Is the 24-70 an overkill on my T2i? Anyone use the combo?

rjx wrote in post #12051242
For the type of photography you do? Or for everyone?

In general. It goes from medium to medium-telephoto. 45-112 zoom. Not wide enough for any wide applications and not long enough for much either.

Sp1207 wrote in post #12051344
Not wide enough for any wide applications and not long enough for much either.

For the type of photography you do? Or for everyone?

FadedBlackSocks wrote in post #12051334
FWIW, when I had the 24-70L/7D combo mounted on my Flashpoint Ballhead+Tripod it would tilt down slightly no matter how tight I would tighten the ballhead. I would have to aim up to compensate for the drop. That's how heavy the lens is. The lens should come with a tripod mount collar like any big white.

(I know my tripod is considered "low end," but there is no way for me to justify spending 3 times as much on a tripod/head that I hardly use. The Flashpoint is very good setup for anyone that just needs a tripod.)

When tripod tilts with ANY lens, it's not time for a new lens, it is time for a new tripod, if you ask me..

Sp1207 wrote in post #12051344
In general. It goes from medium to medium-telephoto. 45-112 zoom. Not wide enough for any wide applications and not long enough for much either.

This is ridiculous. I agree its not an ideal range for a standard zoom but much can be shot from 45 to 112. I know some people that shoot about 90% of the time with just a 50mm lens. ( on full frame )

As to the OP. Image quality is great but its not a lens I would get for that particular camera.

Hermeto wrote in post #12051826
When tripod tilts with ANY lens, it's not time for a new lens, it is time for a new tripod, if you ask me..

I understand exactly what you're saying. I'm simply pointing out my experience with my setup. My tripod held up fine with the 24-105L but that's because it is a solid 10oz lighter than the 24-70L. Even the f/4 versions of the 70-200L don't weight as much as the 24-70L.

rjx wrote in post #12051785
For the type of photography you do? Or for everyone?

In comparison to the 17-55, which becomes a 27-88.

So much comes down to feel, which varies a lot with individuals, and with what you want to accomplish. Only you know the focal length range that does what you want to do. And, for long term happiness you can't go wrong with the L lenses, even if some might suggest you don't 'need' one now.

As for balance, I have a hard time seeing the problem. My left hand is out under the entire camera with my fingers on the zoom ring, so it feels really balanced even with longer/heavier lenses. As for the tripod/head, if you need to use a light model get one of the little flat bar brackets so the tripod head can be positioned in the center of the camera/lens weight.

It is really about what YOU want and what you have learned you need. I have had my T1i for about 14 months and have slowly upgraded my lens as I figured out what I wanted and why - I now love my set of lens, It works great for me and what I like shooting. But it might not work for you - just go slow and figure out what you want. No lens will be an overkill for your camera. And I just got my first L lens and its pretty sweet. You really can't go wrong if it meets your needs. ENJOY!

I just borrowed my friend's 24-70 for the first time yesterday (because I only own primes and wanted flexibility for the event I was shooting). The weight is not something that I mind (because I'm a pretty big guy, and my luma loop definitely helps too), overall the lens is great but it's something I definitely would NOT buy for use with my t2i. I'd rather have something in the 17-55 range (canon/sigma/tamron), I think I would get more flexibility with that lens considering the crop on the t2i (Definitely on the wider end, which is where I tend to shoot most). I don't need the weather sealing and I don't mind that there isn't a red ring around my lens. But it's nice to know I have a neighbor that has this lens whenever I need it for use

I like the 24-70 on the crop camera - it was pretty much the only lens I used on my 20D for several years. I've recently added a few new pieces of glass, but the 24-70 is still my main lens. I know the rebel is lighter than the XXD cameras, but as a previous poster said, if you're cradleing the lens in your left hand it's not an issue.

As for the comments to just get a flash, the results just aren't the same as shooting available light, which is something I like to do. Available light pics often just seem to have a better 'atmosphere', for lack of a better word - they capture the mood with more realism than flash would. Additionally, shooting available light allows you to be far less intrusive - people forget or ignore you because you're not continuously popping off bright bursts of light with every shot.

Go for it!

-Pat

I have the 24-70 on my T1i ( I know its not the T2i but its close). Anyone who says this combo is unusable because it doesn't balance right or the lens is too heavy must have arms the size of toothpicks. I mean come on people, its a lens! I chase my daughter all over the place with this and the 70-200 f4. This is a great lens. If you are skeptical then just rent one for a couple of days, but I wouldn't worry about it. Give it a shot, i bet you'll love it.

drunkjojo wrote in post #12053787
I have the 24-70 on my T1i ( I know its not the T2i but its close). Anyone who says this combo is unusable because it doesn't balance right or the lens is too heavy must have arms the size of toothpicks. I mean come on people, its a lens! I chase my daughter all over the place with this and the 70-200 f4. This is a great lens. If you are skeptical then just rent one for a couple of days, but I wouldn't worry about it. Give it a shot, i bet you'll love it.

I second the rental, rent it for a week and make sure you are satisfied with the results, that it's what you want in focal length, and that you are happy with a purchase.

To be fair, the 24-70 is nearly 25% heavier then the non IS 70-200, but I think it's pretty much nitpicking. But that's part of photography, people zoom into massive 18mp images to nitpick the hairs on a camel's ass. You have to expect a "weight balance" to be part of it.

nikesupremedunk wrote in post #12048422
so yea...does anyone actually HAVE the 24-70/t2i combo?

I've toyed with it. After extended usage, it is uncomfortably unbalanced.

Also, the crop turns it into a mid-telezoom ~ 38-98mm. If that's not your cup of tea, then it's not the lens for you.

The 17-55mm will retain its resale value in the event you switch to FF.

If I got the original question correct - don't be overawed by the reputation of a lens and feel your camera might be inadequate for it. When I bought a 400 mm for my Rebel I had to digest quite a few smirks initially. Some even suggested change the camera first. But the results simply blew me over. Of course I will change the body but not because I think the lens needs a better body but because I think a better body will produce even better photographs.
If you are going to use it mostly indoors then why are you bothered about the weight of the lens?

It's definitely a good match but realize that you're losing the wide end but you do gain on the tele end, otherwise it's fine for a crop camera. I'd personally get a 17-55 or equivalent instead but that's just me.