| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/05/2007 12:33:52 PM · #1 |
Both the same price @ B&Hphoto.
Which one would do you feel would be the best to purchase considering Portrait and Landscape photography and everyday lens?
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM or Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
|
|
|
|
12/05/2007 12:35:39 PM · #2 |
Best walk-around I ever owned was the 24-105. Only short-coming was the aperture. Now I have 24-70 and no aperture problem, but miss the IS and slightly longer reach.
I'm afraid I have to stick with my pat answer every time this particular lens quandry arises - you simply have to buy both. |
|
|
|
12/05/2007 12:40:27 PM · #3 |
Okay, how about this simplification: If it's a walk-around lens ... go for the 24-105. If it's a lens to be used in weddings or other dark venues, go for the 24-70.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2007 12:45:39 PM · #4 |
Thanks for you answers. I don't have a lot to spend on equipment and choosing the right lens has become a pain. I know what camera and flash but the lens(es) are driving me nuts.
Thanks |
|
|
|
12/05/2007 02:00:06 PM · #5 |
If you're in a big town, you should be able to rent them.
Since you're going to spen $1,200 on a lens, spend an extra $40 and rent it first. See what you like.
I'm told the 24-70 weighs a lot, but you'll never know until you try it.
For me, I would get the 24-70 for low light. Of course, my 2 zooms are F4. But if I could afford them, I'd get the F2.8. |
|
|
|
12/05/2007 02:08:12 PM · #6 |
Well your Tammy covers the 24-70 range the of the Canon listed. But you don't have IS in the 24-105 range........
|
|
|
|
12/05/2007 02:35:45 PM · #7 |
I have been using the28/75 2.8 as my standard but have just purchased the carl Zeiss 16/80 3.5/4.5 its slower but the image quality and lack of any aberationds make up for it.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2007 03:47:10 PM · #8 |
I think the 24-105 f/4 would be the best choice. Even though it's f/4, the IS would make up the difference. If the 24-105 had been available at the time, I probably would have bought it instead of the 24-70.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2007 04:11:17 PM · #9 |
I had a tough choice between these two lens also.
Here was how I broke it down:
24-105 F4 IS: Easily the better choice if you are only shooting outdoors or in good light. A little more zoom range and the IS can be helpful.
27-70 F2.8: Easily the better choice if you are shooting indoors and in questionable light as there is no replacement for a stop of aperture.
A step further:
I played with my 28-138 IS with and without IS and found that if you are at all steady and are trying to take a good photo, IS is very slightly helpful at 100mm and useless at 28mm. So IS, not that big of a deal in this situation.
Also, the difference between 70mm and 105mm is very little. Plus, in this range I spend more time below 50mm anyway. So extra zoom, not that big of a deal for me.
F2.8 vs F4 is a full stop. Shutter speed wise, that's the difference between 1/50 and 1/100, which can be a huge deal. Plus the shallow DOF possibilities and being able to shoot at F4 without being wide open.
Since I figured I'd use it 60% outdoors 40% indoors I got the 24-70 F2.8. Having had it more then a year now, I use it much more at F2.8 then times i wished it had a little more reach (sometimes) or IS (never).
Message edited by author 2007-12-05 16:14:33.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2007 08:31:03 PM · #10 |
The other reason, often overlooked, for shooting f/2.8 in dim light is the ability to focus. With an f/4 lens you're going to have a much harder time trying to focus in dim light than with an f/2.8 lens. Especially because Canon's more accurate focusing sensor comes into play at f/2.8 but is inactive at f/4. And no amount of IS will ever make up for inability to "get the shot" because you can't focus.
So... 24-105/4 if you're mostly shooting outdoors or in good light and 24-70/2.8 if you're shooting dim light (reception halls, etc).
One other thing ... it was pointed out that the Tamron 28-75/2.8 also covers the same range as the 24-70/2.8 (or nearly so). The main reason my Tamron doesn't get used any more is because of focusing speed. The Canon 24-70/2.8 with USM is a speed demon when it comes to focusing, especially so in low light. So while I view the Tammy as a *very* capable lens (one I used with weddings for a long time) ... if you ever run into the inability to focus with it, you may have gotten to the point where you're ready to outgrow it and replace it with the more expensive Canon.
|
|
|
|
12/05/2007 09:07:46 PM · #11 |
There have been tomes of stuff written about this on the web....
IMO it comes down to what you shoot... If it's moving stuff then f2.8 and if static then f4 with IS. In the end it's only 1 stop, so hit the ISO one more and you are equal... if you are on the ISO limit then go prime anyway :-) |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 12/29/2025 03:09:22 PM EST.
