View Full Version : upgrading the 28-75 2.8 to 24-105
Livinthalife
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 16:26
Well it's starting to cross my mind I would like a little more on the wide end, and if getting another lens, why not get a little longer too. I'm thinking of the 24-105 L. I do love the 2.8 on my Tamron, but as of lately I don't find 2.8 being needed quite so much. The only thing I AM worried about, is bokeh. I'm sure the bokeh is excellent on the L, but I'm obviously not going to be able to get the amount of shallowness dof as if with the 2.8. Got any words of wisdom? I'm becoming infected with L fever. I would love to have a better over all lens. Not that the Tamron has let me down, but faster AF, and more range in both directions is a big plus, IS is something new for me, but looking forward to it. So what do you all think about that transition? Let me know what you think. Any other reccomendations?
cjm
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 18:10
I have both lenses.
The 24-105 IS L is a better lens. It focuses better, it handles better and IMO the bokeh is fine. The 28-75 is an ok lens, but the 24-105 is amazing lens. I dont think you will regret it. If you think you might, buy a 24-105 IS L used so you don't lose very much money.
Livinthalife
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 18:18
Thanks fo rthe encouraging words Chris. I know it's an excellent lens, I guess I need some back up on this decision before making any rash decisions. ;)
ekie
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 18:25
I did the same when I had the tamron 28-75mm and upgraded to the 24-105L .. definitely worth the upgrade. the tamron served me well but the 24-105 was excellent. for me, i didnt have to do as much post-processing for the pics to "pop" as i did with the tamron.
i did unfortunately sold the 24-105 recently to purchase 17-55 f2.8 IS, mainly cuz of the photoshoots that I do. 17-55 + 70-200 f2.8 IS was more useful for me. and in order to buy the 70-200, I had to sell the 24-105. would luv to buy it again though if i had the money :D
Livinthalife
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 18:52
Glad to hear it ekk_xt.
sounds like I won't have any regrets.
ed rader
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 19:00
i went from the tamron to the 24-105L too. my tamron was sharper and a better portrait lens. (wide open the tamron was sharper. at f5.6 the canon was close to the tamron @ f3.5.
24mm wide end and the rich color and contrast that the L lens produces alone makes it a "better" lens, imo.
ed rader
cjm
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 19:05
Here is a question Andy.
I know, from trying to sell my Tamron for the last two weeks with no luck that they don't sell too well. Why not buy the 24-105 f4 IS L and keep the 28-75 when you think you want more blur? If you already have a great copy it would be a shame to sell it for nothing.
I want $300 for my lens, only offers I have got were $250. No way am I selling it for that. I will keep it.
Tyreman
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 19:22
Well the Canon EF 24-105f/4 IS L is likely superior to the tamron 28-75f/2.8.
But maybe better judge the Canon EF 24-70f/2.8 L to do what you want.
Its couple of stops faster.
A f/4 is an f/4 and indoors or out the f/2.8 is a big advantage.
I own the 24-105 it takes excellent pictures with some good bokeh.
I can send you a couple scans of what its done.
Sledhed
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 19:25
I own the 24-70 f2.8 and the 24-105 f4 and I prefer the 24-105. Not only because it's lighter but the extra reach is really nice. The bg blur is excellent on the 24-105, remember it's more than just a large aperture to get blur. It's the also the focal length of the lens and your distance to the subject.
Sledhed
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 19:28
Its couple of stops faster.
F4 to F2.8 is only 1 stop.
bacchanal
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 19:34
The bg blur is excellent on the 24-105, remember it's more than just a large aperture to get blur.
<sarcasm>
Oh no, you di-int just go there!!!
</sarcasm>
Tyreman
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 19:39
My error its only 1 fstop.:oops:
what was I thinking.:confused:
Livinthalife
6th of June 2007 (Wed), 20:18
Thanks everyone for their input. I may have to do what Chris said, and hold on to the the Tammy (plus it has sentimental value). It's just for me, a bit of money to spend. I mean I won't flinch at the idea of tossing over grand on a lens, it's just that the other day we bought a new bed here, and it was $700, and I was cringing of the thought.
I just want to make sure this is absolutely the right move before hopping on it. As of now, it sounds like it is. Just a matter of summoning the cash. I got a hidden bank account from my wife...maybe time to get into that...lol....
But looks like I'm decided. I think this will be the best overall investment. Thanks again everyone for your inputs.
vBulletin® v3.6.12, Copyright ©2000-2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.