24-70 2.8 or 24-105?

I'd prob. go with the 24-70...actually, personally, that's what I'd absolutely do in that case.

yeah..me too.

the 24-70 would be too short for me on FF so i would go with the 24-105, which would be the perfect range for weddings on a FF body.

ed rader

That's funny Ed, I would have expected exactly the opposite from both yours and my opinions...based on our previous posts I mean. Just goes to show that we're all a diverse lot at this forum and WE'RE NOT PREDICTABLE . I like the 24-105 (it really is my fav) but the speed of the 24-70 in a church (especially since most preachers/pastors/prie​sts don't let you use flash during the ceremony) just seems necc. to me.

Bokeh is not the reason to use a 24-105. It really isn't the best choice for creamy, blurry backgrounds. It captures with depth and sharpness.
It is a very easy lens to use. Great value because of the range, sharpness, and IS.

For those creamy backgrounds a fast prime gets you way more. For zooms and creamy I'd go with the 70-200 2.8L IS.

Lou

I own a 20D and also have the 70-200 2.8 IS. I have found that even at the 70mm end on my 20D, this was too long an aperture to be used for 'walk around'. Hence the reason I just purchased the 24-70 and am eagerly awaiting it's arival. I suppose it depends on what camera you have and what you want to shoot. 24-70 'walk around, portraits etc', 70-200 'extra reach, sports and everything else'.

I have the 24mm-105mm and it has never really failed me at shooting anything. It's quite sharp and not very heavy which means being able to hold it while just walking aorund. However, being in low light situations really makes it hard. Shooting people in low light is hard because they are always moving. Therefore, I'm trading my 24mm-105mm for the 24mm-70mm... I'll also be getting the 70mm-20mm f/2.8 IS L.

At first I didnt believe it, but I do now:

Faster is better.

Well, there're a lot of 24-70's for sale here at the forum, at the moment.

Peregrin wrote:
That's funny Ed, I would have expected exactly the opposite from both yours and my opinions...based on our previous posts I mean. Just goes to show that we're all a diverse lot at this forum and WE'RE NOT PREDICTABLE . I like the 24-105 (it really is my fav) but the speed of the 24-70 in a church (especially since most preachers/pastors/prie​sts don't let you use flash during the ceremony) just seems necc. to me.

the OP said USING FLASH. and i based my recommendation on the reach of the 24-105 combined with flash.

in fact i'll bet the 24-105 is the choice of many wedding shooters.

on FF the 24-70 isn't much different than my 17-40 on my 20d, and that isn't long enough for portraits except in a pinch, imo.

ed rader

It would seem to me that 70mm isn't too far off when you're talking about an 85 being a portrait lens. I'd think the 24-70 would do just fine. take a step forward, ya know?

really sorry if I offended...I was just making an observation...

Lou -- i agree with you. the 24-105L is an excellent walkaround but it's not the best choice for DOF work.

if you need more subject isolation and improved bokeh and don't want to change lenses the 24-70L is a better choice.

ed rader

Actually, I was pleasantly surprised by the bokeh. I didn't expect it to match th 28-70L, but it's certainly not bad. It's not beautiful bokeh like I get with the 85 f1.2L, but it's very decent and much better than I got with the 28-105 consumer lens it replaced.

Mark

Yeah, but i'drather do it locally without the hassle of shipping and things like that. I already have one willing to do the trade, but she had to confirm with someone else. Thanks though.

I've seen very few things with bokeh like the 85 f1.2L...the photos with that are amazing.