I like this lense very much and always the first lense in my camera bag

If you are a pro you just need the fastest available lenses (and you usually can afford them) and for photo journalism or wedding photography image quality is really not all that important (in my opinion)

I have a slightly different take - both lenses are good, they are both phenomenal, but you CAN make the wrong choice here, depending on the kit you already have and what you need the lens for

f/2.8 L USM Lens' 77mm filter diameter makes sharing filters (such as a circular polarizer filter) with most of Canon's other L-Series zoom lenses easy and, obviously, more affordable

Some say there isn't a wrong choice because both lenses are both so good.

Great lense met my expectations

After tens years of "pro-sumer" photography with the Canon family of 35mm cameras and inexpensive lenses, this lens was my first BIG L-series purchase

An incredibly fast lense capable of shooting in low light conditions without flash

(The 16-35mmII and the 70-200mm are also excellent zoom lenses)

Let's get one thing straight, I chose this lense because it's a pretty darn sharp lense for a zoom.

Definitely one of my top two lenses and I would buy it over and over again

as someone who owns the incredible 50mm 1.4 lens, possibly one of the quickest, sharpest and greatest affordable prime lenses you can get for your canon, i cant help but compare all other lenses to this as a golden standard.the focusing compared to the 50mm 1.4 is incredible

It IS the standard, this thing rivals prime lenses in all aspects

There is very little doubt that this is one of the better Canon lenses available

I HATED zoom lenses.

I get that it is allergy season, but the lenses I took to shoot at a garden last week didn't even get this dirty

You'll have to consider your photography priorities when deciding which of these two excellent lenses best suits your needs.

The most important was to have good lenses

Since the other two lenses did not have this problem, I declined and got a replacement lens.

Both are excellent lenses

All L lenses are worth the investment and if you are serious about photography

FisheyeDepending on the light i only carry around this wonderful lens attached to my Canon 5D MarkII and 2 lenses on my bag, this lens is like having a prime lens at all focus lenght, and the best... is very fast

However, after one year of use the lens has several permanent dust particles deep inside (which have to be digitally removed from the photo on a computer), although admittedly unsealed lenses were a lot worse

Man I wish I would have saved my money over the years not trying to 'save' money by buying cheaper lenses

But these lenses are actually terrible when you think about our options on software as photographers.

And I have even bought a bunch of the Canon slower lenses that are fine for taking pictures of family and vacations,etc... but not for photography

I love quick lenses: it changes everything for indoor shots.

In fact together with the 70-200 f 2.8L IS USM, they make a pair of the most useful lenses a Canon Photographer could possibly want in most situations.

I would say this is the best canon lense ever built

Yes, I have had or still own all the 3rd party 'fast' lenses that don't work very good

Note: There are some very good lenses specifically designed for APS-C sensor, but they are not L build quality lenses, even though at least one of them (EFS 17-55 2.8 IS) produces L series sharpness, they do not have the build quality of the L series lens.

Overall, this is probably one of the best all-purpose lenses that you can buy

Owned both lenses and prefer this one.

For example, the 70-200mm zooms that Canon makes in its L-series are INCREDIBLY popular lenses, for good reason.

This has to be one of Canon's greatest lenses

one of the best canon lenses. because you are bright and versatile angle and telephoto in one lens ... very good ...

I know that a good lense doesn't make a good photo

I love both lenses because they are small, but the 50mm lens is hard to resist, working on indoor shots without a flash in ways I had hoped my F/2.8 L lens would have

I have other good Canon lenses but most often I use that one

I bought a Canon 70-200mm L series lens and loved it so much I thought there was no point in using non-L lenses anymore (assuming you can afford the L lenses)

I call my lense "The bomb" because it takes photos that are an explosion of color, detail and beauty

A note though, if you have the cheaper mid-range lenses (I had a sigma 17-70 before I replaced it with this) this is twice the size and like 4 times the weight

I have not spent days comparing the two, but both are great lenses

Sure, it can't do portraits as well as the 24-70 f2.8 L II, but for almost all other situations, since I shoot between f4 and f5.6 most of the time, the IS system and the size advantage will more than make up for the lack of f2.8

f/2.8 L fantastic colors, sharp for a zoom, very versatile ego boosting and attention getting and heavy

The build quality is what you would expect from an L lens and this is a great first L lens for anyone looking to expand their collection and adding something of quality

I tried the EF 24-105 L to better effect, but not so much better to justify the price, or added

Color is comparable to a good L prime.

It's true it's not the sharpest L lens, but it's still an L lens and a lot sharper and stronger than a lot of non-L lenses in the standard zoom "walk around lens" category.

f/3.5-5.6 Rebel XTi Kit lens Muddy, slow, pile of junkCanon EF 17-40mm f/4 L Fantastic colors, sharp zoomed 17 to 24mm, ultra smooth zoom action, light weightCanon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L Fantastic colors and contrast, sharp zoomed 40 to 70mm, zoom a little stiff at first, heavy, repair prone

The 24-70 L is sharp in the center at f/2.8 at all focal lengths

I would not say this lens is "Sharp", especially not as sharp as previous L glass I have owned

Obviously it is not as versatile as the 24-70 and there are some additional optical characteristics that make L series glass a bit better than non-L series glass, but the 85 F1.8 could be used for a professional portrait shoot without any concern at all.

And for an L Series, not too pricey or large either.

The 24-70mm L copy I had was comparably softer than my sharp-as-knife 70-200mm L in all aperture ranges.

not to mention that at f5.6 this lens is just as sharp as the f2.8 L II!If you want to compare to the 24-105 f4 L IS, it's a slaughter

L Lens looks like it ate my EF-S 17-85mm.

I like the versatility of my EF-S 17-85, but not happy with the ave colors or medium contrast or low end distortions