# Vignetting on 24-70 F/2.8L II USM



## Brymills (Dec 13, 2012)

I picked up a new 24-70 F/2.8L II USM this week and from initial shots, it appears to have very bad vignetting. I'm not sure wether I'm expecting too much, or whether I have a duff copy? Due to work stuff I haven't really been able to test it properly, but so far, I'm not very impressed. 
I'll upload some test shots this evening when I've got a bit more time free to play about with various focal lengths and f numbers.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 13, 2012)

Wide open, you should be seeing nearly 2 stops at the wide end, and about 1.3 stops at the long end.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 13, 2012)

If you have same amount of vignetting at 4 corners @ 24mm to 30ish, then yes...it's normal for the new 24-70 f2.8 II. I tried 2 copies and both have similar vignetting at that range. You should be able to fix that vig. in LR with just 1 click

What about sharpness?


----------



## PackLight (Dec 13, 2012)

Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.

But then after a bit I get over it. Dylan777 is correct it does have vignetting. As he said as long as it is equal you should be ok.


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> If you have same amount of vignetting at 4 corners @ 24mm to 30ish, then yes...it's normal for the new 24-70 f2.8 II. I tried 2 copies and both have similar vignetting at that range. You should be able to fix that vig. in LR with just 1 click
> 
> What about sharpness?



I have one..it vignettes pretty severely at the wide end...at first I thought it was the normal-depth B&W filter that I put on the lens..as it was just at the very edges...have been meaning to find a white wall to test it, with and without the filter @ 24mm.
My copy seems very sharp...I did test that against my Sigma 50mm @ 2.8 & 8.0 and I would say that the two lenses are equal in sharpness. amazing for a zoom...so I am not throwing it out ( although the price tag still hurts).
I will try to test it out at the wide end with and with out the filter and get back to you here. I am curious, too!


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 13, 2012)

PackLight said:


> Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.



The 600mm f/4L IS II costs $13,000 and has about 1.5 stops of vignetting wide open. :


----------



## PackLight (Dec 13, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.
> ...



Have you considered sending it back 

@Brymills; check this out
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&LensComp=787&CameraComp=453&Lens=787


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

PackLight said:


> Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.
> 
> But then after a bit I get over it. Dylan777 is correct it does have vignetting. As he said as long as it is equal you should be ok.



I don't know if you get over it...but you learn to live with it BECAUSE the lens is SO sharp and REALLY has great fit & finish. Feels incredible in the hands, (and I cannot believe that I am saying that about a zoom). I never felt that way about my 24-105.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 13, 2012)

infared said:


> Dylan777 said:
> 
> 
> > If you have same amount of vignetting at 4 corners @ 24mm to 30ish, then yes...it's normal for the new 24-70 f2.8 II. I tried 2 copies and both have similar vignetting at that range. You should be able to fix that vig. in LR with just 1 click
> ...



@ infared - It sounds like you have a good copy. Any AFMA on your lens? I did, but I do not see the differences in real life shooting. I might need new glasses here....

I'm using B&W Clear filter. I tested with & w/o filter and the results are same. Stucco wall was my target.


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

I'm using B&W Clear filter. I tested with & w/o filter and the results are same. Stucco wall was my target.

...and what were the results...ie do you have the "severe" edge vinetting wide open?


----------



## PackLight (Dec 13, 2012)

infared said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.
> ...



The vignetting and a few other reasons help answer the question, can I replace my 24mm or 35mm L's with this lens.


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

Dylan777 said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Dylan777 said:
> ...



Put my head down and look at ground....LOL...I have not gotten out the tripod and done that...although when I compared it to the Sigma I was looking for AF accuracy in-passing on the sidelines and my 24-70 seemed to be spot-on. I compared the lens on a close up shot that had great detail. (an OMD camera body.)...
I gotta go to work! 
I will check in later


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

PackLight said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > PackLight said:
> ...


Is you need super-low DOF in your wides, no. 
I was torn...but ended up going for the versatile zoom instead of buying the Sigma 35mm and the Canon 24mm L, (same money being spent). Definitely a TOUGH choice.


----------



## PackLight (Dec 13, 2012)

infared said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > infared said:
> ...



Well yes my need may be a super-low DOF in my wides. Not what I was referring to though.
But, there are other things to. Such as distortion.


----------



## Dylan777 (Dec 13, 2012)

infared said:


> I'm using B&W Clear filter. I tested with & w/o filter and the results are same. Stucco wall was my target.
> 
> ...and what were the results...ie do you have the "severe" edge vinetting wide open?



I didn't see the differences with or w/o filter. Vignetting still appear at 4 corners evenly at f2.8.


----------



## SJ (Dec 13, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.
> ...


 :


----------



## infared (Dec 13, 2012)

PackLight said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > PackLight said:
> ...



ah...you are correct...there are issues there as well. Just was not that important to me..If you look at my lens quiver, I have a lot of good glass...and I just had to make a decision for me...do I always want to be carrying and switching prime lenses out. I decided that sometimes I want to grab my camera, (I got a small holster bag just for this lens on the camera), run out the door, be light footed, have versatility and know that I can come back with the "good" goods. The 5DIII and the new 24-70mm do allow me to truly do that, with (for me), very mild compromises. (when I need shallow DOF I am going to my 50mm Sigma or my Canon 85mm L, anyway).
I think that became my priority, and it ads versatility to my kit, for me. I want it all and just don't have the money or a packmule who can hold reflectors for me either!!!!
My next purchase will definitely be the Zeiss 15mm, f/2.8 ZE. I am gaining strength were I can. We all have to find our way as to what is important to our photographic journey. Everyone should have a good ride!!!!!


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 13, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.
> ...



The 24L II is $1500 and it has 3 stops of vignette.


----------



## PackLight (Dec 13, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > PackLight said:
> ...



This is typical of a board with "Rumors" in its name.
We start by talking about the 24-70mm f/2.8 L II shot at 24mm, jump to the 600mm II and then it somehow turns in to the 24mm f/1.4L II ???


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 13, 2012)

PackLight said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > neuroanatomist said:
> ...



The New Rumored 24-70 2.8L III will have Zero vignette at all focal lengths and perfect IQ. It will weight in at a reasonable 500 Grams and a MSRP of 1299$ including canons all new 7th generation Image Stablizer providing 8-stops of compensation.

This could be a "rumor" right?


----------



## PackLight (Dec 13, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Might be
Can I pre-order now?


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 13, 2012)

PackLight said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > PackLight said:
> ...



Sure, If you've got a spare billion dollars for the R&D. ;D


----------



## Invertalon (Dec 14, 2012)

It has pretty hefty vignetting wide open, for sure...

I am one that is not bothered by vignetting at all though, in fact, I enjoy it. You can always easily correct it in Lightroom with the lens profile if need be.


----------



## bycostello (Dec 14, 2012)

as has been said, quick fix in LR


----------



## Zlatko (Dec 14, 2012)

Invertalon said:


> It has pretty hefty vignetting wide open, for sure...
> 
> I am one that is not bothered by vignetting at all though, in fact, I enjoy it. You can always easily correct it in Lightroom with the lens profile if need be.


I like it too. The vignetting is of course to be expected. This lens has a lot of strengths, including its delightful size. I imagine that to build such a lens without any vignetting, it would have to be much larger (to draw a bigger image circle), heavier and costlier. 

And of course it has that built-in anti-vignetting feature: stopping down the aperture.


----------



## shutterwideshut (Dec 14, 2012)

infared said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > Wide open, f/2.8 at 24mm I expect a lens this expensive to have abolutly no vignetting.
> ...



Absolutely right. This lens is very sharp even wide open. Vignetting can easily be corrected in LR anyway....


----------



## Nishi Drew (Dec 14, 2012)

There's a reason to dump FF and go crop now, you won't even notice the vignetting!


----------



## Brymills (Dec 14, 2012)

Nishi Drew said:


> There's a reason to dump FF and go crop now, you won't even notice the vignetting!


Typical! I went from a 7D to a 5D 3 and had to replace my lovely 15-85 EF-S, hence the 24-70. Now I need to go crop.....
That mk3 sounds perfect, I'll start saving now!


----------



## Marsu42 (Dec 14, 2012)

Brymills said:


> it appears to have very bad vignetting.



"Bad" is only bad if it shows after postprocessing (for jpeg correction is built-in), i.e. when raising the outer areas and then underexposure on top of that so that the shadow resolution drops and noise rises.

So 2ev should be still ok and is not much in comparison to other wide angle lenses like more than 3ev on the 35L.


----------



## tron (Dec 14, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> PackLight said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...


No, no, no, NOOOO this will be 24-70 2.8L IV not III. You are too optimistic ;D ;D ;D


----------



## RLPhoto (Dec 14, 2012)

tron said:


> RLPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > PackLight said:
> ...



And we will still complain that the nikon 24-85 F/2.8 IS has more reach and we should jump system. :


----------



## Brymills (Dec 15, 2012)

RLPhoto said:


> tron said:
> 
> 
> > RLPhoto said:
> ...



Is the 24-70 2.8L IV still EOS mount or the newly rumoured EOS II which converges EF, EF-S and EF-M to a single standard mount?

Work finished for the year, so off to do some testing!


----------

