Upload & Sell: On
| p.2 #2 · Don't know where to go next |
as for the kinds of things I shoot (sorry for not bringing that up earlier), love portraits, pets and bigger animals like horses, low light photography, architecture, do not really care for macro, sports or wild life
now it seems the question I have to ask is: what do you think of the 24-105, since it is by far the best deal, kinda dislike the f4, but love the IS idea, what are your thoughts?
Generally speaking, the 24-105 is a good lens. Not great, but good and quite versatile. As for your specific needs...
It is not the best lens for portraits, but it is decent if you aren't looking for very narrow depth of field. The same more or less appliess to pets & animals. Your 70-200 is likely to be better suited for that type of shooting.
For low light photography, the 24-105 can actually work quite well if you are shooting static subjects. For moving subjects in low light, you will have to look to a faster lens.
As for architecture, there is heavy distortion at the wide end of the lens, though it is less of an issue on APS-C. That said, the distortion is easily corrected in software these days, so unless you have an aversion to post-processing this probably isn't a big deal. The bigger issue may be that 24mm is not very wide on crop, and even on full frame 24mm may not be wide enough for a lot of architectural shooting. If shooting architecture, especially indoors, is a high priority you may want to reconsider one of the ultrawides.