, do I need to get 70-200 f2.8 primarily for portrait alongside 24-70?

second question...

Am I going to miss anything if I don't get 70-200, when it comes to portraits?(other than the more background blur and zoom range)

some of us who prefers prime lenses love using f1.4 or f1.2 which is something your inferior 24-70 don't have

I love my 40mm pancake lens but would love to have the 24-70mm.

NO, IT WON'T. You are kidding yourself when you say that you are going to keep an EF lens for a long time -- be it a decade or just a few years. The fact is that everything is going to move to mirrorless and the RF mount. You are going to HATE using those adapters and having a bigger lens hanging off the front, nevermind that it's a black lens on a gun metal body and whatever else. The fact that you are even considering a lens costing well into the four figures means that you CARE about your gear (a lot). You are not going to be happy and you are going to go buy that RF 24-70/2.8 IS L or you are going to go big and get the RF 28-70/2. It is like buying an FD lens thinking that you'll keep using it adapted or otherwise when the EF mount and the EOS 630 came out. It's not realistically going to happen.

If only the 24-105 came anywhere close to this lens at the edges ... it was my favourite lens on my 5D MkII, and did weddings beautifully (the centre is great), but now with an R5 I am continually shocked at the poor quality at the edges - they are too poor to ignore now, it's so blatent. I suppose I have to go get one of these now!

I am still blown away by the image quality this lens offers on my 5D IV. This is the lens you take on adventures. Build quality is top notch, still looks new, no scratch on after heavy use.

The better lens is the Tamron SP 24-70 2.8 Di VC. Hands down IMO.

Yes, the Canon is technically sharper; but only on a tripod. Pixel peep and be happy I guess. It’s not going to give you as sharp of images handheld, especially if you’re shooting longer focal lengths in low lighting.

It’s a must have focal length and aperture; however, unless you’re mounting this to a body with IBIS, save your money and get the Tamron. And not the Sogma either; it’s IS is lame and barely works. Just my 2c.

It’s all about shooting in the real world, and this is definitely a hand held run and gun lens; so the lack of IS takes it out of the game right quick.

thank you, I'll be purchasing this lens with my R6 body and start learning from there.

I just purchased this 24-70 2.8 II a week ago for my R6 and R5...the images are OUTSTANDING! Better then what I anticipated.

It is a very nice lens. But F2.8 isnt really that fast.

Lol- I describe myself as an enthusiast rather than a pro- I watched a few reviews of this lens- so I took delivery of a pre loved one today- it's way sharper than my 24-105 f4 L- I also have a habit of of watching reviews post-purchase, and you have just made me feel REALLY GOOD about my choice- thanks!