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 30 Mar 2012 (Friday) 19:16
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Car Shoots: Keep 17/40 & 50 1.4, or Get 24-70?

 
Sunthing ­ Productions
Member
71 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 30, 2012 19:16 |  #1

Hey all, a little background on my shooting habits:

I'm a pro detailer and I've had a 17-40/5D2 for about a year now to take with me on shoots of my projects, which you can see in the link below. I also own a 50 1.4 that I barely use to take shots because of not wanting to lug equipment around (I have to drag around a lot for work as it is). I'm not completely thrilled with the 17-40 either:

http://www.eclipsisna.​com/portfolio.php (external link)

I've been thinking of getting a 24-70L to replace both the 17-40 and 50 1.4. Instead of having to bring 2 lenses around, I'd have the utility of the 1 zoom. Would this be a wise choice? Would the 24-70 give me better results on a full frame than the 17-40?

If you look at my work, you'll see a mix of close-ups to show defects in the paints, and then zoomed out shots for the final product. Would the 24-70 suit this style well?


Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Saint728
Goldmember
Avatar
2,892 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Honolulu Hawaii
     
Mar 30, 2012 19:37 |  #2

Maybe get a 100mm f/2.8L IS macro for the close up shots? BTW, nice detailing work you do. I wish we had someone like you over here. My 2012 BMW X5 can use some detailing and polishing.

Take Care,
Cheers, Patrick


Canon EOS 1Ds Mark III | 17-40mm f/4.0L | 70-200mm f/2.8L USM | 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro | 300mm f/4.0L IS
Click Here To See My Gear
Click here to see my Flickr (external link)
http://www.runryder.co​m/helicopter/gallery/9​019/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sunthing ­ Productions
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
71 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 30, 2012 20:23 |  #3

Thanks for the compliment Patrick. I have a 70-200 f4 IS that is for the macro shots. The 24-70 or what have you will be for the "glamor" shots of the car once it's finished.


Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tony_Stark
Shellhead
Avatar
4,287 posts
Likes: 345
Joined May 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Mar 30, 2012 21:32 |  #4

I'd say if you don't use the UWA of 17mm then go for the 24-70L as it would be a very flexible solution, although it will be a heavy one.

Also, I love that Monte Carlo Blue M3 you worked on. Saw it on the Bimmer forums and just a gorgeous color! I hope to work with a car like that one day!


Nikon D810 | 24-70/2.8G | 58/1.4G
EOS M | 22 f/2 STM

Website (external link) | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
alann
Goldmember
2,609 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2007
Location: South Carolina
     
Mar 30, 2012 22:46 |  #5

There are shows in my area on Saturday nights. I have always used my 24-105 but, I can't wait to try my 16-35 (will be here Monday).


My FLickrPage (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sunthing ­ Productions
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
71 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 31, 2012 00:06 |  #6

Tony_Stark wrote in post #14183909 (external link)
I'd say if you don't use the UWA of 17mm then go for the 24-70L as it would be a very flexible solution, although it will be a heavy one.

Also, I love that Monte Carlo Blue M3 you worked on. Saw it on the Bimmer forums and just a gorgeous color! I hope to work with a car like that one day!

That Monte Carlo M3 actually happens to be my car. :) Thanks for the kind words Tony, it's an incredible color in person.

The UWA seems like a bit much on the full frame. The flexibility of the 24-70 is the main reason I'd make the switch. I need different focal lengths for my work and the prime just doesn't see much use. How big is the difference between the 24-70 at 50 and the prime?


Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Atlas ­ & ­ Elm ­ Studios
Senior Member
Avatar
332 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Mar 31, 2012 00:52 |  #7

24-70 or 24-105

:D


Flickr (external link)
Fans (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
2Live4
Senior Member
Avatar
671 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Mar 2012
Location: Chicago, IL
     
Mar 31, 2012 00:59 |  #8
bannedPermanent ban

I'd go with 24-70, even though it's a bit heavy. I had the 17-40 before and f/4 wasn't cutting it.


~Khánh - an amateur bOkeh-OLic
5D III & Some L's
Feedback | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sunthing ­ Productions
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
71 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 31, 2012 12:19 |  #9

There are some used 24-70s on the forum, I'll probably go for one of those. Anyone have any reasons why I might miss the 17-40 or 50?


Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rick_reno
Cream of the Crop
44,642 posts
Likes: 132
Joined Dec 2010
     
Mar 31, 2012 14:27 |  #10

if those are your choices, i'd get the 24-70. i like my 100mm 2.8 for cars, i can get in close enough to eliminate the people.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NWPhil
Senior Member
440 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 84
Joined Apr 2010
Location: Oregon
     
Mar 31, 2012 14:38 as a reply to  @ rick_reno's post |  #11

Man, you really are a pro - not just a detailer, but you restore the car back to his due beauty.
IMHO, you are getting ok shots, but you need to control the shine/reflection a little better - comes in mind a CPL, and your backgrounds/surroundin​gs. All that glare, and the cleanup tools in the finalized car shots, do not help much in the shot 'glamour'


NWPhil
Editing Image OK
GEAR

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Atlas ­ & ­ Elm ­ Studios
Senior Member
Avatar
332 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Mar 31, 2012 21:09 |  #12

not to really show off the car, you wont need the 17-40. go with the 24-70 and you will be fine. for stills i use my 75-300 and for rolling shots i use my 28-70


Flickr (external link)
Fans (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sunthing ­ Productions
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
71 posts
Joined Mar 2012
     
Mar 31, 2012 21:42 |  #13

NWPhil wrote in post #14187013 (external link)
Man, you really are a pro - not just a detailer, but you restore the car back to his due beauty.
IMHO, you are getting ok shots, but you need to control the shine/reflection a little better - comes in mind a CPL, and your backgrounds/surroundin​gs. All that glare, and the cleanup tools in the finalized car shots, do not help much in the shot 'glamour'

That's very nice of you Phil. I take a lot of pride in the work I do. I agree with your critique as well, which is why I've spent a lot of time lately looking into how I can improve my photos.

I know this is the eternal question of the forums, but would a 24-70 or 105 be better for my intended purpose?


Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gtg844f
Member
119 posts
Joined Jun 2011
     
Mar 31, 2012 22:02 |  #14

Nice detailing!!!
I wonder how much it would cost to do something similar on my car haha.
After seeing your website, I realize how dirty my car is!!!!


learning hard!
Feedback
https://photography-on-the.net …=14172392&postc​ount=33323
https://photography-on-the.net …=13036714&postc​ount=29059

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Atlas ­ & ­ Elm ­ Studios
Senior Member
Avatar
332 posts
Joined Oct 2011
     
Mar 31, 2012 22:20 |  #15

id go with 105


Flickr (external link)
Fans (external link)

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

2,469 views & 0 likes for this thread
Car Shoots: Keep 17/40 & 50 1.4, or Get 24-70?
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 Teddy69
1279 guests, 322 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.