DarkFall01 wrote:
Are you saying that on a crop camera, like the 40D, the distortion will be less than on a FF?
Here's a quote from the digital picture's excellent review
"Also common with lenses in this focal length range is distortion. The Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens shows noticeable barrel distortion from 24mm until disappearing near 40mm. Pincushion distortion begins at 80mm and becomes mild at 105mm. As usual, this distortion is most noticeable of a full-frame body."
this helped me decide. http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/28-105.shtml
have made some really large prints (60") with the 24-105L sharp as atack top & bottom end.
previoulsy had 28-70L 2.8, that sits on the shelf for those odd ocacciosns.
You are trying to do what many (all?) of us do-predict use patterns to optimize your buying/value strategy. I can tell you that, as someone that does mostly available light interior photography, that when I owned both lenses I would mount the F4 for holding and change to the F2.8 for shooting.
Now I own neither Canon of these zooms because I use the (IMHO better) Nikkor 24-70 F2.8 on my D3 and primes on my 1Ds MkIII (I retain the Canon 70-200). But then I really don't own a modern (not counting legacy Nikkor Ais) lens slower than F2.8. YMMV!
If you are a beginning DSLR user I suggest primes so that you can get familiar with specific focal lengths. That way you will relate your lens decisions to the material you want to capture.
I haven't used the 24-70 before but the 24-105 I have is junk around the edges. Has really horrible distortion (maybe a bad copy?).
Have you considered prime lenses? With your 70-200 something like a 50mm and 24mm (Sigma or Canon) would be ideal, weigh about the same and probably not cost much more, but you'll have a lot more DOF to play around with.
SoundHound wrote:
If you are a beginning DSLR user I suggest primes so that you can get familiar with specific focal lengths. That way you will relate your lens decisions to the material you want to capture.
Gack!
A better way for a beginning DSLR user to become familiar with different focal lengths is to use one or more zooms. They make the process of trying different focal lengths much simpler and make it much more likely that the user will experiment with more than one FL on a shot.
My view is that today (in contrast to a few decades ago) it makes far more sense to start with zooms and then move to primes if your photography will benefit from them.
Agreed Dan. I'm just getting my head around my 50L
My daughter got baptised today and my 5D2 and the 16-35II were the dogs bollocks. Great shots and I even did a bit of video at home. Very sharp. Not going to post it 'cos the dp type pixel peepers will berate me, endlessly.
If you are going to stay with a "crop" bodies (1.6x) get the 17-55 2.8 IS. However, the 17-55 2.8 IS wiil not work on a "full- frame" (5D, etc.) I really like the extra speed of a 2.8 lens, over f4. If you are planning to go to "full-frame" in the future get the 24-70.
You will be happy with either lens, and after you buy one you will want the other. My 28-70 2.8L gets far less use than my 24-105 4L IS but I would not sell either lens.
