BrodyBPhoto wrote in post #18017517
I recently switched to a full frame body, and now I'm looking to get a solid zoom in the 24-70 range. The 24-70Ls are out of my budget by a bit, so I have been looking at the old 28-70L. I don't mind using old equipment and from what I've read a lot of people feel its on par with the 24-70 mk1. My problem is I keep reading how its not supported by canon anymore and some copies start to have a problem with haze inside the lens as they get older. I have a budget of $600-$700 right now for a solid mid range zoom. Mainly just a walk around lens. I was looking at the 24-105 too but I feel like the f4 limits me a lot with my 17-40 as I find myself shooting in lowlight often.
Any recommendations on a solid, full-frame, mid range zoom in my price range? Or opinions on the 28-70L?
The 28-70 F2.8L is an awesome lens, sharp, and really great. You can get them around $400~500. But, as you pointed out, they are hard to find in good shape without haze or fungus or something because they're 20 years old, and totally unsupported. Granted, I don't care about support in the $400 range or so, for the most part, but with an old lens like that, you have to consider it is a mechanical device and it's really old and used, so it could fail and there's no service for it except third party and it will cost as much as the lens did. A lot of people go to the 28-70 because of budget and they take the gamble of having an amazing lens for cheap, or they get a great lens that either has issues or develops issues and they are shopping again shortly after. Personally if I were getting a 28-70 it would have to be from someone in the country I live in, and hopefully someone from a community like this with good standing history to have good odds of the lens being cared for and without haze, etc.
That said, the 24-70 MK1 isn't that much more anymore, often $700~800 used, and supported and serviceable.
The Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC is better than the MK1 canon in a lot of ways, and in the same price range. It's worth exploring. It's the only one stabilized, and that's a big deal for low light--something you claim you shoot a lot in.
There's also the venerable Tamron 28-75 F2.8. Very cheap these days, still quite a good lens, fast, on the order of $200 pretty often.
As for the 24-105 F4L IS, the 1 stop of light isn't that big a deal in "low light" because it has IS, which makes up for it in many ways. I wouldn't discount it for the idea of having F2.8. When shooting at telephoto focal lengths (70mm / 105mm) you will want IS more often than just having faster aperture in real world use.
If your budget is $700, you can afford a Canon MK1 24-70 or a Tamron 24-70 F2.8 VC. I'd get the Tamron with that budget. F2.8 and 4 stop VC, that's excellent.