I'm waiting on my 5D II and have a dumb question about the 24-105

[Bucster]

I used to have a 17-55 on my 40D and loved everything about it. I now have a 5D II on order. I know the gold standard for FF is the 24-70, I got the 24-105 and rarely used it because of the range and speed on a crop. Does anyone have good experiences with the 24-105 for weddings or do I need the 24-70. I do have a couple of good prime lenses, but I don't want a lot of lens swaps.

I might just be in denial and having a hard time choking down another thousand on top of the three thousand. :wink:

[bnlearle]

Tons of people use (and love) the 24-105. I wouldn't ever use it because I couldn't imagine being limited to f/4 -- but I'm a guy who shoots at f/1.2 about 90% of the time -- so take that with a grain of salt ;)

But anyway, if you don't feel like you'll mind shooting at f/4 then I'm sure you'll love it!

Bobby

[Stealthy Ninja]

I used a 24-105 on a wedding. It was fine most of the time because you can up the ISO quite a bit on the 5DII. But 2.8 is always nice to have. BUT you can get some bokeh with a FF as the DOF is thinner generally. So F/4 might be OK for you.

The 24-105 is MUCH different on a FF over a crop. I had it on my 40D for a while before getting a 5DII and it's like a completely different lens, especially the wide end.

Oh and I also used a 70-200 f/4L IS for that same wedding, it was fine too, indoors at night with medium lighting.

F/4 is really less of a problem (though I do like to be able to go down to f/2.8 for sure) than it use to be (if you have a 5DII).

[Bucster]

I have become slightly addicted to larger apertures, that's why I bought 3 primes. They aren't "L" glass but I'm working my way up to them. I see a lot of people using 50mm on FF, I used my 30 on a crop and was comfortable with it. I would like to buy the holy trinity and shoot a whole wedding with them.

[Stealthy Ninja]

Mmmm you can get by with the 24-105 for sure. But you're right having a larger aperture is certainly nice.

I plan to complete my 2.8 zoom set one day (I have the 16-35II, I'm waiting on the 70-200 2.8L IS II and the 24-70 2.8L IS/II).

As for primes, I don't like the "trinity" (not really a trinity by the official definition, but we'll skip that point). The 35L is great, the 85L is overkill IMHO (I'd love one, but the price is crazy), the 135L is great buy not necessary for me (I have the 100L IS which is good enough for me for portrait purposes).

I'd like a 35L one day (perhaps a mark II if it comes out by the time I can afford it). My 100 2.8L IS is fine for portraits (I don't really need a 85 1.2L or even a 85 1.8 as my business partner has a 85mm Zeiss). I'll probably buy a 50L II if it ever comes out, not happy with the reported quality of the current one and I don't like the 50 1.4 enough (I owned one for a year or so). I tried the Sigma 50mm, but I don't like the games they make you play, sending them in to be re-calibrated... they should work harder to get it right the first time).

The only prime I'm pretty sure I'll get one day is a 35L to replace my (very-good-but-because-I-like-it-so-much-I-want-something-better... 28 1.8 ).

I have a 100mm and 200mm prime already (both of which I use) and a 400mm 5.6L IS would be great if Canon decide to make it.

[tim]

24-105 as a general use lens with a fast prime for when you want narrow DOF is a good plan. A friend of mine uses a 24-105 on a 5D classic, it's a great combo, very sharp.

[Bucster]

Thanks guys. I think I can shoot with the 24-105 at 3200 ISO and a little fill flash if permitted for the darker ones. If there is a no flash rule at the ceremony, I think the 50, 85, and 70-200 will make up for it. I can tripod the 24-105 for the wide shots at the back of the church.

[caught14]

From personal experience, I can say that our 24-105mm is a terrific performer on our 5D and 5D MkII. IQ is great for a zoom, and the wide focal range makes it hard to justify taking off.

But...

For weddings I only take it out one time during the entire day -- to shoot family formals. I am at f/4 or f/5.6 anyways, so I just use one lens that can handle all potential focal ranges for group shots.

That's not to say you can't use it, but like many people here I end up shooting mostly fast primes up to 1.4. So my experience is that although it is a good lens in terms of IQ, I just don't ever pull it out of the camera bag because of the f/4 maximum aperture. If you are a fan of faster lenses, then your experience might end up being similar to mine.

[sapearl]

Going to ride Tim's coat tails on this one too :D?

I've used the 24-105 for 3 years now with my 5D for weddings and social events....but in combination with a 580ex. Most of my lighting is bounced flash, so for the way I shoot the f/4 isn't limiting. I'm usually at 6.3 - 8 depending upon ambient.

I do have a couple of other faster lenses. But because my old medium format lenses were never that fast and I've used flash for a while, this was just a natural progression for me.

24-105 as a general use lens with a fast prime for when you want narrow DOF is a good plan. A friend of mine uses a 24-105 on a 5D classic, it's a great combo, very sharp.

[Bucster]

Thanks, I feel fairly confident in the ability of the 5D II and shooting at higher ISO. I also feel confident in my ability to bounce flash. I appreciate the help and I'm anxiously waiting for my 5D.

[sandpiper]

I can tripod the 24-105 for the wide shots at the back of the church.

From experience with the 24-105, you are not going to need to tripod it for shots with people in, unless you are VERY unsteady. The limitation of the slower aperture is that you need a slightly slower shutter speed at f/4, than with the 24-70 at f/2.8 (one stop difference).

However, the IS on the 24-105 means that it has the ability to be hand held at about 3 stops slower shutter speed, than the 24-70. I have plenty of sharp shots taken at really slow speeds (at the wide end, you can get pretty consistent sharp shots at 1/4 second). Needless to say, that is fine for stationary objects. The limitation then becomes the subject's motion, and people are likely to move enough (even when 'standing still') to become soft or blurred in 1/4 second.

So, if you have a shutter speed fast enough to deal with any potential subject motion, hand holding is NOT an issue. You would be more likely to need a tripod with the 24-70 as, if shooting at just one stop faster shutter speed than the 24-105, you have lost the 3-stop IS advantage and camera shake becomes more likely.

Having said that, if I could only take ONE lens to a wedding, it would be the 24-70 (if I had one).

My actual option, is to use the 24-105, paired with fast primes. The 24-70 is a compromise to me, it's not as fast as a good prime and doesn't have IS like the 24-105. For me then, the 24-105 is the mutt's nuts for shooting stationary subjects in low light, because of the IS, and the primes are great with moving subjects due to f/1.8 apertures. The 24-70 does neither really well.

You say that you don't want to keep swapping lenses. Well, instead of spending on another 'jack of all trades' lens, why not keep the 40D instead, and mount one with your 24-105 and one with a fast prime.

This has the other benefit of giving you a backup body too, something which is pretty essential with wedding photography. Cameras can (and DO) pack up, or go ERR99, at the most inconvenient moments. I've seen a thread on here where one guy had TWO bodies pack up at one wedding, but fortunately had a third with him.

Believe me, once you have used two bodies, and had the option of carrying two lenses ready to shoot, you won't want to go back.

[Bucster]

I thought I would put the 85 on the 40D and use it for portraits. If the lighting is horrible I was going to put the 50 on the 5D. For the ceremony shots I was going to put the 70-200 on the 5D and put the 24-105 back on just before the walk back down the aisle.

[PMCphotography]

It's a good lens- focuses fast, is sharp, light, etc.

If you're happy with f/4, there's no reason not to use it...

[sapearl]

The 24-105 is extremely convenient during processional and recessional shots. This was shot with camera in Manual, one-shot AF, 1/40 sec, f/5.6, ISO 800 at 24mm, with flash. In situations like this you are often zooming with both your feet and the lens:

I thought I would put the 85 on the 40D and use it for portraits. If the lighting is horrible I was going to put the 50 on the 5D. For the ceremony shots I was going to put the 70-200 on the 5D and put the 24-105 back on just before the walk back down the aisle.

[SuzyView]

The 24-105 is going to be very wide on FF. It's quite capable. I chose the 24-70 because of the f2.8. I know many who own both. It's never one or the other, IMO, just which one you need more. I don't use flash often, so I trust the high ISO capabilities of the 5D2 and f2.8 of the lens will do the job. I'm right most of the time.

[form]

I could never stand those shadows under the hand, chin, pillow, etc., or 90% of the background being in focus (or seemingly so at that size). However, for the vast majority who consider those things to be acceptable, sure great lens to use.

You know, maybe I should consider buying a kit lens and using that for weddings, I am sure the photo style would come out almost as good, and then I'd have lots of money left over for college after I sell my fast L primes and f/2.8 zooms. After all, the brides out here in Vegas seem to say 'amazing work' about anything, whether snapshot-quality or genuinely good, professional work. I never see them say that the poorly framed, poorly lit photo with the super-distracting background in focus or key color/etc. elements lost by processing (like a colorful background, or having actual skin color/warmth instead of them looking like corpses) say anything except "Your photos are amazing!" And just to make sure they go ga-ga over my shots, I should remember to blur every detail away on their skin and use a soft glow effect on every photo.

I'm frustrated with the local brides right now. The better I get and the less my work resembles that of the ultra-budget shooters in Vegas, the less work I am getting. Bottom line: I don't think I deliver what they really want.

So guess what? I'm going to re-instate the "budget, affordable, inexpensive, excellent value, competitive rates, includes everything" words and plaster them all over my website and advertisements, and which used to get me a LOT more work.

[sapearl]

Hey Joey - good to see you again.... glad you like the shot :D.

I think what you failed to notice was the amused - and relatively sharp - expressions of the guests surrounding the young attendants, clearly enjoying their roles. It's the emotion of the shot that's really key here. This is what people will remember.

If you're distracted by things like a modest pillow then you will never be satisified with your work.

Sure it's there and I wish it weren't - but these are not super controlled, studio-lighted, sterile environments. They are somewhat unpredictable and we work with what we have, to our best. Without PP, that shadow would be impossible to eliminate. I was caused by the flash in this case, but without it the overhead spots would have been unsightly, and I would have caused unsightly racoon eyes.

I'm very happy with the facial illumination in exchange for that "pillow.":lol:

As for your Vegas clientele.....you could go back to bargain basement blast and burn Joey, but I think you're probably just pulling our leg her again. You'd be killing yourself for barely more than minimum wage and be disatisfied with your clients, work and gear. Stay the course. Re-evaluate your business model per the suggestions of all the folks here. We've given you a lot of good ideas over the past few months.

Btw - happy Thanksgiving :D. - Stu

[form]

Right, and since you're able to get a shot that "matters" because it has emotion with an f/4 lens (not even necessarily shooting at f/4 either, mind you), surely I should be able to do the same thing and thrill my clients while being able to sell all my lenses except maybe the 24-70 and the 70-200 everyone says is a "must-have." I know it will work; it works for everyone else.

No, I really am going back to using those words to describe my services on my website and advertisements. There is no reason for me NOT to; I'm seen as a low-category shooter and so I will advertise myself like one, highlighting the things are are important to people like "Supercheap!" Do you know, that person who sold himself at $25/hour got like at least a dozen gigs off the wedding forum that I visit often, just because he was offering a "incredible deal" (as the brides put it), and those are just the ones who posted there. Now, I won't do that (I never charged that little, and now neither are they), but I will start calling myself affordable again.

*Edit* And so I have; it's back on my ads and my website.

[tim]

You've turned grumpy lately Joey, you seem to want to argue everything and take everything personally, and you seem constantly pissed off. Maybe you need to relax, or take a break from forums for a while.

[form]

I blame college. It's almost end of semester, and I have had almost no time together with my girlfriend for months. Furthermore, it looks like that won't change very much except briefly around Xmas. Her schedule and mine are both completely packed (mine with school, hers with work). I haven't watched TV or a movie in forever or had any similar "cooldown and relax" time except sleep. I am frustrated with my lack of inquiries for work lately and the few times I try to give a higher quote (like anywhere near $1k) I never hear back from the couple. It annoys the heck out of me when someone takes a job away from me just because he will do it for $25/hour. It also irks me that they actually like the photos they are getting from these people just as much as they would like mine, even though I (and I am not my best critic) know that I do a significantly better job. It bothers me that any kind of quality seems to count for nil these days.

So basically I'm concerned about money, haven't had time to relax, and haven't had time with anyone I care about in months. And I'm having some other personal issues too, related to expectation of satisfaction with the job I'm going to college for, and also why I made the choice in the first place. I have really been doubting and questioning the direction I'm going in, and feeling like I want to throw in the towel at least once a week. In short, I'm stressed, and I'm not very happy right now with the way many things (not everything) are going.

[tim]

Sounds like things aren't going great for you. Not much I can say except I hope you get things sorted, there's always a light at the end of the tunnel. I've been through busy periods, you just have to get stuck in and do what you can. I've personally taken a break from all forums from time to time, especially when i'm stressed and giving blunt replies, I find it helpful.

[form]

My mom told me a while back that her mom used to say, "Everything's going to be okay," and eventually, after hearing this enough times without things getting better, she started asking her mom, "When?"

I am looking; the nearest possible light is about 2 years away.

[tim]

Aye, university's hard. Trying to run a business at the same time would make it pretty mental.

[AlexMoPhotography]

Hang in there, Joey. Once you get into your career, you'll know it's totally worth it in the end.

I'm actually studying to get into Optometry school next year (in which case I would have to stop shooting professionally for 4 years), so I have a good idea of what you're going through. But when I'm done, I'll be working 10-5 4 days a week while shooting weddings on Saturdays. It's totally worth it.

and use a soft glow effect on every photo.
:lol: If you haven't already, you should read my Stuff Photographers Like blog below. :cool:

[form]

Really hope you're right; I keep hearing that the one I'm going for is a very stressful job and the only actual shortage is caused by a large number who switch to a different job because of various difficulties.

[sapearl]

Nah - you'll have rays of sun and the odd pleasant breaks within the next two years. That's how life is. There are always good times and bad times..... our family, friends and friendly people help us to survive and make it through, and we grow stronger for it.:D

There will always be challenges. We never really leave the school yard - it just changes it shape and what it throws at you. But we make it through ;). Joey, you have some beautiful terrain out in your area. I think there's a national park not too far away either. Take some of that fine gear of yours, go out and shoot something different, in the early morning sun or late afternoon light and rejuvenate the soul. That's what I do now and then, and it works pretty well.

My mom told me a while back that her mom used to say, "Everything's going to be okay," and eventually, after hearing this enough times without things getting better, she started asking her mom, "When?"

I am looking; the nearest possible light is about 2 years away.

[form]

Don't have time to go out to any nice parks for a while. Nearest ones are probably Yosemite, Zion. I may get to ski this January, but we will see. Otherwise it's just lots of drudging and trudging and right now that's all I have to look forward to for quite a while.

I don't appreciate desert landscapes very much, so I don't consider this terrain very appealing. I've lived in desert all my life and am tired of it. I like water, ocean, forest.

[sapearl]

Well, I don't have ocean but we are bordered on the north by Lake Erie. And we have some wonderful parks close by as well as a national park right above Akron.

I took the leaves and trees pretty much for granted too until I started considering them under different lighting conditions. I would love to try the same with your impressive desert vista's. Amazing what a change of scenery will do for one's mental outlook ;).

Don't have time to go out to any nice parks for a while. Nearest ones are probably Yosemite, Zion. I may get to ski this January, but we will see. Otherwise it's just lots of drudging and trudging and right now that's all I have to look forward to for quite a while.

I don't appreciate desert landscapes very much, so I don't consider this terrain very appealing. I've lived in desert all my life and am tired of it. I like water, ocean, forest.

[form]

Must be nice to do that; I won't have the opportunity for at least another 6-7 months. I've seen our desert in all forms of light, and you know...it's still primarily dead, dry, and desolate. Water and trees are the opposite, being full of life and motion. The colors green and blue are passive and tend to encourage relaxation. Orange, yellow, red and brown do not have that same effect.

[PhotoMatte]

I own both lenses and haven't really used my 24-70 since I got the 24-105 (ie, the last 15 weddings I shot this year, the 24-70 mostly stayed in my bag). I use a 135 f/2 when I want a really shallow depth of field and I like my 70-200 2.8 IS, as well...but the 24-105 does 85% of my work these days, attached to my 5D.

[Bucster]

Thanks, I finally got my camera and I'm blown away with the ISO. I am much more confident in the 24-105 than I thought I would be. I also feel good about using the 50 1.4 or 85 1.8 when it gets dark. I don't think I need the 24-70, but I would like to pick up a 28 1.8 (can't afford the 35L or 24L at the moment)

[sapearl]

I understand the lack of time - life is like that, as it always seems to be running out.

But we make time for things that are important to us. and give us pleasure and meaning.

My wife and I have lately been occupied with the death of her mother, my mom's Parkinson's situation, and the need to empty, clean and prepare, rehab and empty here house for sale. This has left us exhausted and even ill - nice colds for Thanksgiving :rolleyes: - but in between, we always make time for each other, the kids and things we love. Because pretty soon, you blink, and you've been married 30 years :D.

But as far as your dead desert, I'd love to have a go at that. Good that you've explored it under a myriad of lighting conditions. But even in the death of nature, one can find beauty as evidenced by this tree in Shenandoah National Park:

http://www.pbase.com/sapearl/image/119752227

So even those things that appear to lack life can be interpreted in a variety of ways.;) Richard, I realize this was not done with the 24-105 but it will show you some of the fun that can be had with the 17-40.

Must be nice to do that; I won't have the opportunity for at least another 6-7 months. I've seen our desert in all forms of light, and you know...it's still primarily dead, dry, and desolate. Water and trees are the opposite, being full of life and motion. The colors green and blue are passive and tend to encourage relaxation. Orange, yellow, red and brown do not have that same effect.