Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM review

I purchased this lens because it's highly recommended by photographers. Perhaps I don't have a sharp copy, but this lens hasn't done its reviews justice. I tried it a number of times and was always disappointed. I also have a 100mm prime lens and this lens doesn't even come close to the 100 in sharpness. I wouldn't purchase this lens again.

For years I had been using Canon's 24-105 L lens which I was always quite happy with (with the one exception of the vignetting at 24mm) but once I bought the 24-70 and compared the results the difference is actually quite evident. Sharpness and bokeh are both beyond stellar here and the 24-105 is not getting much use anymore. Who really needs image stabilization anyway when low-light photography has improved so much over the past 5 years? On a sour note, I didn't exactly get off on the right foot with this lens. The auto-focus was defective right out of the box as it kept focusing on the background in half of my moving target photos. (In my case, the moving targets were wedding attendants walking down the aisle) I sent it to Canon and no more problem. One thing I simply cannot understand is Canon's "in-your-face" price hikes lately. What makes this lens worth $400 more than it cost just a month or two ago?!! Same goes for the 40% price jump in the new 5D (Mark III) body. I truly feel these kind of tricks could permanently hurt Canon and keep Nikon on top to stay.

For years I had been using Canon's 24-105 L lens which I was always quite happy with (with the one exception of the vignetting at 24mm) but when I compare the results with this 24-70 the difference is quite clear. Sharpness and bokeh are just amazing here and the 24-105 is not getting much use anymore. Who really needs image stabilization anyway when low-light photography has improved so much over the past 5 years? On a sour note, I didn't exactly get off on the right foot with this lens. The auto-focus was defective right out of the box as it kept focusing on the background in half of my moving target photos. (In my case, the moving targets were wedding attendants walking down the aisle) I sent it to Canon and no more problem. One thing I simply cannot understand is Canon's "in-your-face" price hikes lately. What makes this lens worth $400 more than it cost just a month or two ago?!! Same goes for the 40% price jump in the new 5D (Mark III) body. I truly feel these kind of tricks could permanently hurt Canon and keep Nikon on top to stay.

Checking Canon's website today, this lens was estimated MSRP of $1399. How is it that everyone is selling them for $400+ more than the mfg MSRP? I don't own this lens (although I might someday). Just questioning the pricing. I'm sure this lens is awesome and worth the money.

While the price is a little steep, I personally consider this the best walk-around lens released by canon thus far (more so than the 24-105mm). At midrange, the images have superior sharpness to the 24-105, not to mention how fast it is (2.8 vs 4). I tend to carry this and the 70-200 for all my photography trips.