Used Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM Lens

[loosecanon]

Hi
So is the Mark I version worth it or should one get an alternative from an independent for similar money. See wEX have one for £850 - is this a fair price?
Is it worth buying this lens

[Colin Southern]

Mine has been superb; so much so that I've no plans to update.

[Donald]

I think I possibly got the last new one in the UK (this was after the update was announced). Thanks Castle Cameras. The idea of upgrading is beyond my means, but thankfully I have absolutely no need to do so. I love this lens.

[Geoff F]

There seems to be some difference of opinion amongst reviews as to whether the mark 2 is worth getting.

When I was recently in the position of looking at these lenses, I eventually purchased the Tamron 24-70 instead. Many reviews actually rated this lens above the Canon alternatives, and it also has image stabilisation.

So far, it has performed well.

[Colin Southern]

There seems to be some difference of opinion amongst reviews

What's new when it comes to photography!

[Glenn NK]

There seems to be some difference of opinion amongst reviews as to whether the mark 2 is worth getting.

The most commonly discussed issues with the Canon Mark I are field curvature and copy variability. I don't doubt that there are sharp copies, but if one reads many posts on various forums, these two issues come up very often (and I doubt that the field curvature situation will vary much from lens to lens - as it's most likely an optical design problem).

G

[rpcrowe]

I used a 24-70mm f/2.8L for several years and the results were excellent, even though I was shooting a 1.6x camera.

At that time I was carrying a three lens kit for my travel and general photo work: 12-24mm f/4 Tokina, 24-70mm f/2.8L and 70-200mm f/4L IS.

I had no problems with the lens and I sold it to a fellow camera club member because my 17-55mm f/2.8 IS and 70-200mm f/4L IS lenses were a very decent kit for my 1.6x cameras and I no longer needed the 24-70L.

If I were a full frame shooter, the 24-70L and 70-200mm would be a great combination.

I don't know about the variability of copies of the 24-70L. I purchased my copy from a professional photographer who was switching from the 24-70L to the 24-105mm f/4L IS lens. He later told me that he wished that he had not been so quick to replace the 24-70L. He realized that he had a good copy of thw 24-70L and was sorry he had sold it to me.

It has only been within the last few years that I read any complaints about the capability of some 24-70L copies. At the time I purchased mine (right about the time that the 24-105mm f/4L IS was introduced) there were never any bad or even mediocre reports posted regarding the 24-70mm f/2.8L lens...