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 04 Feb 2014 (Tuesday) 01:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF 24-105mm L f4 upgrade for Tamron 28-75mm 2.8?

 
Gethin
Member
Avatar
97 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 04, 2014 01:41 |  #1

Hi guys,

I'd got a little bit of money to spend on photo gear, and Im currently taking a lot of live music photos..

my most used lens for this, apart from my nifty 50 f1.8, is currently my Tamron 28-75mm 2.8.. I'm seeing the 24-105mm L f4 for good prices lately and am considering upgrading..

Will the IS partially compensate for the loss of aperture, 2.8 for 4 in low light situations?

any opinions or suggestions on this??? bad move for my purposes?? the 28-70L 2.8 is outta my price range unfortunately..

cheers!


EOS 7d - EOS 400d gripped + 50mm f1.8 + 90mm Tamron macro + Sigma 10-20mm + Tamron 28-75 f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
JM ­ Photos
"Childhood ruined"
Avatar
3,374 posts
Gallery: 65 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 318
Joined Sep 2010
Location: Washington: North Seattle
     
Feb 04, 2014 03:02 |  #2

I have the 24-105 and absolutely love the thing. It is a perfect walk around lens. But all that is coming from a landscape photographer. When shooting live music, the venues are often poorly lit so that 2.8 to 4 might not benefit you at all. Image stabilizer won't help in the matter of shooting in the darker situations. You'll have to end up bumping the ISO up to compensate for the f/4 instead of 2.8. If you're okay with that and have good noise reduction software then go for it. It's a great lens, I have no complaints. Others may disagree.


Canon 6D, & Sony α6000
Own: 24-105mm f/4L | Tamron 150-600mm f/5-6.3 | Rokinon 14mm f/1.8
Want: 24-70mm f/2.8 L II | 70-200mm f/2.8 L II
Website: Jordyn Murdock Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EverydayGetaway
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,483 posts
Gallery: 7 photos
Likes: 3493
Joined Oct 2012
Location: Bowie, MD
     
Feb 04, 2014 03:08 |  #3

In what way do you find your 28-75 lacking? The IQ between the two lenses isn't all that different. To me the extra stop of light would be more important than the extra range, your needs might be different.


Fuji X-Pro2 // Fuji X-T1 // Fuji X-100T // XF 18mm f2 // XF 35mm f1.4 // XF 60mm f2.4 // Rokinon 12mm f2 // Rokinon 21mm f1.4 // XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 // XF 55-200mm f3.5-4.8 // Rokinon 85mm f1.4 // Zhonghi Lensturbo ii // Various adapted MF lenses
flickr (external link) // Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gethin
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
97 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 04, 2014 03:22 |  #4

Thanks for the replies guys.. you're both probably right, the extra stops of light are probably more important.
And i'm not exactly sure what i think the 28-75 is lacking.. It's done me well, but i have nothing to compare to that is similar.. i figured the cheap price, it must be lacking in something, and being my main go-to lens at the moment, figured it should be first on the upgrade list.. and upgrades work for me as i get some money back when i sell the old one lol.

i've looked at sigmas 24-70, tamrons 24-70 and canons 24-70 and for the price and difference between them, maybe ill stick with what i have..

might have a look at something else for low light live music instead.. thanks again guys


EOS 7d - EOS 400d gripped + 50mm f1.8 + 90mm Tamron macro + Sigma 10-20mm + Tamron 28-75 f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
agv8or
Goldmember
Avatar
2,150 posts
Gallery: 10 photos
Likes: 363
Joined Oct 2006
Location: Midwest
     
Feb 04, 2014 03:29 |  #5

I bought a 24-105L IS when they first came out to replace a 24-70 2.8 while I retained a Tamron 28-75 as a backup. I was able to compare the two lenses and it is not even a fair comparison. Greater focal range with the 24-105 and it focuses faster, quieter and more accurately in low light (just an all around better auto focus system) and the IS more than makes for the 1 stop loss in shutter speed if that is the way you want to look at it. The build quality is much better on the 24-105 as well. I do not miss the 28-75 I doubt you will either.


Rand

Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
xarqi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,435 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Aotearoa/New Zealand
     
Feb 04, 2014 04:20 |  #6

Check the shots you've taken in the past in low light and see what proportion are at f/2.8, and would not have been possible by altering ISO or shutter speed. That'll tell you how well the f/4 lens would function.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
eddie3dfx
Senior Member
486 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2009
     
Feb 04, 2014 04:24 |  #7

agv8or wrote in post #16662129 (external link)
I bought a 24-105L IS when they first came out to replace a 24-70 2.8 while I retained a Tamron 28-75 as a backup. I was able to compare the two lenses and it is not even a fair comparison. Greater focal range with the 24-105 and it focuses faster, quieter and more accurately in low light (just an all around better auto focus system) and the IS more than makes for the 1 stop loss in shutter speed if that is the way you want to look at it. The build quality is much better on the 24-105 as well. I do not miss the 28-75 I doubt you will either.

Yeah, I'm in the same boat. I had the 28-75 tamron and 24-60 sigma. Neither was in the same league as my 24-105 in terms of IQ, sharpness, rendering, etc.


Canon 6D, Canon L 24-105, Zeiss Distagon 28mm 2.8, Planar 50mm 1.4, Planar 85mm 1.4, Sonnar 135mm 2.8 & Zeiss Mutar 2x, Canon 50mm 1.8
http://www.edwinraffph​otography.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stang67
Senior Member
Avatar
385 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Feb 04, 2014 04:51 |  #8

Why not check out an 18-35 1.8 or a fisheye? I would imagine either would be fantastic provided you could get close enough to your subject(s).


Canon 6D - Canon 1D Mk III - 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | Σ 105mm f/2.8 | Canon 400mm f/5.6L | Σ 35mm f/1.4 | 17-40mm f/4L
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sibil
Cream of the Crop
8,466 posts
Likes: 33198
Joined Jan 2009
Location: SoCal
     
Feb 04, 2014 05:09 |  #9

Gethin wrote in post #16662049 (external link)
Will the IS partially compensate for the loss of aperture, 2.8 for 4 in low light situations?

I wouldn't call the 24-105, a low light lens. What focal length do you mostly shoot with your Tamron? A fast prime, with a different focal length than the 50/1.8, might be an alternative




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
EOS5DC
Senior Member
791 posts
Joined Dec 2013
     
Feb 04, 2014 05:28 |  #10
bannedPermanent ban

I have the 28-75. I take upgrade to mean that I would be gaining something by switching. Using that definition, the only available upgrades from the 28-75 are the Tamron 24-70 VC and the Canon 24-70 II.
More distortion at the wide end and softer rendition at the long end, along with losing one stop hardly qualify as an upgrade. The IS would be nice, though.

Some mention has been made of the focus speed of the 28-75. I shoot it on a 60D and a 6D and have no problem keeping up with 4 to 10 year old grandchildren and the family pets. Admittedly, it did not perform well on the 5Dc.


Bodies: 60D, 6D.
EFs: 15-85, 10-22
EF: 28-75, 35 f/2 IS, Σ70-200 OS, 100-400L
Flash: 580EX II, 430 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Gethin
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
97 posts
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
     
Feb 04, 2014 05:44 |  #11

Thanks guys!

Yeah the 18-35 1.8 looks amazing.. slightly more than i'd like to spend at the moment, but it's definitely high on my list .. the 24-105 is cheaper than the 18-35, plus being able to sell the 28-75 makes it cheaper again, so that's why i was asking about that.. i have some money to play with, not much, but essentially a new toy would be a new toy lol..

I wouldn't call the f4 a fast lens either an i'm definitely looking at the prime lens range too.. the 50mm is due for an upgrade but i'm waiting for the new sigma 50 1.4 before i do that. Considered a wide prime but should really just save up for the 18-35 as it would be perfect for what i do. So maybe i should be looking at the 85mm..

hmm decisions.. thanks for all your input


EOS 7d - EOS 400d gripped + 50mm f1.8 + 90mm Tamron macro + Sigma 10-20mm + Tamron 28-75 f2.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
titi_67207
Senior Member
Avatar
496 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Strasbourg, France
     
Feb 04, 2014 09:05 |  #12

You're "taking a lot of live music photos" so if I were you I would take a good prime with 1.8 or 1.4 aperture. Is your 50mm too short or not ? A good idea could be a 85mm, a 30/35mm or a better 50mm.

Titi


Canon 5D MkII + Sony A7 + 24x36 & 6x6 B&W film cameras .
CV 15 4.5 III | TS-E 24L II | FE 28 2 | (50+85) 1.4 | 135 2 | 70-200 4.0L | a collection of old Zuikos + FD + Adaptall + AI-s + M42

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ceegee
Goldmember
2,320 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Mar 2008
Location: Montreal, Quebec
     
Feb 04, 2014 10:11 |  #13

I recently exchanged my much-loved Tamron 28-75 for a Canon 24-105. My reasons were that I wanted the weather sealing, faster focusing and longer range of the Canon. It took me a while to come to terms with giving up f2.8 to get these features. The 24-105 suits my needs because (a) I use it a lot in the studio, where f2.8 capability is not necessary, (b) I often use it outside with moving subjects, where the faster focusing is useful, and (c) it allows me to shoot in the rain. If I'd been photographing indoor events, I'm not sure I would have made the switch. Both lenses produce really great IQ.

I'm thoroughly enjoying my 24-105 because it suits my needs. However, I'm not sure it would suit the OP's needs quite as well.


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

1,354 views & 0 likes for this thread
EF 24-105mm L f4 upgrade for Tamron 28-75mm 2.8?
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 JohnBonney
1542 guests, 328 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.