Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II 0% APR for 2 years £58pcm £1400.00 @ Calphoto
296°Expired

Canon 24-70 f/2.8L II 0% APR for 2 years £58pcm £1400.00 @ Calphoto

65
Found 8th Jul 2015
Might not tempt everyone (or anyone!) but Calumet Photography are running a finance promo until the 15th July on many L series lenses. 2 years completely interest free, no admin charges or settlement fees just the £1,400 split over 24 months. You can also add anything else to your basket (as long as you have a valid lens in there) and everything will quality for the 2 years 0%.

This lens (very surprisingly) is actually more on Amazon at the moment too. So it's an even better deal!

I don't really have to explain about the lens, but it's one of the best workhorse lenses Canon do for a large variety of work, weddings, portrait, lifestyle etc.

Hope this may help someone! Oh, they are OOS now but as long as the finance is accepted before the cut off date you will still receive the lens, they are due stock the end of next week. V12 finance are the company responsible.

65 Comments

Thought this was for a 2 year car lease deal!

Edited by: "topss" 8th Jul 2015

Original Poster

Haha, sadly not!

jeezus. ... Can't believe people have enough money to pay £1400 for a lens...I don't pay that for a car! !

And before you know it we'll be getting work shoes on credit. By the time you finish paying them off, they'd have worn out.

Clearly those commenting have no idea about these lenses. This is a great deal and good find from the OP.

More amazing L Series lens porn

Is that a coffee mug?

Euro 1805 on Amazon.fr which is probably cheaper - if you can get interest free credit on your credit card.

Satele

Clearly those commenting have no idea about these lenses. This is a great … Clearly those commenting have no idea about these lenses. This is a great deal and good find from the OP.



and clearly some commenting have no concept of value-for-money

Buy yourself Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 VC.
Cost £512 on Ebay. I just bought one.

People stop moaning about how lenses are overpriced. Photographer can easily earn this money by shooting few weddings.

I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm f/4 is much the better lens. This is fine in the summer months, but once into Autumn light levels drop so much that without IS this lens is as much use as a very expensive paperweight.

Thoughtful

I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm … I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm f/4 is much the better lens. This is fine in the summer months, but once into Autumn light levels drop so much that without IS this lens is as much use as a very expensive paperweight.



X) Sure it is.

Thoughtful

I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm … I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm f/4 is much the better lens. This is fine in the summer months, but once into Autumn light levels drop so much that without IS this lens is as much use as a very expensive paperweight.


.... so you're saying in dark conditions the lens with the narrower aperture is better than the wider one......

Are you shooting on full auto or something?

If you don't need the finance this is cheaper at other retailers (Mathers and also Mifsuds).

Shame a lot of people missed out on the Currys deal @ £1120 last month oO

It is a nice, but only really worthwhile for a full frame DSLR. And if you own one of the those, the price is peanuts.

donslibi

and clearly some commenting have no concept of value-for-money



£1400 for a lens to use at a £3000 wedding shoot.. I'd say that's good value for money!

Tuscan915

£1400 for a lens to use at a £3000 wedding shoot.. I'd say that's good v … £1400 for a lens to use at a £3000 wedding shoot.. I'd say that's good value for money!


Is not that good value. Let's be honest. Who pay £3000 for a photographer?

WeCanBreatheInSpace

.... so you're saying in dark conditions the lens with the narrower … .... so you're saying in dark conditions the lens with the narrower aperture is better than the wider one......Are you shooting on full auto or something?



Lengthy answer needed for this!
f2.8 is only a single stop wider, and to be honest it isn't enough for proper selective focus, the problem comes when you need depth of field, say f/8 and then the extra stop is only any benefit in the viewfinder.
It's not just the darker month which are at issue, it's coming indoors to poorly lit buildings and either no flash or the scene is too far away to light.
The only time this lens has the edge is if you really need the f/2.8 and most people rarely use that on a standard zoom.
The 24-105mm f/4 IS L was designed for wedding photographers, and the Nikon users I know would love to have an equivalent in their bags.

PLANKT0N0

jeezus. ... Can't believe people have enough money to pay £1400 for a … jeezus. ... Can't believe people have enough money to pay £1400 for a lens...I don't pay that for a car! !



If you are a professional then this is worth the money - nothing else touches it and it was £2399 when it was released.

Thoughtful

I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm … I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm f/4 is much the better lens. This is fine in the summer months, but once into Autumn light levels drop so much that without IS this lens is as much use as a very expensive paperweight.



Whilst the 24-105 is a great lens the performance cannot be compared - the 24-70 has much less distortion than the 24-105. They are different beast with different audiences.

I thought it was one of those cute cups till I saw the price

Thoughtful

The 24-105mm f/4 IS L was designed for wedding photographers, and the … The 24-105mm f/4 IS L was designed for wedding photographers, and the Nikon users I know would love to have an equivalent in their bags.



I already have the equivalent in my bag, the 24-120mm f4 VR. 15mm longer and sharper at f4 than my 24-105 was.

Thoughtful

Lengthy answer needed for this!f2.8 is only a single stop wider, and to … Lengthy answer needed for this!f2.8 is only a single stop wider, and to be honest it isn't enough for proper selective focus, the problem comes when you need depth of field, say f/8 and then the extra stop is only any benefit in the viewfinder.It's not just the darker month which are at issue, it's coming indoors to poorly lit buildings and either no flash or the scene is too far away to light.The only time this lens has the edge is if you really need the f/2.8 and most people rarely use that on a standard zoom.The 24-105mm f/4 IS L was designed for wedding photographers, and the Nikon users I know would love to have an equivalent in their bags.



The extra stop makes a massive difference to the speed and accuracy of auto-focus on pro bodies - this IS important for wedding and low light photographers. Additionally, the bigger maximum aperture and blade shape allows improved bokeh and more creative opportunities compared with f/4. The distortion on this lens is very well controlled and can be used as a general purpose lens for landscapes/weddings and portraits on a full frame camera it is unbeatable.

Finally, the construction is first rate and unlike the older version the front element has an excellent mounting system which makes it more consistent without servicing.
Edited by: "Mbshrekito" 9th Jul 2015

Not shabby although I doubt I'll ever have need for this level of glass

Sliwka

Is not that good value. Let's be honest. Who pay £3000 for a photographer?



Plenty of people.

And yes it is good value. £58 per month for a precision-engineered piece of kit which will help (note I say "help", not allow or enable) a skilled user to capture some stunning images. It's of particular use at weddings, as noted, because the zoom range allows for wide-angle shots, and closer portraits WITHOUT changing lenses, which is critical because changing lenses could cause you to miss an important moment. Additionally, the f/2.8 aperture allows it use in darker environments with a fast shutter speed, crucial for getting sharp shots; especially so when most churches forbid flash photography.

Photography's an extremely lucrative skill, if you're good at it (and good at marketing yourself). Kit like this will pay for itself very quickly. I've sold single shots for £100+ and can make an average day rate of £160 as a retoucher (which is actually a pretty mid-range price in this field), so £58 a month to own one of these lenses is an outstanding deal - it would cost more to rent it for a week at a time. Those who don't understand the value in this simply don't understand what they're looking at, makes the comments pretty moot.


EDIT: many thanks to the OP. Outstanding deal, if only there was a similar one on the 5DSR...

Edited by: "morocco1" 9th Jul 2015

Thoughtful

Lengthy answer needed for this!f2.8 is only a single stop wider, and to … Lengthy answer needed for this!f2.8 is only a single stop wider, and to be honest it isn't enough for proper selective focus, the problem comes when you need depth of field, say f/8 and then the extra stop is only any benefit in the viewfinder.It's not just the darker month which are at issue, it's coming indoors to poorly lit buildings and either no flash or the scene is too far away to light.The only time this lens has the edge is if you really need the f/2.8 and most people rarely use that on a standard zoom.The 24-105mm f/4 IS L was designed for wedding photographers, and the Nikon users I know would love to have an equivalent in their bags.



A single stop is a lot when youre trying to achieve faster shutter speeds in low light for a moving subject. IS is all fine and dandy if you take photos of static subjects or use it for panning. So you're saying because you don't need it, most dont? Because as far as I know pro photographers bread and butter zooms are the 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 or fast primes F1.2 - F1.8, certainly not the 24-105 F4.

Would the Nikon users really love it? They have the 24-120 F4 VR or even the Sigma 24-105 F4 OS.


Edited by: "twist" 9th Jul 2015

This 24-70mm II is sharper in the corners than the previous version was in the centre. This is a cracking lens and a pretty good deal for anyone making money out of photography. Hell, I'm tempted...

stevenbryson

This 24-70mm II is sharper in the corners than the previous version was … This 24-70mm II is sharper in the corners than the previous version was in the centre. This is a cracking lens and a pretty good deal for anyone making money out of photography. Hell, I'm tempted...



Seen a few terrible copies though with serious decentering issues.

Thoughtful

Lengthy answer needed for this!f2.8 is only a single stop wider, and to … Lengthy answer needed for this!f2.8 is only a single stop wider, and to be honest it isn't enough for proper selective focus, the problem comes when you need depth of field, say f/8 and then the extra stop is only any benefit in the viewfinder.It's not just the darker month which are at issue, it's coming indoors to poorly lit buildings and either no flash or the scene is too far away to light.The only time this lens has the edge is if you really need the f/2.8 and most people rarely use that on a standard zoom.The 24-105mm f/4 IS L was designed for wedding photographers, and the Nikon users I know would love to have an equivalent in their bags.


As a wedding photographer myself I couldn't disagree more. Shooting people you will rely on a faster shutter speed a lot more than you do image stabilisation, as IS won't effect the movement of your subject, in fact in those scenarios it would just serve to sharpen your background, which most of the time isn't even a concern.
Add to that that anyone looking to pay £1,400 for a lens will be down the more 'pro' end of the scale and probably will be looking to use it at f/2.8 and not just leaving it on auto aperture, and there are plenty of reasons why this lens is streets ahead, and that's without talking about the distortion and chromatic aberration differences, which the f/2.8 trumps the f/4 on also.

morocco1

Plenty of people. And yes it is good value. £58 per month for a … Plenty of people. And yes it is good value. £58 per month for a precision-engineered piece of kit which will help (note I say "help", not allow or enable) a skilled user to capture some stunning images. It's of particular use at weddings, as noted, because the zoom range allows for wide-angle shots, and closer portraits WITHOUT changing lenses, which is critical because changing lenses could cause you to miss an important moment. Additionally, the f/2.8 aperture allows it use in darker environments with a fast shutter speed, crucial for getting sharp shots; especially so when most churches forbid flash photography.Photography's an extremely lucrative skill, if you're good at it (and good at marketing yourself). Kit like this will pay for itself very quickly. I've sold single shots for £100+ and can make an average day rate of £160 as a retoucher (which is actually a pretty mid-range price in this field), so £58 a month to own one of these lenses is an outstanding deal - it would cost more to rent it for a week at a time. Those who don't understand the value in this simply don't understand what they're looking at, makes the comments pretty moot.EDIT: many thanks to the OP. Outstanding deal, if only there was a similar one on the 5DSR...


I'm wedding's photographer and will say that lens without stabilization for £1400 is not a good deal. Canon will announce in August new 24-70mm with IS. I love shooting with 35mm f1.4 Sigma and Canon 85mm 1.8 and I think to learn how to be more creative you need use prime lenses. Also it gives more DOF for better results.
This two lenses cost me £700 so half cost of new Canon.

Sliwka

I'm wedding's photographer and will say that lens without stabilization … I'm wedding's photographer and will say that lens without stabilization for £1400 is not a good deal. Canon will announce in August new 24-70mm with IS. I love shooting with 35mm f1.4 Sigma and Canon 85mm 1.8 and I think to learn how to be more creative you need use prime lenses. Also it gives more DOF for better results.This two lenses cost me £700 so half cost of new Canon.



Fair point, at least you're coming from a position of strength having some experience in the industry. I apologise, I (obviously incorrectly) assumed yours was another of those "who pays this much for a camera lens, you get free cameras on your phone"-type comments.

I don't think the IS is too important on this lens as it's very sharp from f/4 upwards, and used on a modern full-frame camera with excellent high-ISO performance, I don't think there'd be any problem in achieving a fast enough shutter speed to eliminate any camera shake. Given the price that this lens has held over its lifespan, I can see the IS version being incredibly expensive.

Broadly agree with your comment on primes and creativity, however the constant f/2.8 aperture throughout the zoom range just gives that little bit of extra flexibility which IMO it's better to have and not need, than the alternative.

Fab lens. I dream to own it one day. Grey import but from a decent company with a longer UK warranty and much much cheaper price (£1,086.40 after BACS transfer) available here:
http://panamoz.com/index.php/lens/canon/canon-ef-24-70mm-f-2-8l-ii-usm-lens.html

Not personally used panamoz before, but I have used HDew cameras, who also have a grey import cheaper: hdewcameras.co.uk/can…asp
Edited by: "my-planet" 9th Jul 2015

my-planet

Fab lens. I dream to own it one day. Grey import but from a decent … Fab lens. I dream to own it one day. Grey import but from a decent company with a longer UK warranty and much much cheaper price (£1,086.40 after BACS transfer) available here:http://panamoz.com/index.php/lens/canon/canon-ef-24-70mm-f-2-8l-ii-usm-lens.htmlNot personally used panamoz before, but I have used HDew cameras, who also have a grey import cheaper: http://www.hdewcameras.co.uk/canon-ef-24-70mm-f28l-ii-usm-1061-p.asp



Nice find. I'm not against grey imports at all. They all come from the same place initially, and many of the resellers honour the warranties (Panamoz give a three year UK warranty!). If you're using gear of this expense you should be insuring it, so worst comes to worst, there should always be some way to get a replacement at minimal expense.

WeCanBreatheInSpace

As a wedding photographer myself I couldn't disagree more. Shooting … As a wedding photographer myself I couldn't disagree more. Shooting people you will rely on a faster shutter speed a lot more than you do image stabilisation, as IS won't effect the movement of your subject, in fact in those scenarios it would just serve to sharpen your background, which most of the time isn't even a concern.Add to that that anyone looking to pay £1,400 for a lens will be down the more 'pro' end of the scale and probably will be looking to use it at f/2.8 and not just leaving it on auto aperture, and there are plenty of reasons why this lens is streets ahead, and that's without talking about the distortion and chromatic aberration differences, which the f/2.8 trumps the f/4 on also.


Use a prime then !

does anyone know if finance can be paid off quicker without any charges?

twist

Seen a few terrible copies though with serious decentering issues.




Are you sure that this is the mark II model as the way the lens elements are now mounted would suggest this shouldn't happen unlike the V1 which used a tripod screw arrangement. One of the biggest lens rental companies has gone on record saying they have had *no* issues with this - would be interested in your source of the information.

Thoughtful

I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm … I had the first version of this lens, but sold it because the 24-105mm f/4 is much the better lens. This is fine in the summer months, but once into Autumn light levels drop so much that without IS this lens is as much use as a very expensive paperweight.


HAHAHAHAHAHA



HAHA

Mbshrekito

The extra stop makes a massive difference to the speed and accuracy of … The extra stop makes a massive difference to the speed and accuracy of auto-focus on pro bodies - this IS important for wedding and low light photographers. Additionally, the bigger maximum aperture and blade shape allows improved bokeh and more creative opportunities compared with f/4. The distortion on this lens is very well controlled and can be used as a general purpose lens for landscapes/weddings and portraits on a full frame camera it is unbeatable.Finally, the construction is first rate and unlike the older version the front element has an excellent mounting system which makes it more consistent without servicing.



THIS^^^

Thoughtful

Use a prime then !




You buy a zoom for the flexibility so why would he want to use a prime? if you use the fastest zoom available not only do you get better bokeh wide open you also get take advantage of either faster shutter speeds or lower iso.

This lens is in a different class to the 24-105 in pure IQ terms.

The great thing about the 24-105 is that it is smaller and lighter (important for travel) and for static subjects in low light IS is fantastic especially at the 105 end of the range.

I have both but if I had to choose one it would be the 24-70mm - now a 24-70 f/2.8 with IS would be amazing!!

Thoughtful

Use a prime then !


I do.... I have 3 primes I use throughout the wedding in addition to the 24-70.... I don't just sit in a corner with one lens on one camera.... thanks for the tips though....
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text