Picking the Best 24-70mm Lens by WOMP

Weapons of Mass Production's Kevin Good walks us through the in's and out's of four of the most popular lens brands on the market, in one of the most popular focal ranges... the 24-70mm. Brace yourself as only one of these lenses will be spared John Pellett's bat.

"Want to figure out the right lens for your camera? In this episode, Kevin runs an entertaining experiment on the best 24-70mm f2.8 lenses available, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM II, the Nikon 24-70mm f/2.8G ED AF-S, the Tamron SP 24-70mm Di VC USD, and the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM AF, to see which one holds the most bang for its buck. Elements like the best sharpness, bokeh, vignetting and brightness, and optical stabilization are put into account, and Kevin and John pick their winner. Let us know in the comments what you think!"

"In this episode we do a shoot-out of four brands of "professional" lenses to see which is best for your DSLR. What is the best lens to spend your hard-earned cash on? Do the camera-brand lenses from Nikon and Canon outshine the much-cheaper 3rd party kit? To save your sanity when shopping for a lens, we put them head to head."

Kevin Good, John Pellett, Shanta Parasuraman
Created with the tireless help of::
Paul Good, Jenna St. John
The Static www.the-static.com (recorded at Sonic Sweets)
ossi & (c)AndyBoy! http://soundcloud.com/ossi-candyboy
Thanks to: Marc Alexander, Suzanne Robertson

via [CrsisLabs]

Log in or register to post comments


Lonnie Shull's picture

You left out the Sony/Zeiss 24-70 f/2.8.  That lens is awesome. 

As awesome as it is, the Sony/Zeiss would have also fallen to the fate of the bat. All because it's expensive with out the feature of Image Stabilization.

Sony uses in body image stabilization

Yeah I'm very curious about the whole Sony situation and their in-body image stabilization.  It was just beyond-the-scope of this particular review.

Next time, just send me be nikon, I'll pay for shipping!

Jens Marklund's picture

Yeah, but who uses a Sony?

Lonnie Shull's picture

Anyone that's shooting Nikon... 

Destroying the lenses is so stupid.  Why not have a competition to give them away to attract more people as your audience as well as giving someone a lens that they could use...   The next time you want to destroy that canon 24-70mm, replace it with one of those canon mugs for the video and send the real one to me.  =)

So you're suggesting that I use a mug in the video, instead of the real thing, but make it LOOK real in the video, so no one will know?  I don't know if anyone would fall for it.

OOOOOH. Right in the irony.

Anto de Chav's picture

I'm pretty sure they smashed fakes.. 

destroying stuff is so out dated, show a little respect for all the work that went in it, all the resources and have a little respect for those who can not pay this stuff. I mean, many americans loose there homes and have trouble getting food and then this. I'm done with this crap. And don't get me started on the thousands of kids who die everyday because they dont have food. It's not your direct fault, bit this shows no respect.

 Sooooo... destroying a 24-70mm f/2.8 lens is bad because kids are starving in other parts of the world. O.K. logic!!

Your reaction says enough about your inability to create a holistic view of the world we live in. If a kid was dying in front of you and you had the choice between destroying a lens or feeding the kid, it would have been a simple choice for you. To realize that every human is not different, where ever in the world, should make my point clear to you. It's not that not destroying a lens saves children, yet, the money spend on the lens could have been spend more meaningful and destroying a lens/capital, shows zero respect to the ones in need, our fellow human brothers and sisters, hoping for a better life with nothing to hold on to to solidify their dreams. 

 No, no, it's not my ability to create a holistic view of the world--if that's your sad excuse for poor reasoning and logic. My response was merely to point out the massive disconnect between your destroying an old lens and feeding a child.

Get off your stupid high horse. When you upgrade your phones, TVs, computers, camera bodies or cars, is it because your previous model has failed completely and is beyond repair? If not, shut up. Your life is full of more frivolities than you'd care to admit, and yet you're here preaching about starving children. YOU'RE ABLE TO GET ONTO THE INTERNET.

Christopher Allen Major's picture

he's not on the net breaking it for views. your logic is bad too!

Just Will's picture

Jeebus! I like how the Nikon lens shattered the least when hit with the baseball bat.

KasumiY's picture

Didn't shatter as bad as the Canon or Sigma.

David S Kalonick's picture

Great video!

I have to agree with Dennis.  Destroying equipment is stupid and wasteful.  I won't even bother to watch the video now so I don't know if this is supposed to be a credible comparison or not but, if it is, the gear destruction eliminates any credibility in my mind.


I would imagine they were just the fake lenses that you put money in or the coffee mugs...at least I hope so! 
The picture shows white stickers on the lenses which look like they are all rented or at least a few of them are...

My favorite part of the video was at 7:42

From a salary I receive in our country I will not succeed either in 10 years to buy one of this lens destroyed in this film. People stupidity bothers me because they do not value the money earned by hard work, and blessing to have money. You never known poverty and pain. Gesture shows your pride and disappointed in that way. You can pray for wisdom and for true creativity. You could take a garbage can and throw them symbolic in it, or give the lens as a gift to a child to encourage him to do photos or to do something funny with mark of each less valuable objective. Because you want to give the impression that the objectives you destroyed have no value, which is not true. You can do something constructive and mature. George.

Everything we see in videos is real...Photographers don't use photoshop either. Don't let the sound of the dubbed in glass breaking fool you...wow

Joacim Schwartz's picture

I'm suprised to see that people rant about the lenses being destroyed. If you watch the other videos, you'll notice that these guys are really good when it come to composite a video or changing background.

For what I could tell they could have just used a couple of lens mugs and filled it pieces of glass and added the sound effect later on.

Gunnar Rathbun's picture

the sigma looked real.. looked like i saw some elements flying there.. the other 2 didn't look so real and the sound effect didn't sound real convincing either haha
good review though! i agree with their conclusion

Good video, I like real world uses rather than peeping at brick walls and stupid charts. I had seriously considered the Tamron but was unsure since I have no way of actually renting one or testing one here in Ukraine. So, I will order one to pop on my D800 and hopefully be a happy camper.

As an expat American I approve of the destruction of expensive equipment, because that's the 'Merican Way.

Thanks John.  Likewise I think one of these will be finding a permanent home on my D800.

John Pesina's picture

I've used the tamron 24-70mm, and I prefer my more expensive Nikkor 24-70mm. 

1)  I've never had focusing problems or lens recognition problems with Nikkor, like I did with tamron. 

2) Because the color that comes through the lens is vastly improved, shot for shot, photos with the nikkor are just better color wise.

3) It's way sharper.

More comments