28-70 or 24-105

I have a 7d that came with a 24-105. I have a 28-70 2.8, 70-200 v1 is and a nifty 50. After reading a bunch of posts I'm going to get an 85 1.8 for portraits and indoor sports. I want to get rid of either the 24-105 or the 28-70.

I like the weight and range of the 24-105 for traveling or capturing family and I like the 28-70 for the 2.8 for more focused (no pun intended) shooting.

My thought is the the 50 and 85 will get me the wide open apps so the 28-70 is redundant. But it's an "L" and don't know if I'm hung up on that.

Any thoughts?

I too have a 24-105mm, but it's always in the pelican. I always have the 28, 50 and 85mm in my shoulder pack but now-a-days, the 85 stays at home and I bring the flash instead.

How sharp is your 28-70mm at 2.8? Maybe sell that lens? I only keep the 24-105mm in case I want to do video in the future.

Heya,

You have a 70-200 F4L IS? I would use that for portraits instead of the 85mm F1.8. Shoot at 200mm F4, and just get more distance, you'll get great compression/blur, combine with far away backdrop/outside, and they will literally be popping out of the photo. Great lens.

I would roll the 28-70 F2.8 and 70-200 F4. Work horse lenses that cover almost all your focal lengths. Maybe roll a prime for anything more specific if you truly need wider aperture than this.

Also, for indoor sports, going from F4 to F1.8, well, you will notice right away that at F1.8 you probably won't get a ton of shots. It's going to be a bit of a stretch to reach in with it, even on a crop. The F1.8 gobbles light, but also nets you a shallow depth of field. The farther away you are from the subject, the more will fit into that field, but you will still get some out of focus areas. If you want to shoot sports indoors, I think you'll get more from utilizing higher ISO. You will find the indoor sport guys throwing ISO 12,800+ no problem with their long lenses. I would just use your 70-200 F4L IS for this too, with ISO 6400 or higher, depending on how fast you want your shutter speed to be to freeze them in the light.

Very best,

Very best,

My 24-105 is not a travel lens, I don't need the money so it is part of my kit. My 35L and 100L are in my daily bag. I also have the 70-200 2.8 mk1 I used for sports indoor/outdoor.

To your question do you need 2.8? If not you know what to do. F4 works fine in many situations.

Dump the 24-105 f4... your 24-70 f2.8 combined with your 70-200 will more than make up for the loss IMHO. Your new 85mm will fill a little of the gap you may feel you are missing.

Thanks gang. I ended up selling the 24-105. Keeping the 2.8 28-70 and am getting the 85mm 1.8. I think with the 70-200 2.8 I'm covered. Will post some pics when I get the 85mm

Well done.

I went the other way; kept the 24-105 and sold the 28-70 f/2.8L. No regrets.

Tapeman wrote in post #16571721
I went the other way; kept the 24-105 and sold the 28-70 f/2.8L. No regrets.

Thats interesting. I had sold my 28-70 and bought the 24-105 and hated my decision.

I loved my 28-70 and its my one regret about selling a lens.

Don't get me wrong, I thought the 28-70L was a terrific lens, sharper than the 24-70 that replaced it and my 24-105.

I found myself using the 24-105 because of the large range of focal length.
BTW the only lens I regret selling was my 300 f/2.8L IS, but I can't afford all of the lenses I'd like to own.

Tape -I would love a 300 2.8...but for now I'll "settle" for m 70-200 2.8 IS with and 1.4 tc.

So I just got the 85mm 1.8 WOW!!! I was expecting something similar to the nifty fifty. I cant believe the IQ is so much better. No one in the house would pose for me except the dog. So here's Jack. ISO 1600 / F2.2 for 1/60th. Just natural light. Its going to take some getting used to - especially the thin DOF. Thanks for the help gang.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/tommnyphoto/11​793694426/