would you trade? - DPChallenge Forums

Olympus OM-D E-M1 Mark II

12/14/2012 09:28:54 AM · #1

i'm considering selling my 17-40L and buying a used 24-105L.

I enjoy taking UWA shots but lately i haven't and i'm really thinking after the past few outings that im tired of dragging all my lenses with me. last week in NY really killed me lugging a backpack full of gear all day, with my kids. eventually i just got tired of changing lenses all the time. that happens a lot lately and after the last year of going trough my images i feel like i spend to much time fiddling lugging around all my gear and not taking enough good pictures. i need a good walk around zoom.

im just talking this out, i think i know what i am going to do, i would just like some reassurance or tell me im crazy or propose something i have thought of.

im keeping my two primes (50 and 85) since they are my portrait lenses unless you can convince me i'd get equivalent portrait results with something else.

Venser

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

12/14/2012 09:38:40 AM · #2

Originally posted by mike_311:

i'm considering selling my 17-40L and buying a used 24-105L.

I'd keep the 17-40mm and simply buy the 24-105mm also. Problem solved.

Skip

Canon EOS-1D X

Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS USM

12/14/2012 09:39:27 AM · #3

get another body and you won't have to change lenses as often...

it never hurts to have options. sometimes, to challenge myself, i'll leave the house with just one lense; that forces me to focus on making the most of the limitation. it also makes me keenly aware of why i have other lenses. other times, i'll take almost everything and end up just using one; and even though i might want to kick myself for dragging around unused gear, at least i was prepared. and sometimes i'll just grab two bodies and mount a wide on one and a long on the other and find myself in the goldilocks zone ;-)

mrchhas

Apple iPhone 15 Pro Max

12/14/2012 09:40:37 AM · #4

I'd say save a bit and get the 2.8 - i like the 4.0 a lot but that extra stop changes a lot especially in tricky conditions.

dtremain

Canon EOS 80D

Canon EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6 II

12/14/2012 09:47:33 AM · #5

There is a reason I use the 18-270mm Tamron. One lens. No changes. No extra gear. And it handles almost anything I want to do. I figure that until my skill set reaches a point where the lens makes the difference...

bohemka

Nikon D700

Sigma 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX Aspherical DG HSM for Nikon

12/14/2012 09:49:53 AM · #6

Originally posted by mike_311:

im just talking this out, i think i know what i am going to do

Ditch the kids? That's what I'd do. They're a distraction, and they're getting between you and your UWA. Since I became a dad I haven't had the time or ability to concentrate without distraction long enough to properly set up a shot, and that's what you really need to do to get quality UWA photos.

It's not just you, though, who's struggling with your lens relationship. Your UWA also probably feels a little neglected, especially now that you're eying a mid-range zoom (the horror!) to take quick and dirty snapshots all over town. I would recommend you spend a little one-on-one time with your UWA lens to maybe rekindle the spark.

UWA lens relationships are not easy, but with time and effort they can be very rewarding.

Devinder

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

12/14/2012 09:53:40 AM · #7

Given reviews from certain parties and just a personal want, i almost want to swap my 24-70 for 24-105. Won't do it anytime soon, since i happen to believe my copy of the lens is pretty tack sharp and have figured out a quick swap system.

here's where we get to you.

The way i see it, you need either A. that 24-105, or B. a much better method for lens swapping. I generally do one of two things.

1. go out with just my 50mm
2. carry my S&F Lens Exchange Case 200AW by Lowepro. This things made lens swapping easy and quick. At the risk of sounding like they've hired me to do their marketing, let me explain what it is. Its a lens bag that goes on your belt, you can open it with one hand (zipz down), take your camera lens out, put it in its second compartment, pull new lens out, swap covers, place on camera. I know i can usually do this in under 30 seconds, probably more like 10-15. it takes strain off my back, allows me to avoid carrying my camera bag, allows for a painless lens swap, and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg (40$). It also comes with a rain cover if you really need it.

If you want more range and are ok with giving up that really wide side of things, a 24-105 is excellent. Espesially considering the things you can do with photostiching nowadays. If you want to be able to carry your lenses so you have access to all their different "looks", but without the unecessary pain in the ass - go check out that exchange case at a store near you and see if it'll do it for ya.

edit: did forget to mention that it easily holds my 70-200. so those two primes oughta be easy work.

Message edited by author 2012-12-14 10:00:22.

MargaretNet

Sony DSC-RX100 VII

12/14/2012 10:38:18 AM · #8

Originally posted by dtremain:

I used to have this lens. After looking at some old images taken with that lens I realized recently how good it was. I regret selling it (I might have had a very good speciman). I hate changing lenses as I usually pick up all sorts of nasties. I am now up to 3 bodies in order to avoid this. I travel with just one lens - 24-105 but on 5D MKII it is a heavy package. I also had 15-85mm EF-S. It was a very fine lens too with range on 550D equivalent to my current setup but much lighter. By now I am seriously wondering why have all these cameras and lenses as I don't do portraits and I am not a studio nor a sports photographer. I don't do stock nor any other paid photography. I have a feeling sometimes that I have wasted a lot of money on the gear I rarely use. So don't bother about changing your Tamron, you already have a very fine lens with great range.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

12/14/2012 10:42:50 AM · #9

Get the kids in on some early training as mountain porters, make them lug your gear. Start with no more than 15% of their body weight total. Build up from there.

Brent_S

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II

12/14/2012 10:57:18 AM · #10

I think you will regret giving up your 17-40 even if it is replace it with a 24-105. I was considering doing just that when I pre-ordered the 5D2 as a kit with the 24-105. Once I had all the pieces I realized that though the 24-105 is a wonderful all around lens (I love it), many of my more special shots come from using the 17-40. The extra width is really quite significant allowing more area to be captured certainly but it also gives more of the "expanded" look I love for landscapes.

If I am going out with just one lens I usually take the 24-105. But if taking several I don't hesitate to bring the 17-40 along as it is really quite light.

I'd love to have an extra body right now to be able to quickly switch to a different lens. More affordable to me is just having gear that makes switching lenses faster as Devinder suggests. I use Thinktank Packs, and with their "speedbelt" system you can wear different lens cases around your waste and switch lenses quite fast. It does set you up for getting dust in your camera to be sure. I just except that and take my camera in for cleaning now and then. I would go to the Thinktank site and see what they offer, their modular system is really great if you think it out.

Message edited by author 2012-12-14 10:58:13.

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/14/2012 11:06:14 AM · #11

There are lots of free software out there that can rip rip thru the meta data and graph or categorise your most used range.... I like Jeff's LR plugin but there are lots of others depending what software you use. Look at where your clustered especially around the ends of your current 17-40 and between 17-24.

I have had the 24-105 for a while and just got the 17-40 recently (tripped over a great deal and I'm trying to get back to fullframe, so I got it to eventually replace my 10-22).... I find the 24-105 far the better lens but that's because I am more of a long shooter... I rarely have issues with 24 been too short. It's noticeably heavier then the 17-40 though (I took it for an outing all day in NYC - without the kiddies though - and by the end of the day I could feel the difference).

As far as images.... The 24-105 just seems a tad sharper in a lot of cases so far (at least to me).... that's a bit unfair on the 17-40 as have not had it long enough.... but the 24 is certainly not going to be a downgrade for sure. The IS is absolute magic on it - I am still amazed at the images it will allow!

Giles

12/14/2012 11:22:12 AM · #12

im a big guy and a gear head i like to lug all my gear with me :) yesterday went out walking in the peaks in teh snow i took, 5d mk2 and batter grip with 24-105 on it, in my lowepro pro trekker ii had 70-200 2.8 L, 16-35 2.8 L 28-70 L and my new 50-500 to try out, and my carbon fibre manfrotto, and my filter bag, 2 litres of water all in all it weighs about 25kg i think.

but i didnt have my boy with me, often now if going for a quick walk with the dog and my boy i just whip the battery grip off my 20d and stick the nifty 50 on its a good test to limit yourself. recently i went fishing in spain and just took my 20d and 17-85 efs, yeah i missed my other lens etc but i still got some great pics just makes you concentrate on your images more,

i love the 16-35 2.8 sp much wider than the 24, but the 24-105 is a great one lens set up

if im shooting an event or a gig ill take my 5d/battery grip as well so i can have usually 28-70 on 5d and 70-200 on the 5d mk2 etc, a record/courier back is much better for lighter trip makes lens changes easier and still carry the kids if need be, i have the lowepro clasified 250 or the slightly smaller think tank retrospective 20 which will still hold my 3 Ls and 5d battery grip and have room for flashes etc, i use the think tank as my urban bag

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/14/2012 12:14:12 PM · #13

this is why i love this place. im more confused at to what to do. :) this isn't what i wanted to hear, now i know i am going to miss the 17-40L if i get rid of it...

maybe the solution is to look into a faster switching system as recommended. i purposely bought a lower pro 200AW, while it allows me quick access to my dslr, i still can't easily get to the lenses.

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II

12/14/2012 12:41:12 PM · #14

Originally posted by mike_311:

this is why i love this place. im more confused at to what to do. :)

Let me summarise for you... You asked A or B.... Your answers were BOTH a and b and then ADD some other gear....

Sounds like a crystal clear answer to me :-)

12/14/2012 12:46:30 PM · #15

no, realize its a very subjective question, im honestly torn over whether to do it. any advice given here is helpful.

Giles

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28-300mm f3.5-5.6G ED VR

12/14/2012 01:16:56 PM · #16

ill send you a link via pm to the same scene shot with 16-35 and 24-105

NikonJeb

Nikon D850

12/14/2012 01:53:04 PM · #17

Rent/borrow a good big zoom. See what you think after using it for a weekend. Big zooms are funny.....some of us love 'em, some not so much. My first go 'round I got my D70s an 18-70, then bought a 55-200.... no matter what, it seemed like I *always* had the wrong freakin' lens on..... So I got a Tammy 18-270. it was much better for convenience, but I didn't think it was as sharp as the Nikkor lenses. Then I got the 18-200 VR Nikkor and was I ever ecstatic! It served 90% of my needs, gave me versatility and decent quality shots. I got a couple different bodies since then, and I still have that lens on my D7000. Having bought a 105mm f/2.8, I know what *really* good glass is all about, yet the walkaround 18-200 was what lived on my camera.

Then.....I bought my D600, and a 28-300 VR Nikkor . OH MY GAWD!!!!!! The freakin' thing weighs a ton, but does this combination ever take fabulous resolution images!

These big zooms keep getting better and better. So I would recommend going out and borrowing or renting Canon's equivalent and see what you think. You can always continue on slowly stockpiling all the specific lenses you want for those times when only that prime will do.

Just my $0.02USD, YMMV...

12/14/2012 01:55:06 PM · #18

good idea on renting, i hear the 24-70L is a brick, but i don't hear to much about the weight of the 24-105L.

Silent-Shooter

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II

12/14/2012 11:25:07 PM · #19

Hi Mike
I have both the 17-40 and 24-105. I use the 24-105 as my general walk around lens. It is a nice lens with a nice zoom range. The IS is good but is only good for static objects. If you have a moving subject, I have found the f4 to be a bit of a pain - you have to ramp up the ISO to get a decent shutter speed. Maybe I'm just spoilt by my 70-200 f2.8 but perhaps you want to look at the 24-70 f2.8 as well. I don't think anyone has mentioned that lens yet. It all depends on what you are shooting though, I'm doing a lot of kids parties and low light functions lately so f2.8 helps a lot there. What's your main subject going to be?

I would not let the 17-40 go as it is a lens designed for completely different things to the 24-105. Yes I use mine mainly for landscapes but I'm sure you will miss the really wide 17mm if you got rid of it.

As for the weight question - 17-40 is the lightest, 24-105 is in the middle and the 24-70 is the heaviest due to it being f2.8.

In a nutshell, if you have the finances and budget for it - rather keep the 17-40 and add to your collection. Others have basically echoed my sentiments - there must be a reason for that!

If you are unsure, rent first or find a friend with a 24-105 to test for a day or two.

Devinder