Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 09 Jun 2012 (Saturday) 09:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Full Frame owners, how did you choose your general purpose zoom?

 
PFDarkside
Senior Member
265 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Illinois
     
Jun 09, 2012 09:20 |  #1

It's a classic question....

-24-70mm L
-24-105mm L

I am a brand new 5D2 owner (thanks to Randy98mtu!) and I need a lens for it.... It seems like the two above lenses are the classic general purpose zooms to pair with a 5D2. I know the technical specs of each, and I can relate the field of view of each to my experiences with my Rebel and kit lens. The shallow DOF available with each is a little more difficult to wrap my head around, as the 18-55mm doesn't have much going for it in the "shallow DOF" department, although I do have the 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 to get a little perspective. However, I'm having trouble weighing the 105mm range and IS against the f/2.8.

Basically, what made you choose one over the other for your full frame DSLR?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
garbidz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,722 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 18
Joined May 2005
Location: Reunion Island
     
Jun 09, 2012 09:33 |  #2

I got the 24-70 because the 24-105 only had opened up to f/4 and my 40D had difficulties with focusing in ambient room light with my 70-200 f/4. Had it since, a couple of expensive repairs due to bumping it around carelessly. Never thought about selling/upgrading it, not even with the version II available. I do not want to upgrade all my filters.

It seems to be getting heavier and heavier as years go by so now it gets left home and a 50mm f/1.8 goes out with me instead. Which is beside the point.

With the 5D II go for the 24-105 IS, there you have the ISOs to back it up and the 5D II (I got one now) focuses with the center point nicely in low light.


bag

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Skul
Member
92 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2011
Location: SE Texas
     
Jun 09, 2012 09:45 |  #3

I went the 24-105L route because of the IS feature.
It took me a month to decide over the 24-70L.
The f/2.8 was certainly enticing.
However the IS, plus another 35mm of reach of the 24-105, is what convinced me to go with it.
Like garbidz, I too, use it on a 40D, and it's also my default lens on a 5D II.

Hey, garbidz, I use center point, too. Works just fine.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 134
Joined Dec 2010
     
Jun 09, 2012 10:10 |  #4

i poked around here, reading what others had got.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
westcliff
Member
Avatar
87 posts
Joined Apr 2012
     
Jun 09, 2012 11:32 |  #5

For me it came down to money and IS. I was leaning in favor of IS on my mid-range zoom, and I was able to get a great condition refurbished 24-105L through the loyalty program for hundreds of dollars less than a brand new Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC costs. And I'm happy with the decision so far.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
garbidz
Goldmember
Avatar
1,722 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 18
Joined May 2005
Location: Reunion Island
     
Jun 09, 2012 11:35 |  #6

Skul wrote in post #14554495 (external link)
I went the 24-105L route because of the IS feature.
It took me a month to decide over the 24-70L.
The f/2.8 was certainly enticing.
However the IS, plus another 35mm of reach of the 24-105, is what convinced me to go with it.
Like garbidz, I too, use it on a 40D, and it's also my default lens on a 5D II.

Hey, garbidz, I use center point, too. Works just fine.

YO, Skul, it seems they got the focusing finally right with the 5D III.
Instead of upgrading, I'll get a ticket to Namibia or Borneo or something with a 'z' in its name like Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan or Zaire...

Is my memory playing tricks with me or were there some quality issues with the early releases of the 24-105?

(from wiki: Some early production models of the lens had a flare problem (reportedly the first 10,000 batch) and Canon offered to repair them for free)


bag

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PFDarkside
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
265 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Illinois
     
Jun 09, 2012 11:42 |  #7

rick_reno wrote in post #14554587 (external link)
i poked around here, reading what others had got.

But what were your deciding factors? Focal range for certain subjects? DOF required? Extra stop for lower light?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
30,277 posts
Gallery: 299 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 8982
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jun 09, 2012 11:55 |  #8

PFDarkside wrote in post #14554868 (external link)
But what were your deciding factors? Focal range for certain subjects? DOF required? Extra stop for lower light?

Not that many options really if you consider a general purpose "walkaround" lens. As for focal range, it needs to be wide on the wide end, that means 24/28 and needs to have some length on the long end, long enough for portraits and light tele work. 3 models fit the bill 28-135. 24-105L and the 24-70. The 28-135 is a decent lens, but not comparable with the L lenses in terms of sharpness or build quality. The 24-105 is lighter, has IS, and and a bit more range. The downfall is the F4 max aperture. The 24-70 is a stop faster, but heavier and has less range. For me it came down to the 3 factors 1) price for two lenses that are equally sharp I leaned toward the less expensive option. 2) weight. I use mine as a walkaround lens more than for any other purpose so weight is a consideration. 3) Aperture. I was willing to compromise the max aperture on the zoom as I have a couple of fast primes when I want shallow DOF shots. If I were a wedding photographer or event pro, this might have been the tipping point. But for a day out with the camera and one lens I can live with f4 and IS.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
AlanU
Cream of the Crop
7,732 posts
Gallery: 141 photos
Likes: 1457
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jun 09, 2012 12:03 |  #9

24-70L simply because its f/2.8 so I can shoot with available light easily. I'm tempted to buy a 24-105L for good light use actually. If I'm wanting more reach I usually have something longer on my thinktank lens bag on my belt/waist.

Cant wait for the 24-70L mk2 $$$$$$$$$ but if its anything similar to the 70-200 f/2.8IS mk2 I'm gonna dig having a mk2 lens.

f/2.8 on a full frame will give your subject/separation to pop almost prime like with smooth creamy bokeh.


5Dmkiv |5Dmkiii | 24LmkII | 85 mkII L | | 16-35L mkII | 24-70 f/2.8L mkii| 70-200 f/2.8 ISL mkII| 600EX-RT x2 | 580 EX II x2 | Einstein's
Fuji - gone
Sony 2 x A7iii w/ Sigma MC-11 adapter | GM16-35 f/2.8 | Sigma 24-70 ART | GM70-200 f/2.8 |Sigma Art 24 f/1.4 | Sigma ART 35 f/1.2 | FE85 f/1.8 | Sigma ART 105 f/1.4 | Godox V860iiS & V1S

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
altitude604
Goldmember
Avatar
1,665 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Cape Breton, Nova Scotia
     
Jun 09, 2012 12:07 |  #10

Came down to cost for me as well.

Got the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for the f/2.8 and the IQ is excellent for the money.


Erik - Three Miles Final (external link)
- Gear List -

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hypnotizedd
Senior Member
252 posts
Joined Nov 2010
     
Jun 09, 2012 12:11 |  #11

i bought my 5d2 with a 24-105, 24-70, and 50 1.4, never used the 24-105 so i sold it. the f2.8 made using the 24-70 alot easier. The only time i used the 24-105 was when i needed the extra reach, but that wasnt very often.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dexy101
Goldmember
Avatar
2,387 posts
Gallery: 93 photos
Likes: 990
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Scotland
     
Jun 09, 2012 12:15 |  #12

I had the 24-105 with my first 5D Mk2 and then a 24-70, i didn't think the 24-70 was any better and i prefered the extra reach of the 24-105.

I now have my second 5D Mk2 and 24-105 and i'm finding it a lot sharper than my last copy. Maybe ive come on a bit since then.

Its nice to have the IS, and the weight is not too bad to carry all day. Plus its cheaper, i only use mine in good daylight anyway so i'm not too worried about the f/2.8




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
randy98mtu
Goldmember
Avatar
3,934 posts
Gallery: 376 photos
Likes: 2008
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 09, 2012 12:27 |  #13

Glad you are enjoying the 5D2. I have the 24-105. Love the range, size and weight. I'm more of a prime person, so I really only use my zooms when I travel and then it's primarily outdoors. Indoors I typically shoot at f/2, so 2.8 still feels slow to me. I have considered selling my 24-105 and getting a 282-135 instead, since I only use it when I travel. But with the prices 24-105's are getting, I think I'll just stick with the L.

My advice would be to consider when you plan to use the zoom and what kind of light you'll have. Also remember IS doesn't help with anything that moves. Hope that is helpful.


Canon EOS M6 Mark II - EOS R5
Donate for Forum Costs

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
pbelarge
Goldmember
Avatar
2,837 posts
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Westchester County, NY
     
Jun 09, 2012 12:33 as a reply to  @ dexy101's post |  #14

I researched and read, and finally decided on the 24-70, hoping I would not miss the IS feature. Prior to this lens I had only shot with IS lenses. Now I have 4 lenses without IS and they work great.
It is now more than 2 years since I purchased the 24-70, and I do not even notice the IS is not there. I shoot mostly handheld, but also the tripod. I do not use the 2.8 much, but this lens is used the most. It is really something special, and the fact the new iteration of it has no IS does not bother me at all.
I believe the weight helps in keeping this pretty stable when handholding it.
I was not concerned with the focal length, I already had the 85mm and the 135mm.


just a few of my thoughts...
Pierre

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LamboSan
Junior Member
Avatar
21 posts
Joined May 2012
     
Jun 09, 2012 12:44 |  #15

I used to be same like you, dilemma over 24-70 and 24-105.
At first, i wanted 24-105 because of it's IS, longer reach and cheaper in price.
After several months of consideration and research,
i finally had my decision to go for 24-70 because of it's f2.8.

the fact that i chose 24-70 is because i wanted mainly for portrait,
Otherwise, you should get 24-105.
I believe 5D2 is good enough to cover up the lack of lighting.


Canon 6D | Canon T2i/550D | 18-55 | 50 f1.8 | 17-40 f4L | 24-70 f2.8L | 70-200 f4L IS | Nissin di622 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,034 views & 0 likes for this thread
Full Frame owners, how did you choose your general purpose zoom?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Hodrick
881 guests, 265 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.