canon 24-70L VS 24-105L - DPChallenge Forums

Olympus 12-40mm f/2.8 Pro

08/10/2007 01:25:18 PM · #1

Ok, im trying to make the very difficult decision betwen which to get, the...

Canon 24-105mm f4 L

OR

Canon 24-70 f2.8 L

Im looking for just kind of an all around lense BUT I hope to do a lot of outdoor photography of dogs "in action". Ive read about all the common pros/cons and differences betwene the two but what I havent really been able to find is practicle examples of where the benefit of the f2.8 overtake the slower f4 lens.

Id really like the extra reach of the 24-105 but just how good would it be for outdoor dog sports? Will I be able to keep the ISO low enough to still get solid frozen action of the dogs?

Does anyone have some examples of some action shots they have taken with the above lenses?

slickchik

OM System OM-1

08/10/2007 01:40:35 PM · #2

Link

link 2

link 3

link 4

This has been discussed many times. Good luck choosing!

pineapple

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM

08/10/2007 01:43:16 PM · #3

I think you'll find that the 24-70's 70 is not long enough to capture dogs in action. Though the f/2.8 will indeed make life a lot easier. If you had to choose between the lenses you detailed, my choice would be (the one I own) the 24-70mm. It's accurate and fast focusing. On the 30D it might well be long enough; when I use the 24-70 on my 350XT it is nice and long - on my 5D it is a different sort of (but very nice) lens. I wonder if the 70-200mm f/2.8 might be better for what you need.

08/10/2007 02:00:53 PM · #4

Thanks for the input guys. Im aware this has been discussed ad nauseum and have read much of the debate but I was kind of looking for actual example of just what kind of iso/shutter speed you can get away with using the longer lens.

Damn you canon for making these decisions so hard! :)

Message edited by author 2007-08-10 14:01:24.

fotomann_forever

08/10/2007 03:35:57 PM · #5

Originally posted by pineapple:

I wonder if the 70-200mm f/2.8 might be better for what you need.

Was my first thought.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

08/10/2007 04:04:46 PM · #6

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Impossible question to answer. You can get away with the shutter speed and iso that lets you properly expose the shot.

Sunny? How sunny? Cloudy? Flash?

Practically speaking, F4 outside in the sunshine isn't going to keep you from getting action stopping shutter speeds.

fotomann_forever

08/10/2007 04:13:08 PM · #7

Originally posted by routerguy666:

Practically speaking, F4 outside in the sunshine isn't going to keep you from getting action stopping shutter speeds.

Definitely not... on a bright sunny day, f/8 f/11 f/16, you can still freeze action.

NVPhoto

Canon EOS-40D

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II

08/10/2007 04:13:49 PM · #8

I would recommend the 70-200 as well. For 1, get the IS version and that buys you about 3 stops. Also, when I take pics of my dog in action (golden retriever), I like the extra reach because I can stand back farther. He is fast as hell and can cut turns in an instant. Its a bit easier to follow him when he is further away.

Out of the 2 you said, go with the 2.8. Doesn't really matter for the dog photos, but in low light situations you will be happy and for that amount of money on each, you should be happy.

08/10/2007 06:35:31 PM · #9

Take some wisdom from someone that spent the money and found that it wasn't what he wanted.

RENT. If you can, rent them both (at the same time if you can justify it) and compare them for what YOU do and for YOUR needs.

I just rented the 24-105 for a wedding this weekend having rented the 24-70 for the last one. I certainly realize that availability can be a huge factor in this for many not in urban centers. It will be my own reality shortly.

OK, you know have my 2 cents.

08/10/2007 06:44:00 PM · #10

Originally posted by Jmnuggy:

Thanks for the additional input guys. The main dog events I hope to shhot will be frisbee competitions so the fields arent huge and they are surrounded by people so I wont be able to back up. Freestyle events take place in even a smaller area so while I think the 70-200 would be a sweet lens to have I think it would be limited for "other" use if that makes sense.

It certainly is a tough call and one a lot of people seem to have trouble with. I guess right now I am leaning toward the 24-70 because of its faster and even if I dont need it for outdoor shoots I think it will come in handier indoors which is where we up here in minnnesota are half the year.

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

08/10/2007 06:45:06 PM · #11

Originally posted by sea2c:

Ive looked at renting them as well and likely will. How did the two compare for your wedding shoots?

renefunk

Canon EOS-5D

08/10/2007 07:06:43 PM · #12

i woud take the 24 70 caus is much sharper wide open than the f4

08/10/2007 07:14:07 PM · #13

Originally posted by Kaveran:

Ive looked at renting them as well and likely will. How did the two compare for your wedding shoots?

Have to say I LOVED the 24-70 from the first glance through the viewfinder. It was a distinct improvement over any other I'd tried and I'd just sold my 28-70 for its lack of use. It was fast, tack sharp and spot on.

I'll let you know how I liked the 24-105 after tomorrow. Hopefully I remember!

08/12/2007 09:31:06 PM · #14

Now that I've used them both. 24-70 will definitely be the one on my list. Didn't use the extra 35 mm on the long end hardly at all. Under darker conditions the 24-105 hunts quite a bit and I really missed the 2.8. Sharpness, well, it's a negligible difference either way, but I'd rather be shooting at 1/60 inside at 2.8 than 1/40 at f/4 even with IS. Plus the fact that for the first time since I got this camera, my batteries (both in the grip) died at the end of the day.

So, for this enthusiast, it will be the 24-70. That is, if I don't go buy the D200/17-55! LOL.

fotomann_forever

08/12/2007 09:38:51 PM · #15

Ya know you could couple the 24-70 with a 1.4x teleconverter and still have a very usable lens if ya find yourself needing that extra reach.

08/12/2007 10:12:28 PM · #16

Originally posted by fotomann_forever:

Ya know you could couple the 24-70 with a 1.4x teleconverter and still have a very usable lens if ya find yourself needing that extra reach.

LOL, sure could. But I find myself needing the 1600 bucks first.