Incredibly Sharp - Canon 24-70 II is here

[Patrick O'Sullivan]

Picked up the new 24-70 II yesterday and have been testing it out the last 24 hours. First impressions are great (aside from the build).

I'm just playing with a few clips in Resolve now and the images are fantastic.

The sharpness is incredible. They are just rendering out now and I will post a few up.

This may be my go to lens for everything run and gun.

(btw) the solid work EVF arm is another amazing piece of kit. makes life with the bomb so much easier.

 

[Danai Chutinaton]

Looking forward to seeing more. Can you tell us if it holds focus through the zoom range? What about focus breething?

 

[Matt Ryan]

Also, more info on the evf mount please! That thing looks awesome but also like it gets in the way of a follow focus.

 

[Patrick O'Sullivan]

That thing looks awesome but also like it gets in the way of a follow focus.

No it is completely adjustable. It is all tension based which means it is a one hand operation to move it around.

Check out the Abel video here:

http://blog.abelcine.com/2012/07/25/at-the-bench-solid-camera-evf-support/

It is a very solid piece of gear

 

[Samir Patel]

Patrick,

On your cuba//libre spot on your blog did you shoot in 30p and slow it down to 24p in Premiere or did shoot at 30fps and use a 24p timebase directly in the camera? Does it make a difference? Also do you shoot with 29.97 or actual 30fps and slow to 23.976fps or actual 24fps? Also did you use 1/60 shutter speed? Thanks

-Samir

 

[Martin Weiss]

What do you dislike about the build quality?

 

[Manuel Bauer]

No it is completely adjustable. It is all tension based which means it is a one hand operation to move it around.

Check out the Abel video here:

http://blog.abelcine.com/2012/07/25/at-the-bench-solid-camera-evf-support/

It is a very solid piece of gear

the solid camera evf support is a fantastic piece of gear, rocksolid, easy to adjust and the support from this company is amazing. Received a free!!!! upgrade from solid camera because they did an update, carlos acosta is really a nice person to talk to, very recommended.

 

[Mike P.]

Would anyone know how well this hold up at 2.8 to, say, the Rokinon Cines? I was thinking of getting those bad boys because they're so cheap and have a declicked aperture and gears... and are t1.5... but then this thing pops up and some are claiming it's as sharp as Canon's primes... Now I'm second guessing; I know the primes will serve digital cine needs better, but there's just something so convenient about tacking on a 24-70 (with autofocus) for less critical jobs.

 

[Robino_J]

What do you dislike about the build quality?

I think he's covering up to avoid being flamed by people about cinema vs still glass..

 

[Valentin Paris]

Woaw. It seems to be the best zoom ever made...!

 

[Shervin Mandgaryan]

It boggles my mind that Canon went and re-designed the new 24-70 entirely, yet failed to house the optics in a non protruding body.

Really, how hard is it to stuff everything in a long cylinder? They could have sold twice as many lenses to the cine market this way.

 

[Mark Andersen]

I just got the lens as well. First tests were astonishing (cause I'm used to Canon short zooms being crap) I don't think I'd ever zoom it during a shot, I think of it as a variable focal length prime. The protruding thing isn't ideal, but its easy to deal with. This will be a great travel light, run and gun lens. Optics are really sharp, even at 2.8. It vignettes at 2.8 but not a big deal on cine camera bodies. Canon has out done themselves on this one.

 

[Patrick O'Sullivan]

Patrick,

On your cuba//libre spot on your blog did you shoot in 30p and slow it down to 24p in Premiere or did shoot at 30fps and use a 24p timebase directly in the camera? Does it make a difference? Also do you shoot with 29.97 or actual 30fps and slow to 23.976fps or actual 24fps? Also did you use 1/60 shutter speed? Thanks

-Samir

I shot at 30fps with a 180 degree shutter on a 24p timebase.

 

[Patrick O'Sullivan]

What do you dislike about the build quality?

I think he's covering up to avoid being flamed by people about cinema vs still glass..

The build quality is not great in general. It is the glass and engineering you are paying for. It is plasticky feeling. Lightweight (which isn't a bad thing) and plasticky doesn't ooze confidence that the thing will take massive amounts of abuse. Not that I treat gear like a football but it definitely is a change of pace if you are use to Angie zooms.

That being said what it lacks in materials in makes up for in image.

I am still away from my work computer but the first images are very promising.

 

[Patrick O'Sullivan]

Would anyone know how well this hold up at 2.8 to, say, the Rokinon Cines? I was thinking of getting those bad boys because they're so cheap and have a declicked aperture and gears... and are t1.5... but then this thing pops up and some are claiming it's as sharp as Canon's primes... Now I'm second guessing; I know the primes will serve digital cine needs better, but there's just something so convenient about tacking on a 24-70 (with autofocus) for less critical jobs.

At first glance this thing is definitely sharper than my 70-200 II and I would safely say it is much crisper across the range than any off my contax primes. If the Rokinon Cine primes can stand up against this lens when the canon primes can't then Rokinons are going to start selling a lot of lenses.

 

[Patrick O'Sullivan]

It boggles my mind that Canon went and re-designed the new 24-70 entirely, yet failed to house the optics in a non protruding body.

Really, how hard is it to stuff everything in a long cylinder? They could have sold twice as many lenses to the cine market this way.

I'm all for that as well but something tells me Canon isn't banking on cinema sales with this latest upgrade. This thing will sell well once the reviews start pouring out. It is a significant upgrade in image quality over the previous model which was immensely popular.

 

[Shervin Mandgaryan]

I'm all for that as well but something tells me Canon isn't banking on cinema sales with this latest upgrade. This thing will sell well once the reviews start pouring out. It is a significant upgrade in image quality over the previous model which was immensely popular.

True. They definitely needed to upgrade their zoom line to keep up with the ever increasing amount of megapixels newer bodies are pushing with.

They still missed that cinema ticket though. Not just Scarlet users, but also C300 and VDSLR's too. The 82mm front end doesn't help either.

I sold my 24-70 I and got the Tokina 28-70 PRO I and haven't looked back. Solid build quality, internal zoom and focus and decent focus throw... at 1/5 the cost.

 

[Matt W.]

Would anyone know how well this hold up at 2.8 to, say, the Rokinon Cines? I was thinking of getting those bad boys because they're so cheap and have a declicked aperture and gears... and are t1.5... but then this thing pops up and some are claiming it's as sharp as Canon's primes... Now I'm second guessing; I know the primes will serve digital cine needs better, but there's just something so convenient about tacking on a 24-70 (with autofocus) for less critical jobs.

You can compare it here:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=404

Looks like it's pretty similar at 35mm and 70mm/85mm by f2.8. But the Samyang 24mm, which hasn't been measured yet, is supposed to be a little worse than those. My guess is that the answer will be that both options perform incredibly well, to the extent that other factors than performance at f2.8 factor in more heavily.

This lens looks great, though. Too expensive for me, though--and I just missed the refurb 24-70mm f2.8 I for $900 by like an hour!