Canon 24-70L vs 17-85 - Proof why I'm glad I'm now broke....

[cirks]

well, apart from me now being broke, Ian Kerr has delivered star service again - ordered and delivered within 2 days. My decision to buy was helped by me having a £100 off ebay voucher ;-))

Anyway, thought you may be interested in a slightly unscientific comparison between my existing lens (17-85) and my new one (24-70L). Only arrived this morning so had very little time to play but I'm already amazed by the difference in colour and sharpness between the lenses.

I hope the differences show as clearly here as they do on my screen. The 24-70 is much sharper, the colours brighter and natural. I've always felt that the images with 17-85 have been slightly 'flat'/'lifeless' and this may well just prove that I was right

Shots at 50mm and 70mm

150% crops of 50mm and 70mm images
a) 17-85@50mm - IS turned off

b) 24-70@50mm

c) 17-85@70mm - IS turned off

d) 24-70@70mm



[edited to show 50mm for 17-85 with IS turned off. 4 way grid now consistent with lengths and constant f10]

Edited by cirks on Saturday 27th September 17:09

[4hero]

Very interesting! I was looking at one of these two lenses as my next purchase, this has helped my decision a lot. Thanks for posting, and your time

[cirks]

I'll do some more hopefully over the next couple of weeks. That may help.

[LukeBird]

cirks said:

That may help.

It bloody won't!
It'll just make me want one!

Seriously, very interesting chap. May have to treat myself to some L series glass in the future!

[cirks]

Apologies - now updated the images to be consistent at 50mm and at f10 throughout. Also, the one in the 4-way image is now using the 17-85 with IS turned OFF - Because the shots were taken on a tripod this has improved the image slightly.

However, for comparison purposes, this is the 17-85 with and without IS @ 150% crop of a 70mm shot.

[SamHH]

I can't tell any difference apart from the fact that the pictures taken with the 17-85mm lens look slightly brighter.

[toastboy]

SamHH said:

I can't tell any difference apart from the fact that the pictures taken with the 17-85mm lens look slightly brighter.

So it's not only me then... 17-85 looks better to me.

[cirks]

SamHH said:

I can't tell any difference apart from the fact that the pictures taken with the 17-85mm lens look slightly brighter.

If the blue book bottom left quadrant (17-85) looks brighter than the one on the bottom right (24-70) then there's an issue with monitor display. You might have to take my word for it but the 24-70 is considerably brighter

Edited by cirks on Saturday 27th September 19:33

[SamHH]

cirks said:

SamHH said:

I can't tell any difference apart from the fact that the pictures taken with the 17-85mm lens look slightly brighter.

If the blue book bottom left quadrant (17-85) looks brighter than the one on the bottom right (24-70) then there's an issue with monitor display. You might have to take my word for it but the 24-70 is considerably brighter

Edited by cirks on Saturday 27th September 19:33

Er, yes, I wrote the wrong thing. I meant that the 24-70 looks brighter. Surely that could have been achieved with the 17-85mm lens by increasing the exposure?

[pc.iow]

cirks said:

Apologies - now updated the images to be consistent at 50mm and at f10 throughout. Also, the one in the 4-way image is now using the 17-85 with IS turned OFF - Because the shots were taken on a tripod this has improved the image slightly.

However, for comparison purposes, this is the 17-85 with and without IS @ 150% crop of a 70mm shot.

I am now as confused as others on this one!
I take it the pictures above are from the old lenses (17-85), if so the photo with IS off, is better.
Now can you show is the same photo's using your new lenses?
I too, am seeing the 'old lenses’ photos, a lot clearer then with the new.
(I think: confused

17-85 is better (even more confused)

Edited by pc.iow on Saturday 27th September 21:09

[Dogsey]

pc.iow said:

I am now as confused as others on this one!
I take it the pictures above are from the old lense(17-85),if so the photo with IS off, is better.
Now can you show is the same photo's usin your new lense.
I too, am seeing the 'old lense' photo's,a lot clearer then with the new.
(i think)

IS needs to be off if the camera is on a tripod otherwise the lens tries to compensate for movement that isn't there, hence the lack of clarity in the above shots.

On my calibrated monitor the images from the L lens are significantly better.

[SamHH]

Dogsey said:

On my calibrated monitor the images from the L lens are significantly better.

In what way? I'm not trying to poo-poo the supposed quality, I just can't see it myself.

[pc.iow]

cirks said:

SamHH said:

I can't tell any difference apart from the fact that the pictures taken with the 17-85mm lens look slightly brighter.

If the blue book bottom left quadrant (17-85) looks brighter than the one on the bottom right (24-70) then there's an issue with monitor display. You might have to take my word for it but the 24-70 is considerably brighter

Edited by cirks on Saturday 27th September 19:33

I agree it’s brighter, but are they the true colours?
Apart from the pictures in the quadrant being darker with the old lense, they also appear to be clearer.

[jilap]

Dogsey said:

On my calibrated monitor the images from the L lens are significantly better.

How does one calibrate their monitor?

[flat-planedCrank]

Are these images centre-crops ?

In my experience of the 17-85 its the borders of the frame, particularly on the wide end, that show the lenses shortcomings.


One other issue I have with the 17-85 is the distortion displayed at the wide end, can be really noticeable.



Cheers.

[RobDickinson]

The test is utterly invalid sorry.

At f10 your more likely limited by diffraction, ANY lens should be of decent sharpness stopped down so much.

Shoot again with the 17-85 wide open and the 24-70 at the same aperture.

Also dont post 150% crops, that will involve some upscaling, post 100% crops.

Edited by RobDickinson on Sunday 28th September 07:23

[Dogsey]

jilap said:

Dogsey said:

On my calibrated monitor the images from the L lens are significantly better.

How does one calibrate their monitor?

One buys a monitor calibrator.

I use an Eye One Display 2, bought from PH'er and eBay god Kerso.

[cirks]

RobDickinson said:

The test is utterly invalid sorry.

I did say that it wasn't tremendously scientific
I'll post some centre 100% crops at various apertures when I get a mo. I took various ones from f2.8 through to f20.