I can't believe that. I have both 24-70 and 24-105 for long time. i don't see the 24-70 has low contrast level, and my corners look so much better than yours. sharpness is almost the same as my 24-105 wish is quite good. Some 24-70s have bad copy issue.
The lack of IS is indeed a bit tricky for video. I shot my travel video to Indonesia entirely on this lens and it was mostly in post that I realised how shaky the footage actually was.
Hey Chris i enjoy your work! Question i currently have a APC camera with an EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM Lens which is pretty sharp. My only concern with the 24-70 2.8 is the lack of no IS for the price it is. I eventually would like to go to Full Frame later down the road but would it make sense for me to buy the 24-70mm 2.8 II USM and expect major difference in picture quality and sharpness?
your channel is amazing . every lense I've ever wanted to buy I have come here first!! one thing is that I'm wondering how this would compare to the sony 18-105mm f4 g oss. I'm wondering how much difference in sharpness.
ah cool thats good to know, Im sooo eager to test full frame think i might borrow a 6D for a few days and see what I am missing, I understand I will lose on my zoom but gain on the wide angle but what about image quality is there a drastic difference in image quality from crop to full frame?
cyberchickgeek Hmm, the difference in lens sharpness will vary from lens to lens, but typically lenses are sharper on full frame with less chromatic aberration, although sometimes they don't perform as well in the corners. The biggest difference is that you get blurrier backgrounds, and the high ISO performance of a full frame camera is about 4 times better than APS-C, and you get a much bigger viewfinder to look through :-)
I have the 5D Mark III and the 24-105. Its the least sharpest of all my lenses, even the cheap 50mm 1.8 I think the 24-70 is the superior lens for sharpness, bokeh, lighting, and overall quality. However, the 85 1.8 is a beast if you don't need the wide angle, its also a few hundred cheaper than the 24-105.
Le Monarque yeah but I feel the new image stabilized versions from either tamron or sigma is a better value at half the price of canon and they deliver comparable results. So if it were my money I would go for the sigma 24-70 2.8 os and 70-200 2.8 os. That would be a nice set.
Will 3rd party lens like sigma 17-50 works well with canon 70d for the tracking autofocus and touch screen autofocus for video? I heard tamron 17-50 doesn't works for video
i have a few L lens i find myself shooting with the 24-70 2.8L i love the images this lens produces! i have all the prime lens but i love the versatility. i shoot most the time at 2.8F
I have a Canon T3i right now with a sigma 1.4 30mm lens and whenever I do photos with multipul people my camera has a hard time focusing on the several faces and often only one face is clear while the rest are blurry. I've already played with settings and I feel pretty comfortable that those are accurate but would getting a new lens like this help with focusing or should I get a new camera body?
+june alexander It could just be that your depth of field is too narrow. If you're shooting a group of people at f/1.4 then it's very likely you won't have all their faces in focus. Try stopping the aperture down on your camera to f/4 or so
Hi Christopher, I'm planning to buy the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM to replace the kit lens since it broken. i'm using 500D, is that support the lens? for long term, I would buy a new camera in the future, but i can only afford the lens first. could you please advise, many thanks!
Hi chris, i have this lens, it used my with my 5d mk ii, now i sold my camera and bought 80D, DO you recommend keeping this lens ? or to use the 18-135 IS USM ?
For a cropped sensor like the canon 70d, would you choose this over the sigma 18-35mm? Thanks for the review and please do more lens review! Absolutely great job!
They're very different lenses, so it largely depends on if you want a more wide angle lens or more telephoto, although also, the Sigma is much sharper. I'd go for the Sigma myself
Is better choice Tamron AF SP 28-75mm f/2,8 XR Di LD (IF) Asp. Macro ?? Used cost 1/2 of this Canon used one. Does it have even 90% of its, please? (Sharpness, contrast, chromatic aberration)
I love all your reviews Christopher, they are second to none. I am curious who why the lens is marked "Macro" if it isn't a Macro lens as you replied to another commenter asking if this would be a good choice for a macro lens. Very confused 😕
I can't remember that comment exactly. Sometimes manufacturers mark their lens 'macro' just as a way of saying it can shoot reasonably closely. That's why you have to be careful and watch lens reviews :-)
Christopher Frost Photography thanks man! I love your reviews. I always buy lenses based on your reviews! Would you recommend investing extra money and getting the mark 2 version of this?
Hey christapher can u plz help me which lens to buy i only can afford tamron 24-70 f2.8 and canon 24-70 f2.8l lens but can't afford canon 24-70 f2.8 ii so which lens would be better for me
I know this lens is quite outdated now, but that also means there are some good 2nd hand finds. I have seen it a couple of times for around $300. What would be considered a good price for this lens nowadays?
I watch all the reviews and keep coming back to idea that Canon is the way to go. All reviewers are hung up on sharpness, but most dont test AF accuracy. What's the point of sharp glass, if you take a picture with Tamron or Sigma, go to computer and see that focus was not on the eye, bit nose tip. Happened several times with my Tamron primes. And Sigma has even more bad reputation of missing focus.
eBay, or a good camera shop :-) a lot of people have used this lens extensively for studio work, which I know you're into. Personally I'm not convinced by it though...I'd rather use a few different prime lenses...but that's just me :-)
Totally agree 100%, after owing 3 copies of this lens I found that there was a good amount of variation between them but either way I can say I was never blown away by the OK quality of the images for the price. They were way soft at 2.8, the 2.8 on it vs a prime acts more like an F4 for some reason, it was just so much darker than my sigma 50 1.4 when shooting at the same apertures and it just cant compare in terms of image quality to something like a 135 f2 with amazing sharpness and great contrast. Great everyday lens if you can live with the weight, it has a nice versatile range but never really impressed with the results
Hello Christopher, I would like to ask you something.. I am videographer but I don't know whether I would choose Canon 24-70mm F2.8 or F4.. which is better ? Also im recording in low light condition sometimes..
jaisako If you're using an APS-C camera, go for the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. If you have a full frame camera, then it depends on whether you want a lens with a fast aperture, or image stabilizaton
Hi Christopher, I would like to become wedding photo and videographer. Could you give me some lens recommendation between Canon 24 - 70 f2.8 , Canon 24-105 F4 IS or Tamron 24 - 70 F2.8 VC? Many many thanks!! Love from Indonesia!!
You'll want at least an f/2.8 lens. The Tamron 24-70 is nice because of image stabilization, and the Canon 24-70 will be a bit sharper. It's up to you - but personally I'd go for the Tamron. Actually, If you were a wedding photographer, my kit would be: Canon 24mm f/1.4 'ii' 'L', Canon 50mm f/1.2 'L', Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM 'ii'
The Sigma is a very nice option too - I just slightly prefer the build quality of the Canon lens. The Sigma lens would probably be a lot better overall, though
If I'm able to get this lens for 850€ would it be a good deal? I would also be able to get the Canon 24-105mm f/4 for a bit cheaper (700-750€). Which one would you choose and do you think they are reasonably priced? I'm using Canon 70D :-) Thanks!
Will Canon and Nikon eventually switch off all 3rd party lens support someday? Sigma Art series Lenses just getting very competitive. I know Nikon already switched off some Sigma lenses. Why Canon hasn't done that?
Why do you only test up to f5.6. I’m a landscape photographer and I don’t shoot below f8, you should test, upto f22 or it’s maximum aperture for a fair review.
Another good review Chris. This lens just didn't do it for me though, it certainly seems that it divides opinion. I just never felt that the images had the 'pop' or contrast to make them interesting, plus it weighs a ton! Sold it and have never regretted it. For some reason the focal length of 24-70mm just doesn't do it for me either, 24mm is nice but not quite wide enough and 70mm just doesn't quite get the reach. I'm happier with the Canon17-40mm f/4 and 70-200mm f/4 l IS for most everyday things. Keep up the good work, always nice to find one of your reviews in my subscriptions updates.
thanks cardiacade. Im about to buy the this 24-70 Canon F2.8 lens. After your review I might reconsider. So you went with the 17-40 f/4 ? So you didnt miss the low light feature that the Canon 24-70 mm 2.8 gives?? appreciate your comments. stan
It all depends on your needs. I'm not happy with a 'do-it-all' general lens and refer more specific ones e.g wide/long. The one thing I will say is that the 24-70 L is not fun to use, it's weight makes it a pain and I don't rate the image quality compared to other L's (except for the 24-105L which I also do not like). Personally I used to use (and much preferred) the older brother of the 24-70L, the really rather great 28-70L. What will you be using it for?
I have found that this lens isn't as good as a $300 lens I have… but then again maybe I don't know what the fuck i'm doing. Which isn't out of the realm of possibilities.
Strange, I think, that we have no scientifically neutral reference value by which we can determine the quality of a lens. All we have is ‘very good’, ‘quite good’ and ‘nothing to write home about’? I’ve never heard of a scale or value for sharpness, contrast , image quality, etc. Why not?
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 91 | คู่เอก "คมอาวุธ vs อเล็กเซย์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/V0RkEfYFsgM/mqdefault.jpg)
I think this “reverse zoom” mechanism combined with it’s lens hood is a beautiful solution
I love your reviews because you cover APC and Full frame. Thanks for another great video
Great comment!
0:13 "... & Jacked up the price by 30%. Typical Canon! ..." Had a blast... 😂👌
This happens to be one of the best review videos that I have ever seen, thank you.
I wonder how it performs on modern mirrorless cameras...thanks for the review
One nice thing about the Canon "holy trinity" zooms from this era is that all three lenses have a 77mm filter thread.
Hi Christopher, Thank you for your solid reviews, Watched most of them and loving it, keep up the great work!
I always like your reviews, no crap talking, just facts with real life examples... waiting to see your review on 70-200 f/2.8 IS ii...
I can't believe that. I have both 24-70 and 24-105 for long time. i don't see the 24-70 has low contrast level, and my corners look so much better than yours. sharpness is almost the same as my 24-105 wish is quite good. Some 24-70s have bad copy issue.
Found a good example for a decent price and your last line is what made me go for it. Thanks.
The lack of IS is indeed a bit tricky for video. I shot my travel video to Indonesia entirely on this lens and it was mostly in post that I realised how shaky the footage actually was.
Hey Chris i enjoy your work! Question i currently have a APC camera with an EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS USM Lens which is pretty sharp. My only concern with the 24-70 2.8 is the lack of no IS for the price it is. I eventually would like to go to Full Frame later down the road but would it make sense for me to buy the 24-70mm 2.8 II USM and expect major difference in picture quality and sharpness?
I personally would just keep the 17-55mm lens until you upgrade
your channel is amazing . every lense I've ever wanted to buy I have come here first!! one thing is that I'm wondering how this would compare to the sony 18-105mm f4 g oss. I'm wondering how much difference in sharpness.
No idea I'm afraid, I don't test Sony lenses
Pictures are evidence of what you are saying. Nice honest review...........
Thank you for this video, it was just what I needed
Great review as always, I was tempted at getting this but opted for the 24-105 f4, which might not let in as much light but the IS makes up for it
The 24-105 is sharper on an APS-C camera, too, so you definitely made the right choice :-)
ah cool thats good to know, Im sooo eager to test full frame think i might borrow a 6D for a few days and see what I am missing, I understand I will lose on my zoom but gain on the wide angle but what about image quality is there a drastic difference in image quality from crop to full frame?
cyberchickgeek Hmm, the difference in lens sharpness will vary from lens to lens, but typically lenses are sharper on full frame with less chromatic aberration, although sometimes they don't perform as well in the corners. The biggest difference is that you get blurrier backgrounds, and the high ISO performance of a full frame camera is about 4 times better than APS-C, and you get a much bigger viewfinder to look through :-)
thanks for that, think it's worth testing one out too see then
I have the 5D Mark III and the 24-105. Its the least sharpest of all my lenses, even the cheap 50mm 1.8
I think the 24-70 is the superior lens for sharpness, bokeh, lighting, and overall quality. However, the 85 1.8 is a beast if you don't need the wide angle, its also a few hundred cheaper than the 24-105.
Wow Finally! My Most Desired Lens. But it would be nice if you do the Tamron 24-70 as a follow-up
And then the Sigma, and then a Battle of the 24-70's :D
Le Monarque yeah but I feel the new image stabilized versions from either tamron or sigma is a better value at half the price of canon and they deliver comparable results. So if it were my money I would go for the sigma 24-70 2.8 os and 70-200 2.8 os. That would be a nice set.
Asad the great
uhh...okay? Are you sure you're on the right comment thread?
Will 3rd party lens like sigma 17-50 works well with canon 70d for the tracking autofocus and touch screen autofocus for video? I heard tamron 17-50 doesn't works for video
Thank you so much, you've helped me a lot
Great review. Also, great audio behind the video. Mind sharing the audio setup? Thanks you.
I was using some terrible lav mic for these older videos. Nowadays I used an Audio Technica AT2020 and it's amazing
i have a few L lens i find myself shooting with the 24-70 2.8L i love the images this lens produces! i have all the prime lens but i love the versatility. i shoot most the time at 2.8F
What you think about that lens in comparision with sigm art 35, 50mm about sharpness
Thank you for your reviews they are a great help to me deciding on a new lens. ;-)
Can you, please, review the newer version of this lens? Really looking forward to it.
That will come out in the Autumn :-)
I have the Canon 70d also, how is the video on your 6d compared to 70d All-I ?
Which one do you think looks better for video @ 1080p ?
Hi Chris, will this lens fit my Canon Rebel T7?
I'm have the 70-d camera would a 24-70mm make the pictures very clear? Sorry I'm a newbie.
+Nathaniel Torres Watch the review. I test it on a 70D very thoroughly
Hi Chris will this lens work with eos r ? With adapter of cours.
Yes
Is this lens suitable for canon 90D ma?
I have a Canon T3i right now with a sigma 1.4 30mm lens and whenever I do photos with multipul people my camera has a hard time focusing on the several faces and often only one face is clear while the rest are blurry. I've already played with settings and I feel pretty comfortable that those are accurate but would getting a new lens like this help with focusing or should I get a new camera body?
+june alexander It could just be that your depth of field is too narrow. If you're shooting a group of people at f/1.4 then it's very likely you won't have all their faces in focus. Try stopping the aperture down on your camera to f/4 or so
Is this compatible with the Canon 90D?
Yes im using it and its great!
Hi Christopher, I'm planning to buy the EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM to replace the kit lens since it broken. i'm using 500D, is that support the lens? for long term, I would buy a new camera in the future, but i can only afford the lens first. could you please advise, many thanks!
Jeffrey Chan It will work, but it won't be great. Try the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM instead, that would be much better!
Christopher Frost Photography thank you so much :)
Hi chris, i have this lens, it used my with my 5d mk ii, now i sold my camera and bought 80D, DO you recommend keeping this lens ? or to use the 18-135 IS USM ?
For a cropped sensor like the canon 70d, would you choose this over the sigma 18-35mm? Thanks for the review and please do more lens review! Absolutely great job!
They're very different lenses, so it largely depends on if you want a more wide angle lens or more telephoto, although also, the Sigma is much sharper. I'd go for the Sigma myself
Hi Cristopher, Tanks for your reviews. Please tell me, Which one would you choose betwen 24-105 f4 II / 24-70 2.8 I?
24-105 f/4 II
Is better choice Tamron AF SP 28-75mm f/2,8 XR Di LD (IF) Asp. Macro ?? Used cost 1/2 of this Canon used one. Does it have even 90% of its, please? (Sharpness, contrast, chromatic aberration)
Take a look at my review of that lens :-)
So, what is the equivalent for crop camera? Like for 90D?
Id say the 17-55mm F2.8, I bought one for my 90D and its fantastic!
I love all your reviews Christopher, they are second to none. I am curious who why the lens is marked "Macro" if it isn't a Macro lens as you replied to another commenter asking if this would be a good choice for a macro lens. Very confused 😕
I can't remember that comment exactly. Sometimes manufacturers mark their lens 'macro' just as a way of saying it can shoot reasonably closely. That's why you have to be careful and watch lens reviews :-)
Does image stabelisation matter for photography? I've found one of these cheap.
I would say not so important for stills. if you see a good deal, go for it.
nice review Christopher!
hope you make a review of this lens compare to the sigma 24-70 2.8 ex hsm
thank you!
So you could use aperture of2.8 throughout the whole zoom range?
Yup
Christopher Frost Photography thanks man! I love your reviews. I always buy lenses based on your reviews! Would you recommend investing extra money and getting the mark 2 version of this?
@@blueghost8057 Take a look at my review of it, and you'll see :-)
Hey christapher can u plz help me which lens to buy i only can afford tamron 24-70 f2.8 and canon 24-70 f2.8l lens but can't afford canon 24-70 f2.8 ii so which lens would be better for me
I think the Tamron
I know this lens is quite outdated now, but that also means there are some good 2nd hand finds. I have seen it a couple of times for around $300. What would be considered a good price for this lens nowadays?
$300 sounds very good to me
300 for this lens??? whoa!!!
Hi! :-) Is it ok to buy canon 28/70 2.8F for 200 eur in good condition?Thanks.
Yes, as long as it’s in good condition.
I watch all the reviews and keep coming back to idea that Canon is the way to go. All reviewers are hung up on sharpness, but most dont test AF accuracy. What's the point of sharp glass, if you take a picture with Tamron or Sigma, go to computer and see that focus was not on the eye, bit nose tip. Happened several times with my Tamron primes. And Sigma has even more bad reputation of missing focus.
chris,
wts the diference between 24 70 mm and 28 70mm f 2.8
thanks
The 28-70 is older. I haven't tried it
could you do the F4 lens review too just to show what 2.8 vs f4 is can do
Now I want to sell my 24-105 f4 and get this lol as I'm craving the 2.8, where can I pick this up though is it discontinued now!?
eBay, or a good camera shop :-) a lot of people have used this lens extensively for studio work, which I know you're into. Personally I'm not convinced by it though...I'd rather use a few different prime lenses...but that's just me :-)
Totally agree 100%, after owing 3 copies of this lens I found that there was a good amount of variation between them but either way I can say I was never blown away by the OK quality of the images for the price. They were way soft at 2.8, the 2.8 on it vs a prime acts more like an F4 for some reason, it was just so much darker than my sigma 50 1.4 when shooting at the same apertures and it just cant compare in terms of image quality to something like a 135 f2 with amazing sharpness and great contrast. Great everyday lens if you can live with the weight, it has a nice versatile range but never really impressed with the results
Do you prefer your sigma art or the 24-70?
Hello Christopher, I would like to ask you something.. I am videographer but I don't know whether I would choose Canon 24-70mm F2.8 or F4.. which is better ? Also im recording in low light condition sometimes..
jaisako If you're using an APS-C camera, go for the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM. If you have a full frame camera, then it depends on whether you want a lens with a fast aperture, or image stabilizaton
Christopher Frost Photography Thanks for your reply Christopher :)
How does it compare to 17-55 f/2.8?
Err Yabut The 17-55 is only for APS-C cameras, where it will be a sharper lens
I have crop sensor and I'm confused between 24-70 and 17-50.
17mm is a far wider angle than 24mm. But 50mm and 70mm aren't quite so dramatically different (in my opinion)
is it better than the tamron 24-70/2.8 in term of sharpness?
No
Any chance you will look at the f/4L version?
+cpcw06 Not for a while
thank for your great review!
Hi Christopher,
I would like to become wedding photo and videographer.
Could you give me some lens recommendation between Canon 24 - 70 f2.8 , Canon 24-105 F4 IS or Tamron 24 - 70 F2.8 VC?
Many many thanks!!
Love from Indonesia!!
You'll want at least an f/2.8 lens. The Tamron 24-70 is nice because of image stabilization, and the Canon 24-70 will be a bit sharper. It's up to you - but personally I'd go for the Tamron.
Actually, If you were a wedding photographer, my kit would be: Canon 24mm f/1.4 'ii' 'L', Canon 50mm f/1.2 'L', Canon 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM 'ii'
The Sigma is a very nice option too - I just slightly prefer the build quality of the Canon lens. The Sigma lens would probably be a lot better overall, though
dont buy the sigma, they have major autofocus problems
Hi how much is this lens? Thank u for sharing…
For APS-C size and still photography. What will do you choose between this Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 USM 'L' or Canon 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM?
+MD MP Definitely the 17-55. It would be much better for an APS-C camera in almost every way
But in terms of sharpness which is the most sharpest lens ?
+MD MP On an APS-C camera the 17-55 will give you just a little more sharpness (just slightly)
Thanks.
Derby P if you’re planning on switching to FF dslr in the future just get the 24-70
Can I use this 24-70 on my canon Rebel T6?
Yes. All Canon mount lenses made since 1987 will work on your Canon APS-C digital SLR camera, except EF-M lenses
If I'm able to get this lens for 850€ would it be a good deal? I would also be able to get the Canon 24-105mm f/4 for a bit cheaper (700-750€). Which one would you choose and do you think they are reasonably priced? I'm using Canon 70D :-)
Thanks!
Ive got. this for 700usd,wait for good Deals on ebay,but this Lens is better than 24-105
Ive got. this for 700usd,wait for good Deals on ebay,but this Lens is better than 24-105
+TupsuRS I'd get a Tamron 24-70 VC USD with that money, instead
I like to taste some macro photography too. Do you think this lens would make it for me?
No - try a macro lens
Sigma 180mm or Tamron180mm? which one would you recommend?
I haven't tried either of them, unfortunately
I wish I could figure out how to manually video..I have to use auto..IF I don't then my video is terrible... ?? Your video's are Awesome!!
should I get this or the 16-35mm? for the 70D
Neither. Get the Canon 17-55 f/2.8
+Christopher Frost Photography u sure? why is that thought 16-35 would of been better?
The zoom range
Will Canon and Nikon eventually switch off all 3rd party lens support someday?
Sigma Art series Lenses just getting very competitive. I know Nikon already switched off some Sigma lenses.
Why Canon hasn't done that?
Canon aren't able to do that, I don't think. Even if they could, I don't think they would - no-one would buy their cameras anymore
Good video thanks.🎉
how does it compare to 24-70 2.8 from tamron?
Take a look at my review of the Tamron lens, and you'll see :-)
Tamron 24-70 2.8?
Great Video Chris
Why do you only test up to f5.6. I’m a landscape photographer and I don’t shoot below f8, you should test, upto f22 or it’s maximum aperture for a fair review.
Another good review Chris. This lens just didn't do it for me though, it certainly seems that it divides opinion. I just never felt that the images had the 'pop' or contrast to make them interesting, plus it weighs a ton! Sold it and have never regretted it. For some reason the focal length of 24-70mm just doesn't do it for me either, 24mm is nice but not quite wide enough and 70mm just doesn't quite get the reach. I'm happier with the Canon17-40mm f/4 and 70-200mm f/4 l IS for most everyday things.
Keep up the good work, always nice to find one of your reviews in my subscriptions updates.
thanks cardiacade. Im about to buy the this 24-70 Canon F2.8 lens. After your review I might reconsider. So you went with the 17-40 f/4 ? So you didnt miss the low light feature that the Canon 24-70 mm 2.8 gives?? appreciate your comments.
stan
It all depends on your needs. I'm not happy with a 'do-it-all' general lens and refer more specific ones e.g wide/long. The one thing I will say is that the 24-70 L is not fun to use, it's weight makes it a pain and I don't rate the image quality compared to other L's (except for the 24-105L which I also do not like). Personally I used to use (and much preferred) the older brother of the 24-70L, the really rather great 28-70L.
What will you be using it for?
Canon 24-70 mm f/2.8 USM L Lens what was its price when it first hit the market ? can you tell me please its urgent
which lens would you recommend?
?
Please review the even older 28-70mm f/2.8 👍🏻
Nah, too old, not enough interest
Christopher Frost Photography aw, not even for me? 😘
i had one. mine seemed a bit soft. but if you must have an L zoom, it's the absolute cheapest.
He changed his canon 60d! D:
I have found that this lens isn't as good as a $300 lens I have… but then again maybe I don't know what the fuck i'm doing. Which isn't out of the realm of possibilities.
Why can a high F number make it sharper? Doesn’t that mean less light is getting in?
(I’m not a photographer)
Good review and matches my experience owning it. Use it as a 24-60mm f4 lens and you will be happy.
If only it had IS I’d have got this over the 16-35
Strange, I think, that we have no scientifically neutral reference value by which we can determine the quality of a lens. All we have is ‘very good’, ‘quite good’ and ‘nothing to write home about’? I’ve never heard of a scale or value for sharpness, contrast , image quality, etc. Why not?
I wish 2.8's were so expensive :'(
yes
my favorite lens and will never sell it .......
great video ◉‿◉
Cardiff hahahah
Your voice makes me dizzy!