Torn between lenses!

FM Forum Rules
Canon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 3 end

Archive 2006 · Torn between lenses!

pascal03
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #1 · Torn between lenses!

The f2.8 aperture alone will assist in focus lock and is worth the price when shooting in not so ideal situations. You are letting in twice the amount of light which only helps with focus.

The 24-105 IS is a very nice lens and I really do like it. The IS on this lens is amazing and it was letting me shoot down to 1/15th sec and still get sharp images.... now that's impressive.

Seems like in your case, the 24-105 L might be more appropriate as you want a lens you can use as a walk around and a more versatile lens. The extra reach of the 24-105L might come in handy. However, when I need the shot and don't have a second chance at getting it, I use the 24-70L. The resolution of the 24-70L wide open is spectacular.

I know I might not be helping here, but these are two very nice lenses and it's hard deciding which one to get. If I had to start all over again, I would get the 24-105L IS first and then, if I needed the extra stop, would upgrade to the 24-70L when I had the $$$ or the need.

Feb 02, 2006 at 03:29 PM

Guest
Offline
Guest

p.2 #2 · Torn between lenses!

I had them both and sold my 24-105. The extra stop is crucial for me. In some situations I was very disapointed and cursed myself for taking only 24-105. If you're shooting in low light IS does a great job but you can't freeze time. If I were you I'd rather not listen to others but think on my own. How will you use this lens? Why do you need it? The answer'll be obvious IMO.

Oh, and about the weight... I don't feel tired after a day spent with MkII with 24-70 on it. Those who spent 7 or more hours holding 645 will understand me.

Edited by LiveWire on Feb 02, 2006 at 05:15 PM GMT

Edited by LiveWire on Feb 02, 2006 at 05:16 PM GMT

Feb 02, 2006 at 04:15 PM

VladKenner
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #3 · Torn between lenses!

I had both and eventually decided to sell 24-70. I liked the DOF on it, but after converting to FF DSLR I found tha I need more reach for the type of shooting I do. I miss the extra stop, but the sharpness of 24-105 makes it a clear winner. The gain in sharpness is probably due to the superb IS performance, as I mostly shoot handheld. 24-105 is much lighter and more suited to walkaround lens role especially for FF cameras.

Feb 02, 2006 at 04:50 PM

JasonJ
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #4 · Torn between lenses!

Thank you everyone, for very subjective... reasoning! I have considered getting the 70-200IS first, but the telephoto end is not something I shoot in often.

I agree about the difference in bokeh, but as someone else mentioned, I can always use a prime if thats what I need. I think I'm leaning towards the 24-105IS now, but I won't be sure until its in my hands

Thanks again, you guys have been very helpful!

Feb 02, 2006 at 04:55 PM

sifpandor
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #5 · Torn between lenses!

I had a really hard time deciding between the 24-70 and 24-105 for all the reasons mentioned. For me there were two deciding factors.

1) Better focus on the 20D @ f/2.8
2) I shoot a lot of kids indoors so I need the fastest glass possible.

I would love it if Canon made a 24-105 f/2.8L IS, but that would be even bigger and heavier than the 24-70. In the end, I think I made the right choice and have had no regrets and no plans to get the 24-105. Next lens for me is the 70-200 2.8 IS.

-- Mark

Feb 02, 2006 at 05:42 PM

pchaplo
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #6 · Torn between lenses!

I use the older 28-70 that you can get for ~$700 now. The fast lens is great for lower light handheld situations and the wide aperture does help the AF. But with the 20D, isnt that zoom range a bit on the long side? Used 16-35mm is what I would look at if I were in your mocassins.

Just my 2k,
Paul

Feb 02, 2006 at 06:15 PM

Michael11
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #7 · Torn between lenses!

My thoughts are... you can never have too many great lenses (Coming from a guy who doesn’t have any great lenses yet).

I was (Am) mulling over which lens to save up for first, second, third, forth, fifth... etc. As I was (Am) in the same "Who's on first, what's on second and I don't know who's on third" state of mind when it comes to buying a good next lens.

I am almost to the point of just saving up for a 24-70mm f/2.8L and then start saving for the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS. After that, I will save up for the 16-35mm f/2.8L and somewhere in between snatching up the 50mm f/1.8 (Because it's so darn cheap) and the 85mm f/1.8 (Because its so darn fast). Then not needing a 300mm f/2.8, I will get the 300mm f/4 last.

The way I look at it is, you only live once (Most of us)... so you might as well give yourself what you really want from the get go.

It may take a little while, but I am going to get there (I hope sooner than later... I don't want to miss too many good shots).

Good luck on your quest.

On the other hand, money is king... so the more you save on a f/4's, the more f/4's you can get sooner then later. So go with what your gut tells you. Or just get the f/2.8.

Ok, I just changed my mind again... (If you are poor... "like I am now") keep the 17-40mm f/4 and then get the 70-200mm f/4 (You see what I'm up against here?! This is a never ending battle). Then get the 50mm f/1.8 and the 85mm f/1.8.

I just want to shoot some pictures!!!

I hope this helps you out

I'm sure it doesn't.

I need a drink...

Feb 02, 2006 at 07:38 PM

JasonJ
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #8 · Torn between lenses!

Geez, with FM members going back and forth, I seem to be going back and forth as well.

As of now, this is how I feel:

24-70 has really nice bokeh and it's one stop faster than the 24-105IS.
The 24-105IS on the other hand has a more versatile focal length and IS, which will help me with camera shake, but not subject movement. I would love to get nice, buttery results with the 24-70, but the IS seems crucial at times.

Feb 03, 2006 at 09:07 AM

Michael-M
Offline
Account Locked

p.2 #9 · Torn between lenses!

buy the 24-70 now, and the 24-105 later when you can afford..................or do as i did and buy both now.
each has it's own specs that does a few things beter than the other.
if you do indeed like zooms over primes, then there will always be a time and place where one will be the best choice.
Canon really created a "catch 22" here.

Feb 03, 2006 at 12:19 PM

Suba
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #10 · Torn between lenses!

As already mentioned, do not underestimate the 20d AF additional feature where the autofocus using extra focussing points on any f2.8 (or faster) lens.....

This would not function with an f4 lens.

Feb 03, 2006 at 12:29 PM

JasonJ
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #11 · Torn between lenses!

Well said Michael-M... a catch-22.

Suba, does the 20D have focus points that do not function unless the lens can offer a wide aperture of f2.8 and wider? Or is it just the amount of light let in by the lens that assists the AF?

Feb 03, 2006 at 07:08 PM

Yakim Peled
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #12 · Torn between lenses!

The central AF point is a high precision one with f/2.8 or faster lenses.

Feb 04, 2006 at 09:50 AM

rhorta
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #13 · Torn between lenses!

Like many here I had (and to some extend still have) difficulties making up my mind.

I finally opted for the 24-105, and primes to cover the low light / fast side.

IS is of more use to me when it comes to a GP zoom.

When it came to the 70-200 range it was a lot easier to make up my mind.

There are now basically 3 lenses left in my mind (but only after moving to FF).

85L and 135L, with my mind devided between the 24L and 35L (leaning towards the latter). It may be a matter of just choosing one, or all...if the funds are there.

I notice you have a 17-40/4 and 70-200/4.

If these two lenses are fast enough for you, you won't feel sorry if you get a 24-105. Actually IS will probably be more of use to you than one extra stop.

(but seriously if money were no concern most people would love to have BOTH 24-70 and 24-105 and to see some post terrible critiques on the lens they DON'T have is just silly...).

Feb 04, 2006 at 10:25 AM

JasonJ
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #14 · Torn between lenses!

Thanks for clearing that up Yakim. I had no idea.

Ruy, you have just made my decision process a little more difficult. For some odd reason, almost a gut feeling, I was going to go with the 24-70. Without substantial reasoning -- I just decided to get this lens. But as you mentioned, the f/4 isnt terribly slow and I'm able to get by and so the IS could be of help. I guess I don't want to purchase the 24-105IS lens and regret that I didn't get the f2.8 lense.

The main reason I wanted an IS lens is that when I shoot small concerts (mainly church events where bands come and play set during a time of worship), I tend to shoot at ISO1600 with a shutter speed ranging from 1/13s to 1/60s (mainly 1/13s to 1/60s and when I'm lucky 1/80s to maybe 1/100s). This is with my f/4 lenses. When I use my 50/1.4 lens, I shoot around f/1.8 or f/2.8 and I can get slightly faster shutter speeds. I can hand hold fairly well at 1/30 of a second and can salvage a few at 1/13s too. I'm sure the IS would give me a high percentage of keepers at those shutter speeds. Now that I look through some of my photos, the percentage of keepers at f/2.8 from my 50/1.4 lens was much higher than the keepers with my 70-200 f4L. While thats not a fair comparison, keeping in mind of the focal lengths, I think I might go with the 24-70 and then save up for the 70-200IS!

Wow, I'm so wishy washy. Thank's everyone for guiding me through this difficult, yet almost ridiculous process!

Feb 04, 2006 at 10:38 PM

Savas K
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #15 · Torn between lenses!

The dollar figure and time spent learning the lens once you have it makes getting preliminary info all the more important. I enjoyed this thread. Be sure to go and handle these lenses and the operation of them in the store. I would even say to prepare yourself not to buy one during this visit. You will probably want to think about what you just experienced afterward. At that point, you will be good to go. Visit the store and buy the lens you want.

Feb 05, 2006 at 03:00 AM

rjk55425
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #16 · Torn between lenses!

Buy the 24-105 and add a fast prime somewhere within that range.

Feb 05, 2006 at 03:22 AM

RGS65
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #17 · Torn between lenses!

kahren wrote:
i choose the 24-70 over the 24-105. the IS doesnt make it up to one stop down, atleast for me. if that helps you

Ditto for me, but I understand why some don't. I'm just a 2.8 or better snob, but I don't generally use a tripod and there are times when I wish I had IS. I like the bright viewfinder of the 2.8 lenses. This is a tough choice and no one lense can do it all. Now, put IS on my 24-70L with f/2.8 and I'll gladly give up the extra reach of the 105.
BTW, the 85 1.8 is awesome - of you are set on getting that, then perhaps the 24-105 is the choice for you.

Feb 05, 2006 at 04:54 AM

JasonJ
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #18 · Torn between lenses!

Saves K, I will make sure to stop by a photo store and check out both lenses. I overlooked that option completely.

I think im going to go with the 24-70 for now. The central high precision AF point seems like a winning reason to go with the 24-70

. If not, I can always sell and go for the 24-105IS. I'm just hoping to avoid that situation.

Thanks again to everyone that contributed to this thread and my buying decision!

Feb 05, 2006 at 05:18 AM

jra111
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.2 #19 · Torn between lenses!

I have the 24-70L , 70-200 2.8 L non IS, and the 85 1.8 . For me IS didn't help unless the subject was perfectly still. Before I bought my len's a friend let me borrow his 70-200 2.8L IS & 28-300 L IS . I took the 70-200 to a birthday party and shot candids from across the room , my conclusion was even for normal conversation movement IS was not helpful at shots 1/50 and under. After that I went with the non IS but I am also a blurred background kind of guy and like 2.8 or faster. I will say I sold my Bigma and got the 100-400L IS for the IS and that helps alot.

Feb 05, 2006 at 05:49 AM

orthopod
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.2 #20 · Torn between lenses!

You'll find that with the IS indoors shooting bands, etc, at slower shutter speeds you'll have perfectly crisp objects, and less crisp people as they move.

In my experience, shooting indoors without flash with a F4 lens at events like birthday parties, etc. you really have to push the iso, shoot in Raw, and be prepared to do a lot of PP. I have lost MANY good shots using a f4 lens indoors (made the mistake at my sons birthday party at a place that wouldn't allow flash...had a 24-105 IS and my wife left my lens bag at home!)

The IS is great when shooting stationary objects, or for people posing. If you are trying to catch little ones running around or indoors the extra stop is much more valuable than IS IMHO.

Feb 05, 2006 at 01:35 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Canon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end