06-17-2010, 05:56 PM
It certainly appears that right now there aren't any better alternatives on a FF Canon body right now. I know that the Tamron 28-75 is worse wide open (but good beyond f/5.6) and the Tamron's auto focus is quite bad. I don't know if the new Sigma 24-70 HSM is any good because I haven't tried it.
But no doubt the 24-70 range makes the Canon a 'bread and butter' lens for journalists, and most of the time the image quality is perfectly fine for print (or internet). Taking that into consideration, the review does not make it 'bad' lens - in fact for reportage it is still an extremely good and versatile lens.
Like some of the other members, I would never expect this lens to produce excellent fine art prints - for that it's usually better to use prime lenses.
But no doubt the 24-70 range makes the Canon a 'bread and butter' lens for journalists, and most of the time the image quality is perfectly fine for print (or internet). Taking that into consideration, the review does not make it 'bad' lens - in fact for reportage it is still an extremely good and versatile lens.
Like some of the other members, I would never expect this lens to produce excellent fine art prints - for that it's usually better to use prime lenses.