budget decisions

I'm seeing the need to have a 2 low-light lens system in place for indoor event photography, however my budget is a deciding factor.

Right now I'm seeing the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L mark 1 lenses pretty cheap ($350-$600 on ebay). And of course the mark 2 versions not so cheap ($800-$1300). I had to make this type of decision with my 70-200 2.8 L version 1 without IS. I'm happy with the quality and am used to using it now.

My question, is there anything about the 24-70 mark 1 lens that's really hard to work around that the makes the mark 2 version a better decision?

I have a lot of hours behind both. i'd say the biggest difference between the two is sharpness -- the II is probably sharper wide open than the brick ever gets. i'll add that the II is the better choice in every way if you can afford it, and if not i'd get the tamron if it's in your budget before the brick.

ed rader wrote in post #18752661
if not i'd get the tamron if it's in your budget before the brick.

Tamron G1 or G2?

well g2 is better of the two tho I would probably go for even g1 over brick.

FWIW Mine is the 1 (24-70 L) and I’ve always been quite satisfied with it, maybe because I didn’t know any better. But it is by no means a bad lens in my opinion. See if you can borrow one & try it out.

I have used the Canon 50mm f1.8 STM indoors quite a bit with good results.

If you are looking for primes, you can get the 50mm F/1.4 & the 85mm F/1.8 (both new) for $598!! If you get the 50mm F/1.8 ( a great lens), the 2 will cost you $425!! The 85mm F/1.8 is one of my favorite lenses.

Really??? I have to take your word on this as I don't have any of the lenses you've mentioned here, but I find it hard to believe that a Tammy (especially 1st generation) is sharper than the L glass??? I know the Canon lens is quite an old model but still. The reason I'm interested is because I'm looking into which 24-70mm to get for under the basket during BB games. Currently the difference between the G2 & MII is fairly close, $500.

You've actually shot with all the glass mentioned so you would definitely know better than I. I am not what they call a "Canon snob", I just had some bad luck with 3rd party glass in the past. I think the differences in reviews we read of 3rd party glass is because there is a better chance of getting a "bad copy". Just my thoughts.

The problem I see is losing the flexibility of zoom. I am shooting indoor events and space is limited for me to navigate for shots at times, especially during performances and lectures, when being tactful about my involvement is required. I'm using my f3.5 24-105 kit lens right now but its not a good choice for low light.

Yeah, it's tuff to give up the convenience of the zoom. Even with 2 bodies & a prime on each, you still might miss shots just swapping cameras. What body(ies) do you have?? It does look as though some version of a 24-70mm F/2.8 is your best choice. The Canon MII is pricey, even at it's current sale price of $1,600.

I guess my decision would come down to pay. If you are making money taking these images then I would suggest going all in. My normal routine is to purchase B&H gift cards until I reach the price.

Here are a couple of photos taken with my 28-70 2.8 L:

Photo from ozziepuppy's gallery.

Image hosted by forum (945321) © ozziepuppy THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.

When I bought the mkII it was a solid $2000...but I thought it worth it after borrowing one from a friend. Besides amazing sharpness, I also saw some nice color contrast in shadows. Some will say they need IS...I don't really miss it at these focal lengths since I'd need to raise shutter speed for subject anyway.

I tried zooms both Nikon and Canon and did not care for the shorter versions mainly because of the sharpness. If I were shooting events, I’d be carrying a 24LII or 35LII and a 85L/IS or 135L. I shot a project this year, used the 24LII, 50L and 85L/IS and was happy with the results.

wow we've really deviated from the original post but what else is new

These are pro bono jobs so theres a tax write off at year end, but I learned long ago that's not gonna come close to the cost of the lens. I'm using a 5D Mark 3 that I purchased used around $1300