Another 24-70mm vs. 24-105mm Thread....

I've read a handful of posts, but thought I'd be a bit more specific...

I'm 17.
I don't have loads of cash.
I love photography.

So..... I bought a T2i this summer and am looking to finally replace the 18-55mm that came with the kit with one of these:
24-70mm f/2.8L
24-105mm f/4L IS

Also in my camera bag are:
70-200mm f/4
50mm... the $100 one

1) I am leaning towards the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens so far, but I'm wondering how noticeable the lack of IS will be, especially at 70mm.

2) I've also read about similar lenses by Sigma and Tamron. Should I consider these and will I notice an inferior quality in either of these lenses?

3) I've read rumors about a possible 24-70mm replacement (w/IS?). Should I wait it out or replace my 18-55mm ASAP?

If I get the 24-70mm, I plan on keeping it for a very long time. That's why I'm considering it right now, I'd like to get the best of the best. If the Sigma or Tamron show lesser results, I really don't want to consider them.

Thanks for all your help!

Zach

If you need a faster lens with (from my limited sample size experience) better IQ, get the 24-70.

If you need one lens that does it all, get the 24-105. You sacrifice IQ and speed.

I vote you get NEITHER and get a Tamron 17-50. Save your money man, college is expensive.

Unless you're planning on going full frame like, in the next few months, get the 15-85mm instead.

I agree with everyone else...dont get a FF general lens for your T2i. Crop ones are much better.

I do plan on upgrading to FF at some point... not the next few months but hopefully by the end of next year.

Thanks for all the help so far!

Then get the Tamron 28-75, good IQ, 2.8, save a chunk of change.

@OP
Why the 17-55 is not in the list? I think it is the fast replacement for the 15-85 if you need fast f stops.
EDIT: Sorry, just seen you are planning for a FF.

LamontSanders wrote in post #11361606
If you need one lens that does it all, get the 24-105. You sacrifice IQ and speed.

Are you sure 24-105 is a lower IQ than 24-70? I thought they should be the same (for example at 70mm wide)

Alot of people are probably going to disgaree with this, but the 17-40 might be a cheaper option if a transition to FF is probable.

bishoy wrote in post #11361720
@OP
Why the 17-55 is not in the list? I think it is the fast replacement for the 15-85 if you need fast f stops.
EDIT: Sorry, just seen you are planning for a FF.


Are you sure 24-105 is a lower IQ than 24-70? I thought they should be the same (for example at 70mm wide)

Ive always heard the 24-105 has better iq and less distortion and less CA.

slapshot36227 wrote in post #11361676
I do plan on upgrading to FF at some point... not the next few months but hopefully by the end of next year.

Thanks for all the help so far!

Going a year using a lens thats made for a full frame could possibly be a looooong year. If you dont use wide angle at all i guess that up to you. But a 17-55 IS would do you MUCH better then both of them lenses. it has 2.8 AND IS...its win win. Dont buy lenses for the future...buy them for what you have now. If you buy the lens used you most likely wont loose any money at all. Ive sold plenty of lenses and sometimes i come out on top due to used prices rising.

slapshot36227 wrote in post #11361558
I'm 17. I don't have loads of cash. I love photography.

So..... I bought a T2i this summer and am looking to finally replace the 18-55mm that came with the kit...

1) I am leaning towards the 24-70mm f/2.8 lens so far, but I'm wondering how noticeable the lack of IS will be, especially at 70mm.

2) I've also read about similar lenses by Sigma and Tamron. Should I consider these and will I notice an inferior quality in either of these lenses?

3) I've read rumors about a possible 24-70mm replacement (w/IS?). Should I wait it out or replace my 18-55mm ASAP?

If I get the 24-70mm, I plan on keeping it for a very long time. That's why I'm considering it right now, I'd like to get the best of the best. If the Sigma or Tamron show lesser results, I really don't want to consider them.

If you don't make loads of money and want to keep a lens for a long time consider the following lenses. My top three lenses for you would be:

(1) Canon EF-s 17-55 f2.8 IS USM. Do yourself a favor and get a sharper lens like this one as oppose to heavy brick of a 24-70L. Trust me, if i had my way, i'd rather go for the EF-s 17-55 f2.8 IS USM. It's got a more effective Focal length for crop cameras, has IS, and is of a lighter build. WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?

(2) Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 NON-VC. The VC version is not as sharp as the non-vc version. I personally hate this lens because it's loud but you really do get sharp results from it.

(3) Sigma 30mm f1.4 - I am a prime addict and I'm not going to lie about the fact that I HATE zooms. I own one and it never goes near my bag. The Sigma 30mm f1.4 delivers sharp results at an affordable price. Primes will help you learn how to compose your shots by setting focal length limitations for you. It'll also help you attain shots that you can't with an f2.8 zoom. It'll help with those indoor shots, provide sharp results, and attain minimal noise to iso ratios because of the fast f1.4 aperture.

As an alternative to the Sigma 30mm f1.4, I'd have to pick the tamron 28-75mm f2.8. This is a fantastic lens but the focal length best suits FF cameras like the 1Ds and the 5D lines. It may not be as sharp as the 24-70L at the long focal lengths, but it's doable for a cheaper alternative. It's motor is quieter than the Tamron 17-50 Non-VC which I do find odd. Oh well. Hope this helps!

slapshot36227 wrote in post #11361676
I do plan on upgrading to FF at some point... not the next few months but hopefully by the end of next year.

Thanks for all the help so far!

A lot of people "PLAN" to transition to FF at some point but most can't muster the cash to do the change. Not only are you trading off money to change bodies but you will also trade off cash and time to sell off your old EF-S lenses to move them to their EF lens equivalents.

However, a lot of people do trade off quality glass that you just can't get with FF cameras - like the Sigma 30mm f1.4, Tokina 11-16mm f2.8, and the Canon 17-55 f2.8 IS.

At the time that you intend to own your crop camera, use crop lenses. You are really missing out on some great (AND CHEAPER) glass! When you upgrade to a FF camera, then make your transition to sell off your old lenses and rebuild your line.

What's the problem with using one of the FF general lenses without a FF camera? Do you see a different image through the viewfinder than what is recorded? I had read about this but wasn't completely sure about the effects.

If that is the case, however, I guess the 17-55 would be better for me. It would be nice to have the 55-70 range though. I have had a few instances where I needed a little extra zoom.

Oh, and what designates a lens as being FF specific? Is it just on the spec sheet for each lens? Thanks guys, I'm already learning a lot. EDIT: nevermind... EF-S vs. EF

With your kit, EF-s 17-55 f/2.8 IS hands down.

Staszek wrote in post #11361795
With your kit, EF-s 17-55 f/2.8 IS hands down.

Agreed.

I "planned" to transition to FF a little over a year ago, but never quite made the leap. I bought all my lenses with that in mind, but never did. Nevertheless, I did pick up an old Canon 35mm EOS body, so all of my "FF" lenses have gotten good full 35mm use.

I found that the 17-40 was a good choice for a crop body. If you have the money by all means go with the 17-55, it's the best of both words for a "crop" camera.

Hi, I'm 17 and turning 18 next month.

I'm blessed to be able to have parents and jobs that can afford me the gear in my sig list over three years.

Like you, I started off with a rebel body, and "planned to move to FF". That didn't come for 2.5 years though (1.3 crop came in exactly 2 years, followed by FF later on), and I definitely wished I had gotten the 17-55 then instead of the 17-40L.

Since you're on a crop, I highly recommend the 17-55mm like the others have said. I definitely know how difficult it is to muster the cash for higher end lenses, and not getting a lens that is badged as "L" for the same price might be getting to you. But trust me, the 17-55 is easily the best standard zoom lens out there for crop, and is easily sold without much loss in the second hand market.

And talking about second hand markets, why not take a look there?

All the best,
Another 17yo shooter (: