24-105 F4 IS vs. 24-70 2.8 for weddings

[microman23]

What would you recommend for weddings on a 5D?

The 24-105 is only one stop slower the 24-70 and has THREE stop IS.


So wouldn't the 24-105 IS be the better for low light pictures with no action?

[sapearl]

For the way that I shoot, absolutely the 24-105. I've used it for nearly 2 years now and it does a terrific job in that regard. I agree with what you are saying, but keep in mind that I use flash in most of my work. It is critical in dark churches for the recessional, processional and other shots if flash is permitted during the ceremony.

The other thing I like about the 24-105 is that it covers the complete range of 4 MF primes that I'd previously used when shooting film. For large group shots in tight places I'm usually in the 24-35mm range. If I can back up a bit, then 35-50mm works quite well.

For walk around candids I'll be at about 50-85, and for tighter shots and portraits I'll take it out to 105mm. The IS is also superb and has come to the rescue many times at low shutter speeds when flash was not permitted.

Now yet another 24-105 vs. 24-70 can begin :rolleyes:. Microman, have you seen the other threads on this? Also, do you use a flash at weddings at all? - Stu

What would you recommend for weddings on a 5D?

The 24-105 is only one stop slower the 24-70 and has THREE stop IS.


So wouldn't the 24-105 IS be the better for low light pictures with no action?

[trantz]

I had the 24-70 before I got my 5D. I was using it with my 20D, and I loved it. Now that I have the 5D, I love it more. 24-105 has good range, but 70mm end of the 24-70 is sufficient for my style. Also from past experiences with image stabilizer, I find the 2.8L comes in more handy then a IS.
It's hard to say tho, it really depends on your style of shooting. I would suggest you test-drive them both if possible.

[EOS_JD]

I have a 24-105 and find it fantastic. The IS works a treat although sometimes I wish I was using f2.8 (luckily I also have a 28-75 Tamron and a couple of fast primes for those times....... To be fair the 28-75 sees very little use.

[microman23]

I have seen other threads... But this one is focused more on the IS.
Do you ever use your 24-105 in combo with 70-200?

Its funny how 105mm FF is where 70mm is with a crop body. Its like they are meant for each other. :cool:


For the way that I shoot, absolutely the 24-105. I've used it for nearly 2 years now and it does a terrific job in that regard. I agree with what you are saying, but keep in mind that I use flash in most of my work. It is critical in dark churches for the recessional, processional and other shots if flash is permitted during the ceremony.

The other thing I like about the 24-105 is that it covers the complete range of 4 MF primes that I'd previously used when shooting film. For large group shots in tight places I'm usually in the 24-35mm range. If I can back up a bit, then 35-50mm works quite well.

For walk around candids I'll be at about 50-85, and for tighter shots and portraits I'll take it out to 105mm. The IS is also superb and has come to the rescue many times at low shutter speeds when flash was not permitted.

Now yet another 24-105 vs. 24-70 can begin :rolleyes:. Microman, have you seen the other threads on this? Also, do you use a flash at weddings at all? - Stu

[microman23]

I had the 24-70 before I got my 5D. I was using it with my 20D, and I loved it. Now that I have the 5D, I love it more. 24-105 has good range, but 70mm end of the 24-70 is sufficient for my style. Also from past experiences with image stabilizer, I find the 2.8L comes in more handy then a IS.
It's hard to say tho, it really depends on your style of shooting. I would suggest you test-drive them both if possible.

I am feeling the same way at the moment... and this thread is enforcing that feeling.

I love my bokeh. ;)

[sapearl]

Yes, absolutely.

My second 5D body always has the 70-200 mounted on it while the 24-105 is mounted on the first. The thirds lens is there as a sort of back up in case the shorter one fails.

.......Do you ever use your 24-105 in combo with 70-200?

Its funny how 105mm FF is where 70mm is with a crop body. Its like they are meant for each other. :cool:

[microman23]

Yes, absolutely.

My second 5D body always has the 70-200 mounted on it while the 24-105 is mounted on the first. The thirds lens is there as a sort of back up in case the shorter one fails.

Do you ever see the need to use the 1.4 tele with your 70-200 on the 5D for larger weddings?

[sapearl]

You're referring to the 1.4TC? Actually I don't own one. If I did though that would make the longer lens a 280mm, but reduce the light sensitivity 1-2 stops. I find the 200mm length to be quite adequate. Most of my wedding work is done on the wider end anyhow... groups shots, smaller rooms, closer-in candids, dance floor, tables shots....

Do you ever see the need to use the 1.4 tele with your 70-200 on the 5D for larger weddings?

[sapearl]

On second read, maybe I missed the meaning of your question. Under what circumstances did you have in mind for use of the TC with the long lens?

Do you ever see the need to use the 1.4 tele with your 70-200 on the 5D for larger weddings?

[microman23]

To get candid photos from the other side of the room .

[sapearl]

IMO it would just not be practical to use a 70-200 w/TC indoors in dim lighting. You could use a flash - I have with just the 70-200 - but then you end up "building" a bit of an ungainly rig.

If you really want to do fast unobtrusive candids in dim lighting, you probably would be better off with a fast prime like the 100 or 135 f/2.

To get candid photos from the other side of the room .

[QX56]

For wedding indoor ,candid shot I would use 24-70 and out door I use 24-105 .

[cdifoto]

I prefer the 24-70 since that's pretty much all I've known, but I'm sure I could make a 24-105 work as well.

[sapearl]

Both are fine lenses, and in the hands of a skilled user they will both produce superb images based upon samples we've seen here in the forum.

[Stime187]

microman, I sent you a PM.

[cdifoto]

Both are fine lenses, and in the hands of a skilled user they will both produce superb images based upon samples we've seen here in the forum.

Agreed.