Can you justify buying the 24-70 even if you are an amateur?

I've been thinking about this lately and I wanted to see what you guys think. I am an amateur and I have only been into photography for less than a year but I've been seriously considering buying an L series lens like the 24-70. The question I have is, is it worth it to spend the money on this lens even if you don't see yourself doing photography for a living but only as a hobby? After all, the lens a professional lens so I was wondering if it is overkill to buy one.

If you buy the best gear you have nothing to blame when you get bad shots, how I see it anyway

can you justify it, of course. Should you . . . thats another story.

the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is a mighty good competitor optically and at 1/3 the cost is more "justifiable" and would leave more $$$ for other things.

you can buy whatever you can afford.. there are a lot of amateurs on here that have some very expensive lenses and bodies.. will it be worth it?.. that depends on you..

sari

I'm an amateur and want to keep it that way. Photography is my hobby and what harm does it do if I get real serious about getting nice lenses? I have the 24-70L and am very happy with it.

Oh yeah, and as Pete says, it's such a relief to know that all my cr@ppy pics are my fault

I bought a Sigma 24-70, and I'm and amateur

No reason to rule out the siggy.

For the answer lookup Dante King and MDJAK and look at their equipt list in their signature. You'll find your answer. And there more Amateurs out there that I haven't listed.

Definition:
Professional is someone who does it and make 50% or more of their personal income from it.
Amateur is someone who does it purely for the enjoyment of it.

Then there are the equipment hourders that buy it just to say they have it.

Of course you should get the 24-70L if you want one of the best lenses around! Your photographic IQ will soar no matter how bad your pictures are. You will have great looking lovely or not-so-lovely pictures. But beware it is a really heavy sucker! And you will have to like hauling it aroud all day...so try it out before you buy to see if you can manage this much beloved 'tank' of a lens. And remember f2.8 rules. Have fun!

I don't even think I'm an photographer, let alone an amateur. I stopped trying to justify things like this, if you want it, can afford it, get it.
Now when I get a good shot, In addition to the WOW, I feel a personal satisfaction that it's damn close to the best I could probably get, given the gear I have.

If it haunts your dreams, get it

Some people spend their money on stylish clothes that are out of fashion in a year.
Some people spend their money on fast cars and never exceed the speed limit.
Some people spend their money on really expensive camera equipment and can't take a decent photo to save their soul. (That would be me.)

It's purely a matter of desire, financial capacity, priorities, and rationalization. Only you can really answer this question for you. We can only answer it for ourselves.

I make a living with my camera and I use the Tamron 28-75. It has yet to fail me. Carl Mydans didn't have an "L"....

I've used this lens for some time now, and I love it. If you're looking for a great lens that takes great picture, go for it. On my 20D this lens hits my focal range sweet spot, but is a touch short on my 5D. The 2.8 aperture will be VERY forgiving in low light situations, where a smaller aperture will not. The one disadvantage is that it's not an IS lens. If you are usually shooting in decent lighting, and a little less bokeh (background blur) is ok for you, check out the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. This is Image Stabilized, and has a little better focal range....and is a tiny bit shorter, I might add. Either way, it never hurts o go "L". They are sharper, produce better saturation and have the highest build quality. I always will go L with f/2.8, but that's me. I'd rather save a little longer and get the best. Good luck with this decision, it can be a very hard one sometimes!

I have the 24-105l and i would do it again.

coreypolis wrote in post #2268424
can you justify it, of course. Should you . . . thats another story.

the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 is a mighty good competitor optically and at 1/3 the cost is more "justifiable" and would leave more $$$ for other things.

I agree. Many account that IQ of these 2 lenses are equal. My Tamron 28-75 is great, and is sharp widen open. It sounds like you want to buy an expensive L lens for the same of buying one. It's not always needed.