Three EF 24-70 f2.8 L lenses are enough! (1 Viewer)

I have just got rid of my third copy of this lens, as none of them were giving me sharp IQ so I took them back to the store.
The shop tested the lenses & agreed they all had a problem, they even got the last one from a later batch at another store.

Anyway I have since bought a an EF 24-105 f4 L IS & the difference IQ is much much better.

What has happend to quality control?
Has anybody else had a problem with this lens?

I have just found this Review!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY-jKIGhAzI&feature=fvsr

Paul the problem could have been your camera body - not the lens itself. Or to be more specific the combination of your camera body and those lenses; each component of the DSLR is made to manufacturing tollerances and most of the time they are in the middle of the tollerance range - however every so often you get one lens at one end of the scale and a body at the opposite end. The result is when those two sepecific units (which have no fault of their own) are put together they give a lesser result. Its very hard to impossible for techs to easily repair this as there isn't anything wrong with the unit itself to fix - unless you send both body and lens to Canon for a free warranty calibration (if you use other lenses you'd have to specify that changes occur to lens only - a note on the covering letter and in the box when shipping helps to ensure this remains the case).

Overread said:

Paul the problem could have been your camera body - not the lens itself.

Click to expand...

Hi Overread

They tested them on two different bodies in the shop, a 7D & 1D Mk 4 & they were the same, even after tweeking them in with microadjustment.

In the end I was glad to see the back of them.

No such problem with the 24-105 though, it's absolutely tack sharp.

Cashie said:

I have just found this Review!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY-jKIGhAzI&feature=fvsr

Click to expand...

i just had a look -thats a daming review of it ,i have the 24/105 and im happy with it .
Rob.

Good the bad and the ugly - minus the good

Also he points out that some might be paying for calibration - yet if its a calibration fault right of the box that counts for warranty calibration anyway (the most you'd have to fork out is postage costs to get the camera to Canon and even then you can probably get that done through most retail shops you purchase from).

Considering that its a breadwinner for many many wedding and portrait photographers I get the feeling that he is way overblowing the overall problems - heck he makes it sound like the first gen 100-400mm lenses.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqZXB6zvtew&feature=channel_video_title

I get the feeling that he's only out to defend his own kitbag of gear
I wouldn't overly worry about his reviews

Cashie said:

Hi Overread

They tested them on two different bodies in the shop, a 7D & 1D Mk 4 & they were the same, even after tweeking them in with microadjustment.

Click to expand...

Remember the microadjust is only countering focusing issues with the AF lock of the lens itself - manual focusing and the native sharpness of the lens+camera combo isn't changed by microadjust. (I'm sure you know this, but its a point many slip up on

The 24-70 and 24-105 each have their fan base who defend their choice passionately. They are different lenses with different uses. The complaints about 24-70 copy variation are well known, but so is it's reputation as a workhorse for many pros who rely on it week after week.