cant decide what lens would be best.

Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by csgrafix, May 21, 2010.

  1. csgrafix

    csgrafix TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New York
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I currently have a a 28-135mm kit lens that came with my 7D.
    Looking into expanding with better L series glass and was thinking...
    Get 24-70 f/2.8 then 70-200 f/2.8, ...eventualy macro and prime.

    Searching the other day I found that I may be able to get 24-105 f/4 used at a good price local. Seams to me that it would be better as a general use lens cause of the zoom range but not as good as the faster f/2.8 glass. I haven't compared the usage difference with either lens and was hoping to get some input in experiences others may have.

    What are your thoughts on the 24-105 as opposed to the other f/2.8 set ?

    Any comment would be appreciated.
     
  2. bigtwinky

    bigtwinky No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    4,820
    Likes Received:
    285
    Location:
    Montreal
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    Depends on what you are shooting

    Both lenses are great lenses depending on what you are using them for. Do a lot of low light shooting, concerts, events,...then the 24-70 is a great choice for the 1 stop on aperture. The 70-200 is also to be considered in here as well, for the 2.8 and for the longer reach. Great lens for amateur level sports and events and weddings where you aren't always as up close.

    Are you more of a walkaround the city and take images of landscapes? Then the 24-105 would be your best bet as the f/4 should be more than enough for regular day shooting, specially having the 7D and its decent high ISO.
     
  3. pbelarge

    pbelarge TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    Messages:
    2,680
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New York
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    The 24-70 does not have IS, the 24-105 does.

    The 24-70 has f2.8, 24-105 has f/4.


    I have heard great things about both lenses, of course, the 105 has greater range.

    I have the T1i and recently purchased the 24-70. I really like the lens, even without the IS. I purchased the lens without the IS, thinking I would have difficulty without the IS.
    I am a good leaner when I do not have my tripod. ;)
     
  4. bigtwinky

    bigtwinky No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    4,820
    Likes Received:
    285
    Location:
    Montreal
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    pbelarge, did you consider the Tamron 28-75 over the Canon 24-70? Just curious to hear your thoughts...
     
  5. bentcountershaft

    bentcountershaft Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Location:
    Southern Indiana, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I have the 24-70L as well and it's a great lens. If you need it for low light stuff it's a must have unless you go with flash. The 24-105 is an awesome lens as well and I envy the extra length available. From what I've read, optically speaking I think the 24-105 may have a slight edge in image quality. One thing you should consider though, even though it's wider than your 28-135, 24 is all that wide on a crop body, especially for landscapes. I'm probably going to pick up a 17-40 just for that reason. You may want to consider one of the 16/17-50/55 EFS mount lenses available if that's a concern.

    bigtwinky, I picked the Canon over the Tamron mostly because it's a Canon. I wouldn't go so far as to say I'm a Canon snob or anything, but it's probably not too far from the mark. The 24-70 is now and probably will always be my most used lens, so if ever there is a time to splurge I felt this was it.
     
  6. santacruz

    santacruz TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    0
    as far as the budget concern, the best forever L lens to extend your currently have is 70-200 f/4L. I used to own it before move to Nikon. It is the best choice in my opinion.

    -Santacruz
     
  7. csgrafix

    csgrafix TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New York
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Thanks for your comments, for me its not an easy decision to make since Ive gotten used to the range of the kit lens (28-135), the change point of having the 24-70 and 70-200 would take a little getting used to (depending on situation).
    As far as low light, its good to know that bumping the ISO up may help with the f/4 lens. Not sure, I`m guessing that the 24-105 is fixed on f/4.

    Is there much of a difference sensitivity/bokeh between f/2.8 and f/4 ?
     
  8. bentcountershaft

    bentcountershaft Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2009
    Messages:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    1,026
    Location:
    Southern Indiana, USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    The 7D is certainly capable of boosting the ISO with good results but to avoid noise you really have to nail the exposure. There's less wiggle room for being off it seems.

    The difference in depth of field between f/2.8 and f/4 will vary on your distance to the subject. Here's a close up example, sorry for the filthy guitar:

    f/4:

    [​IMG]

    f/2.8:

    [​IMG]
     

Share This Page