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 20 Mar 2010 (Saturday) 06:27
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-70L on 5D2 verdict?

 
Houston1863
Senior Member
Avatar
729 posts
Joined Jul 2009
Location: South East UK
     
Mar 20, 2010 20:47 as a reply to  @ post 9837672 |  #46

By any criteria, 24-70 sure has got to be a pretty useful range of focal lengths to have, especially on FF. That it is a mainstay on the gear list of many wedding photographers says a lot. If you shoot events where you are milling around people it places a lot of versatility in just one lens.

To each his or her own and My 2c


Cheers everyone

IMAGE: http://www.cosgan.de/images/smilie/froehlich/a010.gif


H
IMAGE: http://www.cosgan.de/images/smilie/nahrung/a035.gif

2x5D3, 16-35L, 24-70L, 70-200/2.8L IS,15 FE, 50L,100L, 2x580EXII, 1x430Exll, Fuji X10, YN-622Cs, Manfrotto Neotec legs, various bits and pieces, my Apples ( 2 living MacBook Pro, 1 dormant PowerBook G4 ), bags and bits of Think Tank stuff
www.picture-u.net (external link)
www.picturing-u.blogspot.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
chomish
Goldmember
Avatar
1,917 posts
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 20, 2010 21:02 |  #47

I dont think theres anything "boring" about this lens and i personally love it.

In your opinion its "boring", but i think many, many people would disagree. But hey, you have every rite to your opinions.

One day youll find your dream lens. Until then i guess you have to use these lenses that everybody else loves.


:) 5D-2 Mark ii :) 16-35 2.8L | 24-70 2.8L | 85 1.2 IIL | 70-200 f4 ISL | 70-200 2.8 IS IIL | 24-70 2.8L |MP-E 65 | 580EX, 430EX, MT24-EX | :p :p :p

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 50
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Mar 20, 2010 21:05 |  #48

chomish wrote in post #9837841 (external link)
I dont think theres anything "boring" about this lens and i personally love it.

In your opinion its "boring", but i think many, many people would disagree. But hey, you have every rite to your opinions.

One day youll find your dream lens. Until then i guess you have to use these lenses that everybody else loves.

I wouldn't use the word boring.
To me, it's still an essential lens for a lot of what I shoot.
All I am saying is the parameters within which you can operate with the 24-70L is sorta, kinda, limiting...not sure how to really put it without sounding like I am knocking the lens, b/c I am not!:D

I don't think I can go without the 24-70L just b/c it's so damn convenient but convenient for me doesn't neccessarily mean it's a great lens or focal range.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thewiz4u
Senior Member
Avatar
262 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Oct 2007
     
Mar 20, 2010 21:13 |  #49

Is no such thing as boring lens or subjects is boring photographers... And the 24-70L is a HIGH quality glass.


1d mark III and some Lenses.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Skrim17
The only TPBMer without a title. Enjoying my anonymity.
Avatar
40,070 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2006
Location: In my tree
     
Mar 20, 2010 21:14 |  #50

get the lens and see what you think, if you don't like it take it back.


Crissa
PLEASE HELP ME FIND MY PHOTOS!! (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jon
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
69,628 posts
Likes: 226
Joined Jun 2004
Location: Bethesda, MD USA
     
Mar 20, 2010 21:49 |  #51

mikekelley wrote in post #9837518 (external link)
I'm not quite sure what the point of this post was.

I'm not trying to say that every picture taken at 35, or 50, or anything between 24-70 is boring. Maybe i misworded my first post.

What I'm saying is that the range of that lens does nothing to excite me. Not wide enough when you need it, not long enough when you need it.

Sometimes 35mm is best for the job.

Sometimes 50mm is best for the job, etc etc.

When given the choice, I'd rather have a 16-35 or 17-40 or a 70-200 instead of a 24-70. Both of these excel at what they do (ultra wide and telephoto) and still leave enough for that holy grail of "general and walkaround" photography that people here seem to love so much.

Some people may find the 24-70 the end-all, be-all of lenses. That is good to hear, they are happy with it. I personally was not able to express myself well enough with that lens.

Let me break it down.

Wide: 24 isn't that wide on either FF or especially on crop. I'd rather have a 16-35 or 17-40. These both cover ultrawide to a good environmental portrait range if needed.

Fast: Not really at all. Give me a 50 1.4 for a fourth of the price.

Long: The lens isn't really long enough to solve all perspective issues commonly associated with shorter focal lengths and shooting people. I'll take a 70-200 if I want to shoot a headshot, any day. Sure you could back up to fix the problem (because we all know the effect that distance has on perspective) but generally I'd like to fill the frame.

So what am I personally going to use a 24-70 for?

Any of those legendary photographers shots that you mentioned could easily be recreated with a 17-40, 50 1.4 or 70-200, given the props, models, etc etc, and you'd still have more options.

Maybe I'm just a worse photographer than everyone else.

Simply that they're three of the most outstanding 35 mm photographers of the 20th century and their most celebrated shots were taken within the 28-70 mm range (mostly 35-50 mm). Capa's tagline was "If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough". And they were working with lenses closer to f/2.8 - f/3.5 than f/1.2.


Jon
----------
Cocker Spaniels
Maryland and Virginia activities
Image Posting Rules and Image Posting FAQ
Report SPAM, Don't Answer It! (link)
PERSONAL MESSAGING REGARDING SELLING OR BUYING ITEMS WITH MEMBERS WHO HAVE NO POSTS IN FORUMS AND/OR WHO YOU DO NOT KNOW FROM FORUMS IS HEREBY DECLARED STRICTLY STUPID AND YOU WILL GET BURNED.
PAYPAL GIFT NO LONGER ALLOWED HERE

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yagit80
Goldmember
Avatar
1,257 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2009
Location: MANILA & DOWN UNDER
     
Mar 20, 2010 21:51 |  #52

it's my very first set up as a first time dslr shooter as a hobbyist and it's GREAT COMBO!


flickriver (external link)
What Did You Blog Today? (external link)
Where's Tyler? (external link)
BOTTOM GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mikekelley
"Meow! Bark! Honk! Hiss! Grrr! Tweet!"
Avatar
7,317 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Feb 2009
Location: Los Angeles, CA
     
Mar 20, 2010 22:26 |  #53

Jon wrote in post #9838097 (external link)
Simply that they're three of the most outstanding 35 mm photographers of the 20th century and their most celebrated shots were taken within the 28-70 mm range (mostly 35-50 mm). Capa's tagline was "If your pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough". And they were working with lenses closer to f/2.8 - f/3.5 than f/1.2.

I don't use anything faster than a 50 1.4. in fact my next fastest piece of glass is a 15mm 2.8.

I can get "mostly the 35-50mm range" and then some with a 17-40 and my 50mm.

Again, I'm not saying that everything between 24 and 70mm is horribly boring and should be avoided. I'm saying that the zoom range of the 24-70 is not as necessary or useful as most think because of the reasons I've stated previously.

It is my opinion that people think they need this lens more than they really do, and they could take photos that are just as great with other lenses that would benefit them more.

But to each their own. If it works, and you're happy, I'm happy.


Los Angeles-Based Architectural, Interior, And Luxury Real Estate Photography (external link)
How To Photograph Real Estate and Architecture (external link)
My Fine Art Galleries (external link)
My articles at Fstoppers.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Doc ­ Fluty
Goldmember
Avatar
1,762 posts
Likes: 35
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Gulfport, Ms
     
Mar 21, 2010 03:42 |  #54

i used my 24-70 today at a bday part.. even though i have some primes it was nice to go from wide angle to focused subject pretty quick

with the 5d2 and this lens i was able to get the shutter speed up enough to where iso didnt have to go above 400 or so... even when we went inside

24

IMAGE: http://i44.tinypic.com/2nvaser.jpg

70
IMAGE: http://i43.tinypic.com/t7jthe.jpg

My Facebook Fan Page (external link) - My Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hnaa
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
79 posts
Joined Oct 2008
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
     
Mar 21, 2010 05:08 as a reply to  @ Doc Fluty's post |  #55

Wow,
never thought this post would stir up such a debate:). But thanks for the input evryone. I think maybe I'll go looking for a wider prime to supplement my 50mm. If the new 24-70 LII, when it comes out, is as good as the new 70-200mm LII, then I'll definately get it. Have you seen the pixel peeping test on The Digital Picture? Looks like it beats the hell out of just about evrything in it's focal length range.


I know, I really don't need that lens

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SuzyView
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
32,093 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 129
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Northern VA
     
Mar 21, 2010 06:45 |  #56

Don't hold your breath on a new 24-70 II anytime soon. It will probably be heavier and more expensive. But I would consider it myself. The 70-200 II is on my list for next year.


Suzie - Still Speaking Canonese!
5DIV, SONY a7iii, 7D2, G12, M100, M50, 5 L's & 2 Primes, 25 bags.
My children and grandchildren are the reason, but it's the passion that drives me to get the perfect image of everything.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 50
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Mar 21, 2010 11:47 |  #57

hnaa wrote in post #9839629 (external link)
Wow,
never thought this post would stir up such a debate:). But thanks for the input evryone. I think maybe I'll go looking for a wider prime to supplement my 50mm. If the new 24-70 LII, when it comes out, is as good as the new 70-200mm LII, then I'll definately get it. Have you seen the pixel peeping test on The Digital Picture? Looks like it beats the hell out of just about evrything in it's focal length range.

That's not the impression I got. It merely catches up to the f4 IS version.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bohdank
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
14,060 posts
Likes: 6
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Montreal, Canada
     
Mar 21, 2010 12:24 |  #58

nicksan wrote in post #9837672 (external link)
Why is it silly? I've given you my reasons and I don't think they are "silly" and mikekelley summed it up very well as well. I might add compression to the mix when it comes to the long end. At 70mm it's still meh...

It has nothing to do with lack of imagination. That's a pretty silly thing to say.

Well, since lighting, framing, subject matter and composition, all the things that make a great image, have nothing to do with the hardware, what else can it be ?

I understand your followup post, after I made my comment, when you say not long enough, not short enough, but then you replace it with 2 lenses so, correct, no 1 lens will be be able to do it all, at least not as well. Frankly, if there was one lens that was wide enough and long enough, we'd all be running around with only 1 lens.

Now, if you lack inspiration visualizing images that lend themselves to 24-70, I can understand that also. We all see the world in different ways. Some are more versatile than others but people tend to stick to certain type/style of shots.... this is not as negative as it sounds "lack of imagination".


Bohdan - I may be, and probably am, completely wrong.
Gear List

Montreal Concert, Event and Portrait Photographer (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nicksan
Man I Like to Fart
Avatar
24,729 posts
Likes: 50
Joined Oct 2006
Location: NYC
     
Mar 21, 2010 12:29 |  #59

bohdank wrote in post #9841114 (external link)
Well, since lighting, framing, subject matter and composition, all the things that make a great image, have nothing to do with the hardware, what else can it be ?

You conveniently left out everything that has to do with hardware.

bohdank wrote in post #9841114 (external link)
I understand your followup post, after I made my comment, when you say not long enough, not short enough, but then you replace it with 2 lenses so, correct, no 1 lens will be be able to do it all, at least not as well. Frankly, if there was one lens that was wide enough and long enough, we'd all be running around with only 1 lens.

God forbid we use more than 1 lense on a DSLR!:lol:

bohdank wrote in post #9841114 (external link)
Now, if you lack inspiration visualizing images that lend themselves to 24-70, I can understand that also. We all see the world in different ways. Some are more versatile than others but people tend to stick to certain type/style of shots.... this is not as negative as it sounds "lack of imagination".

Sure, I take "lack of imagination" as a complete compliment!:lol: The 24-70L doesn't inhibit my inspiration/imaginatio​n/visualization. Those things happen even before I mount a lens on the camera and most of the time unless I am looking for convenience or blanket coverage of an event, the 24-70L rarely makes it on to my camera.:lol:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sf_loft
Member
Avatar
212 posts
Joined Mar 2009
Location: San Francisco, CA
     
Mar 21, 2010 14:05 as a reply to  @ nicksan's post |  #60

5D MK II is awesome for me. This is the one lens I take with me when I can only have 1 lens.

IMAGE: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3486/3855139132_021e23bab6_b.jpg

IMAGE: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2632/3855349514_2e3b1892be_o.png

Canon EOS 5D Mark III & FUJIFILM X-T1 mirrorless

35mm f/1.4L | 85mm f/1.2L II |135mm f/2L | 16-35mm f/2.8L II | 24-70mm f/2.8L II | 70-200 f/4L IS | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro
Benro C2691T Travel Angel | GP-E2 GPS | EF 1.4x III
FUJINON 23mm 1.4 | FUJINON 35mm 1.4 | FUJINON 56mm 1.2

flickr (external link)

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

6,945 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-70L on 5D2 verdict?
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 Kylemorgan
898 guests, 232 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.