Discussion: How and when do you use your 24-70mm lens?

I use mine on the 5D3 pretty much all the time unless I really, really need razor thin DoF. It autofocuses as fast as any lens I own and its minor deficiencies are easily corrected by Lightroom. I Even shot an available light concert a couple of months ago with it because I needed the zoom more than the extra aperture of my 50 1.8.

I use it on the 7D for a little extra reach compared to my 17-55 in sports shoots. It happens to work beautifully for certain events and venues. It may not be quite as sharp as my 17-55 but I don't use it for pixel peeping.

When I bought my 6D, I knew I had to have a 24-70. I purchased the Mark I version and I was quite pleased with it. It's definitely not the best out there but the IQ I get from it is adequate for my needs. It helps that it's a pretty mean-looking standard zoom to boot. For personal use, it's the one I take practically anywhere and when I work, it gets attention during the wedding reception but rarely during the ceremony and the pre-wedding preparations...I have my 50mm to do that.

I dont use it often, but at an event, and it'll surely be in my bag as well as a 70-200. If I'm hiking or landscaping, it's a core lens.

my day to day lenses include a pair of primes.

This thread is very helpful for me. Just this morning I created a thread wondering if I should sell my Canon 35mm 1.4 for the 24-70 II. From everything I'm reading so far, I might just have to pull the trigger.

Buylongterm wrote in post #17457189
This thread is very helpful for me. Just this morning I created a thread wondering if I should sell my Canon 35mm 1.4 for the 24-70 II. From everything I'm reading so far, I might just have to pull the trigger.

Sell the Canon 35 1.4 and buy the 24-70 II and the Sigma 35 Art!

LV Moose wrote in post #17455642
I've only had my 24-70 (Tamron) since Christmas (my previous "general purpose lens" being my old 28-135), but unless I'm shooting birds or macro, it's on my 5DIII all the time. I think it's great focal range for a walk-around/event/landscape lens on a full frame, and it's very sharp (above f/2.8).

I also have a 35 f/1.4, and it's a beauty, but it's just not as versatile and I don't like being without IS.

Here's one from a couple days ago:

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/rpwR​Ee DW0A0479_1024X by mistermooster, on Flickr

Great shot! That's the perfect DoF for it.

I own the 35 f2 IS. the 35L, imo, is nothing special. doesn't even get sharp until f2.

ed rader wrote in post #17457653
I own the 35 f2 IS. the 35L, imo, is nothing special. doesn't even get sharp until f2.

Not only is it not sharp until f2, the color fringing is horrible until at least f2 (and in some cases it's even visible at f2.8).

The Sigma art, Canon 35 f2 IS and Canon 24-70ii have none of that.

Just recently picked up the Tamron 24-70, replacing my 24-105.

I'm hoping this is going to be "the lens" for me. Sure I use other lenses, but I like to have one that I use for most everything and I think this focal range, with f/2.8 and VC/IS is perfect for me.

When I say it is going to be my main lens, I'm primarily talking about a hiking/backpacking landscape lens that can also be a day to day, do everything else too lens.

Time will tell.

freestylee30 wrote in post #17460538
Just recently picked up the Tamron 24-70, replacing my 24-105.

I'm hoping this is going to be "the lens" for me. Sure I use other lenses, but I like to have one that I use for most everything and I think this focal range, with f/2.8 and VC/IS is perfect for me.

When I say it is going to be my main lens, I'm primarily talking about a hiking/backpacking landscape lens that can also be a day to day, do everything else too lens.

Time will tell.

Please keep us posted on how you like it, because I'm about to get the same lens for my camera for the same purpose (day to day/hiking/ backpacking/kids in action). I'm also hoping it'll be "the" lens for me, too. I still keep looking around to see if there is something that'll be better suited for my needs, but I keep coming back to it.

Hey there MegBear - you can look at my gallery here on this site, or on my zenfolio site. I've already added some pictures taken with it - more to come soon.

UNFORTUNATELY... I read about AF or VC issues with this Tamron lens after I purchased it and so now whenever using it and looking at my shots, I am evaluating it for problems instead of just enjoying it. In the little time I've used it, I would say it is the perfect lens for me. Overall, I've been pretty happy with the results, I just hope I've got a good copy.

I think I've got a good copy but I've got some questions about what people do for QC when they buy a new lens (MFA, testing sharpness, etc. etc.) - I'll probably start a new thread for that though.

Good luck with your decision!

PS - looking at your gear selection, it does look like a good choice. I would also suggest the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which was amazing for me on my 70D! Also might consider looking at the 24-105, if you can live with F/4. It served me well on my 40D and 70D.

freestylee30 wrote in post #17460574
Hey there MegBear - you can look at my gallery here on this site, or on my zenfolio site. I've already added some pictures taken with it - more to come soon.

UNFORTUNATELY... I read about AF or VC issues with this Tamron lens after I purchased it and so now whenever using it and looking at my shots, I am evaluating it for problems instead of just enjoying it. In the little time I've used it, I would say it is the perfect lens for me. Overall, I've been pretty happy with the results, I just hope I've got a good copy.

I think I've got a good copy but I've got some questions about what people do for QC when they buy a new lens (MFA, testing sharpness, etc. etc.) - I'll probably start a new thread for that though.

Good luck with your decision!

PS - looking at your gear selection, it does look like a good choice. I would also suggest the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which was amazing for me on my 70D! Also might consider looking at the 24-105, if you can live with F/4. It served me well on my 40D and 70D.

You have some great shots there! Will check more out later when I don't have kids screaming at me

Which Tamron 17-50 are you referring to? The one with or without VC? I see that there are two versions. I might have to consider that option as well.

RE: 17-50, I had the non-VC version. It was fantastic. I don't know if it was just my copy or what. On my crop body it was about 27-80mm equivalent.

Not sure in general how good the VC version is, I'd look at the sample photo thread to get an idea:

non-VC: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=209580
VC: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=776836