View Full Version : EF 24-105 L vs. 24-70mm f2.8L
HoldyourfireAl
10-20-2008, 05:36 PM
Which do you like better & why? I love my 60mm, but I need more versatility!
P1X4R
10-20-2008, 05:51 PM
this is a common comparison between these two zooms. here are the differences to consider as well.
- F/4 vs F/2.8
- IS vs non-IS (f/2.8 is faster than f/4 though)
- longer reach (105 vs 70)
both produce excellent image quality. i have both. are you planning on taking any pics under low light? if so then i would favor the 24-70. you would need to bump up the shutter speed on the 24-105 or use a flash to help compensate. try them both out at a local camera store. the 24-70 is a hefty beast! hope this helps!
HoldyourfireAl
10-20-2008, 11:35 PM
this is a common comparison between these two zooms. here are the differences to consider as well.
- F/4 vs F/2.8
- IS vs non-IS (f/2.8 is faster than f/4 though)
- longer reach (105 vs 70)
both produce excellent image quality. i have both. are you planning on taking any pics under low light? if so then i would favor the 24-70.
Are you saying this because when you step (up?) to f/2.8, the shutter is open wider, thus allowing more light into the camera? If so, I'd have to say that I've noticed that I've been bumping (down?) to between f/8 - f/14 to capture more detail of subjects. For example, if I take a pic of 4 people, standing together, a lens set at f/2.8 is going to go soft on the outer two people. Also, I've lost detail in my statues when I don't use a (lower?) f/stop. Am I making sense? Am I speaking the lingo correctly?
:)
you would need to bump up the shutter speed on the 24-105 or use a flash to help compensate. try them both out at a local camera store. the 24-70 is a hefty beast! hope this helps!
I've just been reviewing pics at the Canon Forums & the 24-105 seems to be taking sharper pics & it has so much more reach!
What do you think?
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 12:00 AM
yup, i usually stop down the lens apertures from f/8 to f/10 if i want greater detail but having the option to shoot faster under dim light is always a plus. i would not use my 24-105 f/4 for shooting indoors handheld.
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 12:27 AM
btw, canon is having a promotion with instant savings on various lenses. 24-70 is in that group!
http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/controller?act=PromotionsAct&promocat=140
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 01:17 AM
yup, i usually stop down the lens apertures from f/8 to f/10 if i want greater detail but having the option to shoot faster under dim light is always a plus. i would not use my 24-105 f/4 for shooting indoors handheld.
Why?
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 01:26 AM
Why?
i try to avoid blurry pics. :D
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 01:36 AM
i try to avoid blurry pics. :D
If it was on a tripod, why would it be blurry?
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 01:53 AM
If it was on a tripod, why would it be blurry?
i was referring to the shots being handheld. if on a tripod then no worries. i took these with the 24-105 on a tripod just now. i really need to take the flash off camera.
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/P1X4R_2008/Bowen/Captain%20America%20Faux%20Bronze/IMG_3577.jpg
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/P1X4R_2008/Bowen/Captain%20America%20Faux%20Bronze/IMG_3578.jpg
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/P1X4R_2008/Bowen/Captain%20America%20Faux%20Bronze/IMG_3579.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 02:32 AM
WOW! The 24-105 looks SHARP! I wonder how it would be on my XSi?
geto10
10-21-2008, 03:25 AM
I had the 24-105, but switches to 24-70 which I love.. Very sharp and fast! :)
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 03:48 AM
I had the 24-105, but switches to 24-70 which I love.. Very sharp and fast! :)
But don't you miss the reach? What was wrong with the 24-105?
I have the 24-105 and its a really great lens. Its become my working lens now as its got a good range and really sharp shots. I haven't done any statue shots with this yet, its too dark when I get home from work!
This was an attempt at doing a HDR shot.
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb292/kujo1987/Other/Outdoors/PortHDRcopy.jpg
This is just a normal shot. Both handheld.
http://i210.photobucket.com/albums/bb292/kujo1987/Other/Outdoors/Portsmall.jpg
geto10
10-21-2008, 02:16 PM
But don't you miss the reach? What was wrong with the 24-105?
Nah, tbh I don't really need 105mm.. way too much.. 70mm is perfect for me. :)
Upitnik
10-21-2008, 03:22 PM
My main problems with zooms are: the picture quality lacks that of primes and the weight of 2.8 zooms is too much. Handhelding 70-200 f/2.8 on a session with kids is ridiculous. And only with f/2.8 and faster lenses will the vertical line-sensitive sensor at the center AF point function to attain high-precision focusing which is in my experience a big deal. But for studio shooting the 24-105 is without a flaw. I repeat MY EXPERIENCE.
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 03:39 PM
beautiful shots guys! the 24-105 is a joy to shoot outdoors.
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/P1X4R_2008/TMP/IMG_4217.jpg
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/hh285/P1X4R_2008/TMP/IMG_4222.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 04:01 PM
Let's keep talking!
:)
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 04:20 PM
My main problems with zooms are: the picture quality lacks that of primes and the weight of 2.8 zooms is too much. Handhelding 70-200 f/2.8 on a session with kids is ridiculous. And only with f/2.8 and faster lenses will the vertical line-sensitive sensor at the center AF point function to attain high-precision focusing which is in my experience a big deal. But for studio shooting the 24-105 is without a flaw. I repeat MY EXPERIENCE.
i favor primes myself. i especially love the 135L. sharp wide open! i rarely shoot wide but this lens excels at f/2!
i just threw a monkey wrench at ya Al! :)
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 05:23 PM
i favor primes myself. i especially love the 135L. sharp wide open! i rarely shoot wide but this lens excels at f/2!
i just threw a monkey wrench at ya Al! :)
My main problem is this...
I have the stock lens, but it isn't the sharpest.
I have the 60mm lens, but when taking pics of people at events or buildings or other objects, it's a pain because I have to move sooo far away!
I love the sharpness of the 60mm, but I need something that's both versatile & sharp. I want to be able to take a pic of my nieces in the backyard & capture a rabbit or bird that is out of reach with the 60mm.
Tyz1on
10-21-2008, 06:37 PM
I would go with what seems to be one of the most versatile and highest quality lens that I have seen recommended on this forum and a few others as well. Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. It's on my shopping list. I hope to have the 17-55 and an L series zoom telephoto as my two carry around lens'. For the L series I was thinking either the 70-200mm f/2.8 L "IS" lens or the EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM. After that I will look for some primes like the 50mm f/1.4 USM to do controlled shots.
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 06:40 PM
I would go with what seems to be one of the most versatile and highest quality lens that I have seen recommended on this forum and a few others as well. Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. It's on my shopping list. I hope to have the 17-55 and an L series zoom telephoto as my two carry around lens'. For the L series I was thinking either the 70-200mm f/2.8 L "IS" lens or the EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM. After that I will look for some primes like the 50mm f/1.4 USM to do controlled shots.
So you think that the sharpness more than makes up for reach?
mongobredboy
10-21-2008, 07:04 PM
@al, sir try to weigh in as to which type of shoots you will use this lens more often or preferred to use it for., and from there decide which one you want, speed or reach
either one you choose these are both "L" lenses which i believe will be enough to satisfy the quality of pics you are looking for.
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 10:11 PM
also, don't get totally caught up in L lenses only. there are other non-Canon brands that are often overlooked because they don't have that red ring. :)
if you like wide then check out the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. a very nice lens to use handheld. fast and sharp!
P1X4R
10-21-2008, 10:15 PM
the 17-55mm f/2.8 is a great lens. it produces great image quality. i had one before i sold it off. now the 70-200mm f/2.8 is another awesome lens but it's not the easiest to carry around. it's a heavyweight but you eventually get used to it. this is one lens you wouldn't want to put around your neck! :laugh:
I would go with what seems to be one of the most versatile and highest quality lens that I have seen recommended on this forum and a few others as well. Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. It's on my shopping list. I hope to have the 17-55 and an L series zoom telephoto as my two carry around lens'. For the L series I was thinking either the 70-200mm f/2.8 L "IS" lens or the EF 100-400mm f/4.5- 5.6L IS USM. After that I will look for some primes like the 50mm f/1.4 USM to do controlled shots.
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 10:38 PM
also, don't get totally caught up in L lenses only. there are other non-Canon brands that are often overlooked because they don't have that red ring. :)
if you like wide then check out the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8. a very nice lens to use handheld. fast and sharp!
When you use the terminology, "wide," what exactly does that mean?
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 10:40 PM
@al, sir try to weigh in as to which type of shoots you will use this lens more often or preferred to use it for., and from there decide which one you want, speed or reach
either one you choose these are both "L" lenses which i believe will be enough to satisfy the quality of pics you are looking for.
Well...I hate having to stand so far away from subjects to get a good shot with my 60mm & there have been so many opportunities to capture something that was just out of reach of a 60mm. I need versatility, reach, & sharpness.
:)
Tyz1on
10-21-2008, 10:50 PM
When you use the terminology, "wide," what exactly does that mean?
Wide is a wide angle lens. With an 11-16mm there is not much of a chance that you would have back away from any shot. But on the flip side you can't reach out and touch anything with that lens either.
Tyz1on
10-21-2008, 11:01 PM
So you think that the sharpness more than makes up for reach?
I am looking to take a variety of the best shots I can and I don't think I can do that with one lens. I feel I need a minimum of two walk around lens. I need a wide to mid lens like the 17-55mm and a telephoto zoom. I also want the lens to produce clearest shots possible and to still be somewhat affordable.
I have a the stock 18-55mm IS that came the Xsi and have not used it at all. I also have a EFS 17-85mm IS lens that I use as my primary. Good mid quality lens and it takes most of the shots I post. Lastly I have a 75-300mm IS for zoom shots. It's a good mid qaulity lens as well and I have taken some pretty good shots with it but it's time for me move up ladder and even though it will cost quite a bit the new lens' will last longer than my Xsi will.
Tyz1on
10-21-2008, 11:14 PM
Well...I hate having to stand so far away from subjects to get a good shot with my 60mm & there have been so many opportunities to capture something that was just out of reach of a 60mm. I need versatility, reach, & sharpness.
:)
I found just what you need Al but there a pluses and minuses. On the plus side it's a high qaulity Canon lens that is versatile in its focal length. You can reach out with it and with L series you will get sharp high quality shots.
On the minus side its 7.2" long at its shortest focal length and it weighs in at 3.7 lbs. Oh and its $ 2,199.95 at B&H.
It's the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS, a handy all-in-one compact zoom lens for versatile and easy subject selection while traveling, etc. This lens offers the highest optical performance in its class, plus the convenience of focusing as close as 2.3 feet over the entire zooming range.
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Dflz30Lyn04/RumnNyrKpvI/AAAAAAAACP0/PrzVyvE_QoE/ef28-300mmf3.5-5.6lisusm.jpg
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 11:33 PM
I found just what you need Al but there a pluses and minuses. On the plus side it's a high qaulity Canon lens that is versatile in its focal length. You can reach out with it and with L series you will get sharp high quality shots.
On the minus side its 7.2" long at its shortest focal length and it weighs in at 3.7 lbs. Oh and its $ 2,199.95 at B&H.
It's the Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS, a handy all-in-one compact zoom lens for versatile and easy subject selection while traveling, etc. This lens offers the highest optical performance in its class, plus the convenience of focusing as close as 2.3 feet over the entire zooming range.
http://lh3.ggpht.com/_Dflz30Lyn04/RumnNyrKpvI/AAAAAAAACP0/PrzVyvE_QoE/ef28-300mmf3.5-5.6lisusm.jpg
Thanks! I'll pick it up tomorrow!
:laugh: :laugh:
HoldyourfireAl
10-21-2008, 11:34 PM
Wide is a wide angle lens. With an 11-16mm there is not much of a chance that you would have back away from any shot. But on the flip side you can't reach out and touch anything with that lens either.
Are the 24-105 and 24-70 considered...wide angle lenses?
mongobredboy
10-21-2008, 11:35 PM
@P1X4R, yes you are right sir, there are other alternatives for an "L".
@Al, good luck on your quest for the next glass sir!
mongobredboy
10-21-2008, 11:38 PM
sir AL, heres a reference
http://www.sweeting.org/mark/lenses/canon.php
HoldyourfireAl
11-06-2008, 07:48 PM
Any pics using an XSi with an EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM lens?
P1X4R
11-08-2008, 11:14 AM
Are the 24-105 and 24-70 considered...wide angle lenses?
on crop (1.6) cameras i would say not really..
vBulletin® v3.8.8, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.