Okay, another comparo: Canon 24-70 f/2.8L v. Canon 28-70 f/2.8L

[lkWinnipesaukee]

Looking into getting one of these lenses used (keeping the Sigma tele!) on ebay. The 28-70 goes for about $200 cheaper. I plan to use it for my high school paper (I absolutely NEED a 2.8; my school is pretty dark and as immoral as it is, I have become a 2.8 snob...:blushing, senior portraits, high-quality vacation photos, and just because I want a bit of a boost in the quality of my photos that I can get from a nicer lens.

How do THESE lenses compare in terms of quality (contrast, color, sharpness, etc)? I don't consider just the extra 4mm on the wide end to be worth the extra money, but a big difference in something else, maybe....

Expert opinions, 2 cents, something in between?

Thanks!

 

[soylentgreen]

Try this link:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/24-70-review.shtml

 

[Sideburns]

there's a reason the 24-70 is a legend...

 

[Big Mike]

The 28-70mm is just the older version of the 24-70mm.

That extra 4mm does make a significant difference in your FOV.

The 24-70 is indeed a legend...highly recommended by just about anyone who uses it. It is big and heavy...many have nicknamed it 'The Brick'.

The 28-70 is no slouch though...probably good enough for your needs.

 

[Shibby!]

Thanks for the posting. I was curious about the same thing as I am looking to buy one of these lenses. I did notice the 28-70 had considerable savings.

Problem is, the 28 is by far good enough for me, but knowing there is better I'll be stupid and probably buy the 24. *sigh*.. Why does it have to be like this?

Just don't bid on the same auction as me please =)