24-70mm lens for all around outdoor portraits...going to Australia

[Kauaicrazed]

Ok, so I usually have my 50mm 1.8 that I shoot portraits with but I hate that I have to move back and forth to get a good frame. When I am on vacation I usually bring my 28-105mm and it's light and still can get portraits of my kids with scenic b/g. But the pics are not as sharp as my 50mm. But what about a 24-70mm? Would I be happy with this one? I am going to Australia for a few months and mainly will take pics of my kids but also want to incorporate the scenery.

Any samples would be greatly appreciated! TIA!

[Fernando]

Originally Posted by Kauaicrazed

Ok, so I usually have my 50mm 1.8 that I shoot portraits with but I hate that I have to move back and forth to get a good frame. When I am on vacation I usually bring my 28-105mm and it's light and still can get portraits of my kids with scenic b/g. But not pics are not as sharp as my 50mm. But what about a 24-70mm? Would I be happy with this one? I am going to Australia for a few months and mainly will take pics of my kids but also want to incorporate the scenery.

Any samples would be greatly appreciated! TIA!

Although it completely duplicates your existing FLs have you considered the 24-105 f/4L? Great lens often considered the perfect vacation lens.

-F

[gasrocks]

Maybe you should force yourself to move back and forth more often. Only you know what range of a zoom will do what you need. How does the 28-105 work? If you need that range and just better IQ, then the 24-70 is one choice. May I also suggest you rent a new lens for your trip instead of buying?

[dave_p]

What do you WANT to like about the 24-70? If its aperture, yes perhaps. But many folks (such as myself) feel as though it's pretty soft wide open.

[superstes]

Originally Posted by dave_p

But many folks (such as myself) feel as though it's pretty soft wide open.

I'm interested in this lens so doing some research, is it soft wide open in all shooting conditions or is it only soft in a specific condition.

Thanks

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by dave_p

What do you WANT to like about the 24-70? If its aperture, yes perhaps. But many folks (such as myself) feel as though it's pretty soft wide open.

mine isn't soft wide open. in fact it's pretty darn sharp.

ed rader

[laydros]

Originally Posted by superstes

I'm interested in this lens so doing some research, is it soft wide open in all shooting conditions or is it only soft in a specific condition.

Thanks

I spend way too much time reading this stuff, and people seem a little disappointed in this lens compared to some others, like the 17-55, or the 70-200s. I think it may be that the lens is a 9.5 on a scale of 10, but considering it is kinda the flagship of the L series, people feel it should be a 10.

Bear in mind that Sony's CZ 24-70 and Nikon's 24-70 both cost about 50% more.

Edit: I think if you don't need the speed, the 24-105 is a better travel lens because of the better range, less weight, and IS. If your subject is stationary and you don't need shallow DOF, you can probably get lower shutter speed shots out of the 24-105, because IS gets you more than 1 stop.

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by laydros

I spend way too much time reading this stuff, and people seem a little disappointed in this lens compared to some others, like the 17-55, or the 70-200s. I think it may be that the lens is a 9.5 on a scale of 10, but considering it is kinda the flagship of the L series, people feel it should be a 10.

Bear in mind that Sony's CZ 24-70 and Nikon's 24-70 both cost about 50% more.

because most use 1.6 crop cameras and the 17-55 IS is sharper @ f2.8 and provides a more useful range .

many around here talk about the 17-40L like it's dog poop because they've never used it on a FF camera where the 17-55 IS or third party options won't work.

ed rader

[blam]

im personally not overly happy with the 24-70L

its a great lens, but i expect more for the high price of admission.

[superstes]

I have one that mine if i part with 700 euros thats 630 quid or $926 conversion made with XE.

Seems like a fair price.

[superstes]

Originally Posted by ed rader

because most use 1.6 crop cameras and the 17-55 IS is sharper @ f2.8 and provides a more useful range .

ed rader

Hi ed

Can the 24-70 be coxed to the same sharpness on a 1.6 or is this unachievable.

[ed rader]

Originally Posted by superstes

Hi ed

Can the 24-70 be coxed to the same sharpness on a 1.6 or is this unachievable.

the sensor size shouldn't matter. my 24-70L was very sharp on my 20d. i used it more for portraits of people and animals then because of the crop factor.

ed rdaer

[superstes]

ed

Do you feel that the 17-55 IS would have been sharper on your 20d or could you get the same results with the 24-70.

Thanks again.

[scott stokes]

The 24-70 is a great lens.I have thought about the 24-105 for a walkaround len,but that would be something else for me to carry on the plane.(I always take all of my camera lenses)

[SkipD]

Originally Posted by Kauaicrazed

Ok, so I usually have my 50mm 1.8 that I shoot portraits with but I hate that I have to move back and forth to get a good frame.

You might want to read our tutorial on controlling perspective in your images. I think you will find it quite useful, especially the last part of my post #1.