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 07 Jun 2013 (Friday) 13:42
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-105/f4 L IS USM vs. 70-200/f4 L IS USM for pets

 
JohanBorjesson
Member
Avatar
187 posts
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Sweden
     
Jun 07, 2013 13:42 |  #1

I've gone through all my images and most of them are at around 35-55mm (kitlens). I'm in search for a better lens to use when out with my dog. I like to do portraits and action shots (see http://500px.com/LostM​ySelf (external link)) and images where I just snap away (some always turn out good).

I've looked at the 24-105 and 70-200 and I'm not sure which one is best suited for this type of photography. Do you guys have any input? I use a 60D so crop factor should be considered.


Flickr (external link)
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,928 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 265
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Jun 07, 2013 14:11 |  #2

I'd say 70-200. Dogs get far away fast.


1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,196 posts
Gallery: 28 photos
Likes: 1324
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jun 07, 2013 14:16 |  #3

The features of 24-105 are largely wasted on a crop body so not that. The 70-200 is a great lens, focuses fast and gives you some room to work. If you decide to go wider look at the ef-s lenses instead. I like 17-55 2.8IS.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Jun 07, 2013 14:21 |  #4

I have both these lenses and use them primarily for dog photography, on my 7D. Either would do a good job for you. Both have IS, fast focusing and excellent colour/contrast. It depends how much working space you have. If you're always out in wide-open spaces, the 70-200 would probably be a better pick. However, the 24-105 is a more versatile range, lets you get in a bit closer. I get nice results with both. If forced to choose one, it'd probably be the 70-200, but I use the 24-105 more, just because of its range.

In the shots below, the black dog was taken with the 70-200 and the golden retriever with the 24-105.


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



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


Gear: Canon 7D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Canon 24-105L f4, Canon 70-300L, Canon 60 macro f/2.8, Speedlite 580 EXII, 2x AB800

Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
waterrockets
Goldmember
Avatar
3,928 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 265
Joined Jun 2010
Location: Austin (near TX)
     
Jun 07, 2013 14:50 |  #5

gonzogolf wrote in post #16009452 (external link)
The features of 24-105 are largely wasted on a crop body so not that. The 70-200 is a great lens, focuses fast and gives you some room to work. If you decide to go wider look at the ef-s lenses instead. I like 17-55 2.8IS.

FWIW, I like my 24-105 about twice as much on my T2i as I liked my 17-55 f/2.8 IS. 17-55 just didn't fit most of my shooting. Sold 17-55 and used money to buy a used 24-105, only lost $0.65 on the sales.


1D MkIV | 1D MkIII | 550D w/grip & ML| EF 70-200mm f2.8L| EF 24-105mm f4L IS | Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS | Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED UMC | 430EXii | EF 50mm f1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
arctic98z
Member
187 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Austin, TX
     
Jun 07, 2013 14:53 |  #6

I like the 70-200 for dogs. I prefer to be a little further away so they aren't as tempted to get distracted be me moving around, and keep running or playing. As soon as I kneel down, if they notice, my dogs want to tackle me lol


Sean
5D III | 16-35L II | 35L | 50L | 85L II | 70-200L IS II | 1.4x II
600EX-RT
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohanBorjesson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
187 posts
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Sweden
     
Jun 07, 2013 14:57 |  #7

This would be a nobrainer for me if I would carry two lenses with me, then it would be the kitlens and 70-200 but now I can't decide between the 24-105 and 70-200. As you guys said, the dogs get away fast and as I said most my images are at the max FL (55) so a 70-200 would probably be the best for me anyway.

I had the 70-200/f4 non-is before but sold it due to economy issues but now I'm in for a permanent buy. I just don't know if I could get the non-is again, I liked the lens alot and I would never bring out my camera in bad weather so getting a good shutter speed would not be an issue. The only thing I hated with the lens was the shaky viewfinder but it was not so bad..


Flickr (external link)
500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lovemyram4x4
Goldmember
Avatar
2,198 posts
Gallery: 97 photos
Best ofs: 3
Likes: 57
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Temecula
     
Jun 07, 2013 20:18 |  #8

I actually use my 24-105 and my primes the most to shoot my dogs and that's on a FF. That's mainly because I do more shots of them in the house, back patio, or out in general public areas so either space is limited or want to kept them close. If I take them out to play fetch on the front lawn since it's so big I find the 70-200 a bit short.

Since you have the kit lens and assuming you're happy with it I'd the 70-200 before getting something that covers a lot of the same range.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick5
Goldmember
Avatar
3,100 posts
Likes: 192
Joined Mar 2007
Location: Philadelphia Suburbs
     
Jun 07, 2013 20:50 |  #9

Having both lenses, I, like many would go for the 70-200 f/4 L IS.


Canon 5D Mark III (x2), BG-E11 Grips, 7D (x2) BG-E7 Grips, Canon Lenses 16-35 f/4 L IS, 17-40 f/4 L, 24-70 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/2.8 L IS II, 70-200 f/4 L IS, 70-200 f/4 L IS Version II, 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 L IS Version II, TS-E 24 f/3.5 L II, 100 f/2.8 L Macro IS, 10-22 f3.5-4.5, 17-55 f/2.8 L IS, 85 f/1.8, Canon 1.4 Extender III, 5 Canon 600 EX-RT, 2 Canon ST-E3 Transmitters, Canon Pixma PRO-10 Printer

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
arctic98z
Member
187 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 10
Joined Apr 2011
Location: Austin, TX
     
Jun 07, 2013 22:16 |  #10

These are just my personal thoughts. Not trying to be influential, but maybe something to think about.... While shooting my dogs, I prefer a longer focal length because as mentioned earlier, I want to capture them being 'them.' Running, playing, being themselves, whatever. I don't want to influence them too much. So I prefer the longer focal lengths. If I am too close, as soon as I kneel down, they want to run to me, say 'hey,' tackle me, or whatever, and those close shots aren't as flattering.

As for the IS vs. non-IS. I had the 70-200 f/4 IS. When I looked to move to the 2.8 version, I considered the non-IS version. But in the end, I didn't want to find the situation where I was looking back wishing I had spent a little extra on the IS version, and wishing I could sell and upgrade yet again. Also I didn't want to be in that situation where I wish I had it. Its one thing to want a different lens, but to what another version of the same lens is difficult, because it makes it harder to justify upgrade. You would already have most of what you want, but would just be missing that last little bit. So, my advice, if you can swing it, save the little extra and get the IS version. You can always turn it off, but it certainly doesn't hurt anything. I don't shoot in low light often, and mostly shoot sports/action with it at high shutter speeds. And though you say you are a nice weather shooter, you never know when you might be out in the evening, or it may not be 'bad' weather, but maybe cloudy, and you want that little piece of mind.


Sean
5D III | 16-35L II | 35L | 50L | 85L II | 70-200L IS II | 1.4x II
600EX-RT
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
strykher1025
Member
Avatar
162 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 5
Joined May 2013
Location: Los Angeles, CA
     
Aug 14, 2013 12:04 |  #11

arctic98z
"Its one thing to want a different lens, but to want another version of the same lens is difficult, because it makes it harder to justify upgrade." SO TRUE!!
--------
I'd say at least get the IS. If you're doing action shots. 24-105mm isnt so bad, I love it! When indoors and low lighting, I usually opt out to my prime to get down on F2 or bigger. Unless I get better lighting indoors or with flash.


-Jay
"Fortune favours the bold"
SONY A7Rii | Fuji X-T3 | Canon T3i | Canon 85mm 1.2ii L | Canon 80-200MM 2.8 L | Canon 17-40mm 4 L | EF Rokinon 8mm Fisheye | XF 23mm 1.4 | XF 35mm 2 | XF Rokinon 12mm 2
Facebook (external link) | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link) | Gears

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
m3incorp
Senior Member
Avatar
989 posts
Joined Jul 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
     
Aug 15, 2013 16:32 |  #12

Ok Johan, that was a sneaky way to get us to look at your great photos. I'd say either lens will do just fine in capable hands. If the choice is only one, guess I'd go with the 70-200 (you didn't mention which 70-200 though).


7D, 10D, Canon EFS 18-55mm modded
Canon EF 50mm, Canon 85mm 1.8, Tamron 17-50mm F/2.8 XR DiII VC
Canon EF 70-300mm, 70-200 F4 L
, Canon 430ex ii Speedlite.

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

2,692 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-105/f4 L IS USM vs. 70-200/f4 L IS USM for pets
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 PhotoEngineering
924 guests, 332 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.