LOG IN    OR   REGISTER TO FORUMS


24-105 F/4L

FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events
Thread started 01 Feb 2006 (Wednesday) 01:32   
LIST NEARBY THREADS
 
calicokat
calicokat is BANNED
calicokat's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
14,720 posts
Southern California
[MORE/SHARE]

Is the 24-105 a better lens for weddings than the 24-70. Does the IS offset the extra F stop gained with the 24-70??? Thanks for your replies and help.

Post #1, Feb 01, 2006 01:32:56


"You are going to fall off a cliff trying to get a better shot someday"- My hopeful and loving wife :eek: :twisted:
My Websiteexternal link

My Gear

Calicokat 1990-2007 RIP My Loving Kitty

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
kawter2
Goldmember
kawter2's Avatar
Joined Aug 2004
2,046 posts
Orange County, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

based on your signature I think you could stick any of your lenses on your 5D and get top of the line images... I think you need to be more concerned with technique at this point in your endeavours

Post #2, Feb 01, 2006 12:55:34



Wedding Blogexternal link
Eric J. Weddingsexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
themirage
Senior Member
themirage's Avatar
Joined Dec 2005
611 posts
Marion, Iowa
[MORE/SHARE]

Holy Crap, when I first saw your post your sig was empty but now WOW.

kawter2 wrote:
based on your signature I think you could stick any of your lenses on your 5D and get top of the line images... I think you need to be more concerned with technique at this point in your endeavours
_______________
1DsMKII,1DMKIIn,5D,20d
10-22m3.5-4.5
16-35m2.8L
17-40m4L
24-70m2.8L
70-200m2.8LIS
70-200m2.8L
70-200m4L
70-300m4.5-5.6DOIS
100-400m4.5-5.6LIS
14m2.8L
15m2.8Fish
20m2.8
24m1.4L
BTW GearSigs suck
28m1.8
28m2.8
35mm1.4L
35m2
50m1.4
50m1.8II
85m1.2L
85m1.8
100m2
135m2L
135m2.8
200m2.8L
300m2.8LIS
300m4LIS
400m2.8LIS
400m4DOIS
400m5.6L
500m4LIS
600m4LIS
1200m5.6L
MPE65m2.8 Macro
60m 100m 2.8Macro
180m3.5LMacro
TS-E24m3.5L E45&90m2.8
Extenders1.4x 2x
ExTube12&25

Post #3, Feb 01, 2006 13:54:51 as a reply to kawter2's post 59 minutes earlier.


-Michael

Gear List

Designs of Utopiaexternal link
SmugMug Galleryexternal link
˙ǝɹnʇɐuƃıs ʎɯ uı pǝʇsǝɹǝʇuı ʎllɐǝɹ ǝɹɐ noʎ sıɥʇ pɐǝɹ uɐɔ noʎ ɟı

LOG IN TO REPLY
Symantec
Mostly Lurking
Joined Dec 2005
19 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

"BTW GearSigs suck"

i think that says it all lol

Post #4, Feb 01, 2006 14:33:50




LOG IN TO REPLY
mrclark321
Noinker
mrclark321's Avatar
Joined Mar 2005
7,508 posts
.... with a long history
[MORE/SHARE]

What's that supposed to mean???

Symantec wrote:
"BTW GearSigs suck"

i think that says it all lol

Post #5, Feb 01, 2006 14:43:13 as a reply to Symantec's post 9 minutes earlier.


A crap pile of various gear!

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
tim
Light Bringer
tim's Avatar
Joined Nov 2004
49,508 posts
Wellington, New Zealand
[MORE/SHARE]

Back on topic... I wouldn't buy an F4 lens for wedding, I want all the light I can get. IS doesn't help if your subjects are moving, and even when people are standing apparently still they're still really moving.

Post #6, Feb 01, 2006 17:30:56


NZIPP Qualified Professional wedding photographer.
Wellington Wedding Photographerexternal link ~ Camera and Lens Reviewsexternal link ~ Photographers Tech Supportexternal link
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

LOG IN TO REPLY
calicokat
THREAD ­ STARTER
calicokat is BANNED
calicokat's Avatar
Joined Oct 2005
14,720 posts
Southern California
[MORE/SHARE]

Thank You Tim

Post #7, Feb 01, 2006 17:42:18 as a reply to tim's post 11 minutes earlier.


"You are going to fall off a cliff trying to get a better shot someday"- My hopeful and loving wife :eek: :twisted:
My Websiteexternal link

My Gear

Calicokat 1990-2007 RIP My Loving Kitty

LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberPet
Hiding Under a Rock
CyberPet's Avatar
Joined May 2005
4,052 posts
Piteå, Sweden
[MORE/SHARE]

Nope, I'd love to buy kawter2's nice 24-70/2.8 L (please) :D

And if you can part with your 85/1.2 for almost nothing, I'm game.

Post #8, Feb 01, 2006 18:28:15


/Petra Hall
Click here to view my geeky gear list
I shoot as much as possible in available light... sometimes, my flash is available – Joe Buissink

LOG IN TO REPLY
cactusclay
Goldmember
Joined Jan 2005
1,610 posts
[MORE/SHARE]

Well, I'll throw my 2 cents in. In my experience with weddings, most of the time I use a flash bracket and I do that for outdoor weddings, to fill in the shadows or indoors when the light is low. The times I use a prime for natural light shots, 2.8 usually isn't fast enough, so, I found a F4 lens more than adequate. I just recently bought the lens in question and haven't had a chance to shoot a wedding with it, but I have to say that having also owned a 24-70, I really like the 24-105 much better. The reasons being are that it is smaller, lighter and longer. I can walk around town and shoot street shots at 24 mm and it isn't extended all the way out, like the other one and if I go without the hood, it doesn't look all that intimidating. It does hunt in low light/contrast situations, but with a flash or STE2 and infared assist it's no problem. when the light gets down to where you are shooting at 1/8 sec. or something like that you can get a sharp image with the IS, but at a 1/16 sec. and F2.8, I doubt you could. I really don't think there is a better one lens solution for weddings, than this lens, with a flash.;)

Post #9, Feb 01, 2006 19:11:32




LOG IN TO REPLY
Michaelmjc
not cool enough
Michaelmjc's Avatar
Joined May 2004
4,832 posts
Toronto, Ontario
[MORE/SHARE]

Wow you almost own every canon lens :D, any reason why you have the 70-200 f/4, 2.8, 2.8 IS?

And the 1200mm? I highly doubt you have that, Do you have any pics taken with it?

I agree just whip any of those bad boys on and you'll be fine.

Post #10, Feb 02, 2006 23:09:14


Yyz Designexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
kawter2
Goldmember
kawter2's Avatar
Joined Aug 2004
2,046 posts
Orange County, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

sorry It was a cruel joke (i copied the text from a Canon pdf) as I was frustrated at the amount of clutter in sig's lately

sorry,


BTW read my sig

Post #11, Feb 02, 2006 23:14:37



Wedding Blogexternal link
Eric J. Weddingsexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as registered member)
queenbee288
Cream of the Crop
queenbee288's Avatar
Joined Dec 2004
5,502 posts
Madison, Alabama
[MORE/SHARE]

I really have to wonder why people listing their gear irks some people (envy maybe). I often look at the gear list to determine what a pic was probably taken with. Also if I notice someone has a particular lens I mignt ask their opinion on it if I was thinking of buying it.
Read the quote in my sig.

Post #12, Feb 03, 2006 12:01:43


Char
www.charlenelanephotog​raphy.comexternal link
Canon 7D, , Tamron 28-75, Canon 100 2.8, 50 1.8, Sigma 30 1.4, Canon 10-22, Canon 24-105

LOG IN TO REPLY
kawter2
Goldmember
kawter2's Avatar
Joined Aug 2004
2,046 posts
Orange County, CA
[MORE/SHARE]

queenbee288 wrote:
I really have to wonder why people listing their gear irks some people (envy maybe).

Yah that is it... haha, Sorry I have enough gear, and if I don't have the right piece for the job, the client pays a rental fee..

I just prefer photography to be more about the art and less about the gear.

Post #13, Feb 03, 2006 12:14:08 as a reply to queenbee288's post 12 minutes earlier.



Wedding Blogexternal link
Eric J. Weddingsexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Titus213
Cream of the Crop
Titus213's Avatar
Joined Feb 2005
19,389 posts
Camas, WA USA
[MORE/SHARE]

I would agree with Tim on the f4.0, even with IS. I find myself trying desperately to get the natural light shot and end up forgetting about the movement of the subject. And boy, do they ever move. You don't notice it much until you try to stop it. Perhaps an IS for the subjects would work.:lol:

kawter2 wrote:
sorry It was a cruel joke (i copied the text from a Canon pdf) as I was frustrated at the amount of clutter in sig's lately

sorry,


BTW read my sig

Cruel yes, funny definitely. It is exactly what I thought when I read it....

Post #14, Feb 03, 2006 12:17:55 as a reply to kawter2's post 13 hours earlier.


Dave
Perspiring photographer.
Visit NorwoodPhotos.comexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY
Michaelmjc
not cool enough
Michaelmjc's Avatar
Joined May 2004
4,832 posts
Toronto, Ontario
[MORE/SHARE]

kawter2 wrote:
sorry It was a cruel joke (i copied the text from a Canon pdf) as I was frustrated at the amount of clutter in sig's lately

sorry,


BTW read my sig

Haha, I was gonna say.. damn man your a rich Ba****d, I just couldn't understand why someone would have 3 lens all the 300mm range.. haha im glad your feeling better.

Post #15, Feb 03, 2006 13:23:58 as a reply to kawter2's post 14 hours earlier.


Yyz Designexternal link

LOG IN TO REPLY


LIST NEARBY THREADS
2,333 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-105 F/4L
FORUMS Photo Sharing & Visual Enjoyment Weddings & Other Family Events



NOT A MEMBER YET? CLICK HERE TO REGISTER TO FORUMS

CHANGE BODY TEXT SIZE FOR ALL THREAD PAGES
POWERED BY AMASS 1.0version 1.0
made in Finland
by Pekka Saarinen
for photography-on-the.net


SEND FEEDBACK TO STAFF  |  JUMP TO FORUM...  |  FORUM RULES


Spent 0.0012 for 4 database queries.
PAGE COMPLETED IN 0.02s
1163 guests, 824 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 3341, that happened on Dec 11, 2014
Latest registered member is surfsidetim

COOKIES DISCLAIMER: By using this site you agree that some cookies will be stored on your browser. For unlogged users we store one session id cookie. For registered members we store (in addition to login session cookie) only cookies that are essential for required functionality, we do not store any personal tracking data in cookies or other browser's data storage methods.