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 Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
Thread started 23 Mar 2009 (Monday) 19:13
Search threadPrev/next
POLL: "which one is your choice?"
EF 24-105mm F/4 L IS USM
7
18.9%
EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L USM
26
70.3%
OTHER....your choice
4
10.8%

37 voters, 37 votes given (1 choice only choices can be voted per member)). VOTING IS FOR MEMBERS ONLY.
BROWSE ALL POLLS
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

which lense would you choose?

 
blondine
Goldmember
1,273 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2008
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada
     
Mar 23, 2009 19:13 |  #1

I want a lense for my new Canon 50D.... I plan on using it for weddings...... my two choices:

EF 24-105MM F/4 L IS USM
EF 24-70MM F/2.8 L USM

I like both lenses... but I want 1 that I can leave on the camera...

I have a 30D with a 17-85 lense for backup..... and a few other lenses (50mm 1.4, kit lense)


Blondine

:D Canon 5D Mark II ~ EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon 7D ~ Nifty 50 ~ EFS17-85mm IS USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,986 posts
Likes: 361
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Mar 23, 2009 19:22 |  #2

FAQ: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=255604

Plus the two dozen identical threads in the past month. You're missing the 17-55 F2.8 IS option.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
blondine
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,273 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2008
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada
     
Mar 24, 2009 05:55 |  #3

tim wrote in post #7583999 (external link)
FAQ: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=255604

Plus the two dozen identical threads in the past month. You're missing the 17-55 F2.8 IS option.

I should have clarified.... I only have a choice of one of these 2 as it is being handed down to me as part of an inheritance, I get to choose because I'm the oldest. My uncle has/had an awesome collection of primes and 2 5D's which my aunt is hanging onto at this time.


Blondine

:D Canon 5D Mark II ~ EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon 7D ~ Nifty 50 ~ EFS17-85mm IS USM

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,986 posts
Likes: 361
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Mar 24, 2009 06:12 |  #4

I love IS, and since you have a fast prime i'd take the 24-105.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
droberts
Senior Member
260 posts
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Missouri
     
Mar 24, 2009 10:20 |  #5

I agree with Tim that the 17 - 55 is another good option, but out of your two choices I would get the 24-70. Mainly for lighting issues, you will need the 2.8 quit often. Plus its good for blurring backgrounds. Personally I think you would get more use out of a longer zoom...70-200 2.8 You can do most of your close up with the 50.


Canon Stuff...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
matonanjin
Goldmember
2,378 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Omaha, NE
     
Mar 24, 2009 10:27 |  #6

This 24-70 vs 24-105 has been covered hundreds of times. You might want to do a search:

https://photography-on-the.net …arch.php?search​id=7357615


My Web Site (external link)

My Equine Photography Blog (external link)
My Stuff and Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
form
"inadequately equipped"
Avatar
4,929 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Henderson, NV
     
Mar 24, 2009 10:46 |  #7

Shooting with the 85L for two weddings has taught me two things: Full Frame, and 35L + 85L make a highly adaptive pair that can't be matched with a standard zoom for creative potential or workable environments. The standard zoom is still useful for a few things the primes can't do, but it's not as good at about 85% of the stuff. However it's a lot less expensive and therefore should be high on the priority list.

As for 17-55 vs. 24-70, for crop sensor the 17-55 would be a better choice because of the better range. After shooting with full frame for a while, even the 24-70 is not really that great on crop sensors. I used to be devoted to the 24-70/28-75 over 17-55 for crop sensor because of the extra background blur they give with their longer focal lengths, but it's really nothing compared to the difference between crop and full frame.

I wouldn't find a 24-105 useful for weddings because it's f/4 and already loses versatility over an f/2.8 zoom.


Las Vegas Wedding Photographer: http://www.joeyallenph​oto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stathunter
"I am no one really"
Avatar
5,635 posts
Likes: 36
Joined Aug 2006
Location: California & Michigan
     
Mar 24, 2009 10:48 |  #8

form wrote in post #7587919 (external link)
Shooting with the 85L for two weddings has taught me two things: Full Frame, and 35L + 85L make a highly adaptive pair that can't be matched with a standard zoom for creative potential or workable environments.

I am in full agreement.....once you play with primes......it is hard to get what you want with others.

The question the OP posted-- I personally would not feel that any f/4 lens is really a wedding lens-- this is my personal opinion--- I have had them all--- you typically need something that is faster in low light 2.8 or better.


Scott
"Do or do not, there is no try"

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
picturecrazy
soft-hearted weenie-boy
Avatar
8,565 posts
Likes: 688
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Alberta, CANADA
     
Mar 24, 2009 12:19 |  #9

F/4 can work well if you know your flash technique. The 24-105 is one of the most used lenses in our bag for weddings. ISO1600 and flash will get the job done. Ceremonies are very slow and you can use shutter speeds down to 1/2 and not get motion blur. IS will give you that. F/2.8 will often fall short. F/1.4 can blur so much of the photo that it can lose the context of the environment you are shooting. Not saying primes don't have their place, but F/4 does too if you like to add some variety for your clients.

I'd take the 24-105 over the 24-70, personally. Yes, F/2.8 will get you double the shutter speed, but chances are, if you are shooting action in low light, flash at F/4 will get your a cleaner photo than F/2.8 without flash, and likely just as good a photo as F/2.8 with flash. Where F/4 really loses out is that it uses double the flash power and therefore increases recycle times. It also provides half the light available to your AF system. But the 50D AF system is very sensitive so it should be able to handle the 24-105 fine in crappy light.


-Lloyd
The BOUDOIR - Edmonton Intimate Boudoir Photography (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Studio Family Baby Child Maternity Wedding Photographers (external link)
Night and Day Photography - Edmonton Headshot Photographers (external link)
Facebook (external link) | Twitter (external link) |Instagram (external link) | Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
form
"inadequately equipped"
Avatar
4,929 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Henderson, NV
     
Mar 24, 2009 12:48 |  #10

I don't know how you can manage 1/2 sec. shutter speeds even with IS.

I'm coming from a different perspective: About 60% of my jobs don't allow me to take pictures during the ceremony because the resorts have their own photographer who has sole permission to shoot them. Therefore, in most cases I only shoot before and/or after the ceremony, doing posed shots and motion shots.

For the reception, any shutter speed will do most of the time because I'm using flash, but the lens needs to gather enough light from my flashes and I do set them around 1/4 power most of the time to conserve power and decrease recycle time. Sometimes I set one or two at 1/2 power. This usually gives me around f/2.8 ISO 800 for a properly exposed shot. I really don't like to push to ISO1600 if I don't have to, but I know the D700 or 1DIII would be able to handle ISO1600 all day long.

The other environments I shoot in are casino resorts and I can't set up flashes, stands or other lighting equipment in those places because it's both a foot-traffic hazard and against the general policy of the resorts to allow paid photographers to take pictures on their property. I also don't have an assistant to make that kind of thing easier, in part because I don't charge enough to pay an assistant and still make money. Therefore, I am left with the option of getting the fastest lenses for the job to get as much light as possible. I'm probably going to end up swapping out standard zoom entirely for 35L and 85L.

Then, just last night there was a lighting situation by this grid-patterned wall of light on the strip, and it gave enough light for f/1.2 at ISO800, around 1/125 sec for a really good exposure. f/4 would've been too dark, I would've had to push the ISO up to 1600 to get 1/25 sec. f/2.8 would've given me around 1/50 sec for the same exposure.

I think that if they make a 24-70L with IS, then the standard zoom might once again have some definite usefulness over the primes for me in posed shots where the people aren't moving, but so much of my work is at night or indoors with available light, and primes seem to be far more versatile for that.

Now, I'm less experienced, so this all may just be part of a phase...but right now it seems like a good idea for me. In the future, maybe I'll think something else is a good idea instead, and I'll come around full circle.


Las Vegas Wedding Photographer: http://www.joeyallenph​oto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,986 posts
Likes: 361
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Mar 24, 2009 15:45 |  #11

I can manage 1/3 of a second sometimes with IS, but I need to take a bunch of shots and only one comes out decent. 1/10th is easier.

Form, no-one is suggesting F4 lenses are good for all day, just the best general purpose lens given the options. Even with F2.8 I either need IS or a tripod in many churches, so F2.8 vs F4 is moot. Outside i'm usually at F8-F12 during the day, and F2.8-F5.6 when it's getting dark.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
form
"inadequately equipped"
Avatar
4,929 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jan 2006
Location: Henderson, NV
     
Mar 24, 2009 16:49 |  #12

Whenever someone who's a better photographer than me can take better shots with certain equipment I think wouldn't suit the purpose so well, it always reminds me of how little I know, and how there is so much more that I could do with what I have, if I only was any good at this stuff.


Las Vegas Wedding Photographer: http://www.joeyallenph​oto.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PeaceFire
Goldmember
Avatar
2,281 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Glendale, AZ - Chico, CA - Duluth, MN
     
Mar 24, 2009 21:29 |  #13

I use the 24-105 almost all day until the reception gets too dark then I switch a prime. I like my IS and I like the extra reach. I spent more time at the 105 range at my last wedding then I did at the 24 range. If I could only go to 70 I think I'd not get the shots I'm going for.


My Gear List / My Blog (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mckay ­ photography
Senior Member
Avatar
676 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 3
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
     
Mar 25, 2009 02:18 |  #14

I own both lenses and have used them a lot for weddings: on a crop body the 24-105mm is great when paired with a wide angle option like the 16-35mm on a crop body. But on a full frame body you will find the 24-105mm has a lot more vignetting than the 24-70mm, so it's better to go for the 24-70mm and pair with a long zoom like the 70-200mm on either crop or full frame


Gear: 5D mkiii x 2, 35 1.4 L, 16-35 L, 24-70 mkiiL, 70-200 L, Sigma Art 50 1.4
Wedding Photography Sydney (external link)
| Wedding Photography blog (external link) | Wedding photography Bowral (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
PeaceFire
Goldmember
Avatar
2,281 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Glendale, AZ - Chico, CA - Duluth, MN
     
Mar 25, 2009 20:09 |  #15

razyl wrote in post #7593287 (external link)
I own both lenses and have used them a lot for weddings: on a crop body the 24-105mm is great when paired with a wide angle option like the 16-35mm on a crop body. But on a full frame body you will find the 24-105mm has a lot more vignetting than the 24-70mm, so it's better to go for the 24-70mm and pair with a long zoom like the 70-200mm on either crop or full frame

This is a good point. At 24 I do get a lot of vignetting on my 5D. It's easy enough to fix in LightRoom but it is that extra 30 seconds or whatever of work per image that adds up after a while. I still won't give up my 24-105 of my 5D, but this is a good point.


My Gear List / My Blog (external link)

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

2,655 views & 0 likes for this thread
which lense would you choose?
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre Weddings & Other Family Events Talk 
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 smartlogg1
658 guests, 254 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.