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 16 Jul 2012 (Monday) 21:22
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Can anybody tell how much difference?

 
beginner_canon
Member
108 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2011
Location: MN
     
Jul 16, 2012 21:22 |  #1

I just got a 24-105 and wanted to know how good it is when comparing to non-L 18-55. I posted 2 photos and found there is not much difference between these two pics. Can anybody tell which one is better?


HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.



HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.


Canon 5D3, 70-200mm/4L IS, 85mm/1.8; 24-70mm/2.8L II; Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro (non-DI), Tamron 150-600mm.flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,383 posts
Gallery: 49 photos
Likes: 3356
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jul 16, 2012 21:30 |  #2

at those sizes it'll be hard to see any differences...the main things are they are two different types of lenses though....that doesn't mean the 18-55IS isn't capable of good shots...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
omegaone
Member
Avatar
133 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Indonesia
     
Jul 16, 2012 21:35 |  #3

I need to see a larger pictures


Canon 5D3 | 17-40 f4L | 24-105 f4L IS | 70-200 f2.8L IS II | 85 f1.2L II | 100 f2.8L IS
Flashes: Phottix Indra500 | 580EX I | 580EX II with Phottix Odin and Godox Winstro AD360
Fuji XT1 Black | | Fujinon 18-135 f3.5-5.6 OIS | Fujinon 10-24 f4 OIS | Fujinon 56 f1.2
Erwin Sajudi Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 16, 2012 21:39 as a reply to  @ DreDaze's post |  #4

With two small (even for the web) internet sized shots that are not the even the same size (let alone that you can stop down on the kit lens for excellent images ant pp) - Your kidding right?


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
beginner_canon
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
108 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2011
Location: MN
     
Jul 16, 2012 21:40 |  #5

This website has a limitation of dimension and file size for posted pic.Could your guys tell me how to post a large and more pixel pic?


Canon 5D3, 70-200mm/4L IS, 85mm/1.8; 24-70mm/2.8L II; Tamron 90mm f/2.8 macro (non-DI), Tamron 150-600mm.flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 16, 2012 21:43 as a reply to  @ beginner_canon's post |  #6

Here


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
watt100
Cream of the Crop
14,021 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Jun 2008
     
Jul 17, 2012 04:09 |  #7

beginner_canon wrote in post #14726972 (external link)
This website has a limitation of dimension and file size for posted pic.Could your guys tell me how to post a large and more pixel pic?

use a photo hosting site like www.Flickr.com (external link)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kobeson
Goldmember
Avatar
1,075 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jul 17, 2012 04:36 |  #8

If that is the maximum you will ever want a picture, no point buying expensive gear.


1Dx | 5D III | 1D IV | 8-15 | 16-35L II | 24-70L II | 70-200L II | 400L II | 1.4x III | Σ85 | 100L | 3 x 600EX-RT | ST-E3-RT
website  (external link)facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jwp721
Senior Member
771 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
     
Jul 17, 2012 06:43 |  #9

Can't tell which one is better but I will guess that the smaller one is from the 24-105....




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
john29
Member
31 posts
Joined Jul 2012
     
Jul 17, 2012 07:02 |  #10

interesting information shared here for all of us. thank you and keep sharing this type of useful information for us.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Keyan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,319 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 78
Joined Mar 2011
     
Jul 17, 2012 07:05 |  #11

There are a ton of things other than IQ that go into the cost differences.

The 18-55 is an EF-S lens, with a standard gear and motor driven autofocus system, plastic body, variable aperture, and limited zoom range.

The 24-105 is an EF lens, with a ring USM autofocus system, metal body, constant aperture, longer zoom range, and a red ring on the front.

Were your lenses stopped down for this shot? Often most lenses will look close to the same at about f/8. There are also other considerations that aren't brought out by this sample, such as chromatic aberration, where there is a red and blue or purple "fringing" to the edges of objects in a high contrast scenario (think a pillar or tree branches against the bright sky), edge to edge sharpness at various focal lengths, etc.


Cameras: 7D2, S100
Lenses: 17-55 f/2.8 IS USM, 18-135 STM, 24-70 f/4L IS USM, 50 f/1.4 USM,70-300L IS USM
Other Stuff: 430 EX II, Luma Labs Loop 3, CamRanger

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LowriderS10
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,170 posts
Likes: 10
Joined Mar 2008
Location: South Korea / Canada
     
Jul 17, 2012 07:17 |  #12

Looks like one of your lenses takes smaller pictures. Sell it and keep the lens that takes them big, purdy pictures!!


-=Prints For Sale at PIXELS=- (external link)
-=Facebook=- (external link)
-=Flickr=- (external link)

-=Gear=-

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Christina.DazzleByDesign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,973 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2012
     
Jul 17, 2012 07:33 |  #13

You can make the attached images larger, all the site asks is the file size remain below 150kb - keep the size to a height of about 800px, and when you save out as JPEG (assuming you are using photoshop) lower the resolution until the file size is below 150kb. It won't make a difference to us when we see it online whether the resolution is 100% or 70% - at web size you can't see the difference. If you want us to pixel peep your photos to see the detail differences between the two lenses, then you will need to upload to Flickr and post here. Anyway, lenses don't do the work for you in the sense that any lens, no matter how expensive - if used with a lack of knowledge or skill will result in pictures that could be taken with a point n' shoot.

I've seen it time and time again at the equestrian sports I go to. I see at least four other freelancers with the big ol' 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II - and then I look them up online afterwards to see their pics (If I was a rider in the event, for instance, wanting to see pictures of my ride with my horse) and half the pictures are OOF (and still posted online) and the other 90% are the wrong timing due to the photographer not understanding the subject they are shooting. Long story short, it shows that even a $2600 lens can take pictures WORSE than a point n' shoot, if used incorrectly.

Either way neither picture looks bad at all, don't get the wrong impression :p I can't tell which is which lens at this size online, but if you want to know the differences between the lenses themselves, the 24-105 is an L series lens, it's much better built, metal mount, superior optics in terms of colour rendition and sharpness. And more as someone above already posted :) The 18-55 is a good lens for what it is, but it can't compare to the 24-105. You will be happy with the lens, it makes for a great walkaround lens. Sometimes I've taken it to sporting events when I just wanted something lighter and less obvious than the 70-200, and it performs very well with fast moving subjects. It's sharp too! :)


5D3 | 7D | 85L II | 70-300L | 24-105L | Nifty Fifty | 600EX-RT_______________
| Facebook (external link) | Website (external link) | Gear List |Flickr (external link) |

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jimewall
Goldmember
1,871 posts
Likes: 11
Joined May 2008
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
     
Jul 17, 2012 08:37 as a reply to  @ Christina.DazzleByDesign's post |  #14

There is a size limit in height and width. It is in the link above and again here. That is why some link to outside sites, as they can show larger pictures.


Thanks for Reading & Good Luck - Jim
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Christina.DazzleByDesign
Goldmember
Avatar
1,973 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Mar 2012
     
Jul 17, 2012 08:39 |  #15

Yeah but 1024 is fairly large anyway, I typically stay around 600px if Im uploading directly to this site :) But for the OP's needs I think bigger the better, so yeah external site is better


5D3 | 7D | 85L II | 70-300L | 24-105L | Nifty Fifty | 600EX-RT_______________
| Facebook (external link) | Website (external link) | Gear List |Flickr (external link) |

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

3,005 views & 0 likes for this thread
Can anybody tell how much difference?
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 Feedmypets
624 guests, 209 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.