24-70 dilemmas

reneecook3 · Nov 4, 2015

Hi,

I am researching lenses and have so many questions I decided to just post in here and see if more knowledgeable people could help me out!

Background: I have a canon t3i that came with kit lens plus a 50/1.8 and 35/2.0.

Mostly, I take pictures of my kids, family activities/ events. My sister and I swap family photo sessions too. I could see myself getting even more into photography someday, possibly learning to do natural light outdoor portrait sessions, newborn or birth photography.

That being said, I'd like to save up and get another good lens. I've considered just getting the 50/1.4 as an upgrade from my 50/1.8... I've read that it's a huge difference, but I'm not really sure what the huge difference is. Any input there?

Also, I really like my prime lenses, but with kiddos, I've thought it might be easier to have a zoom around for every day stuff... since they move a lot!! For a while, I've had an eye on something like a 24-70/2.8 lens. The newer one from canon is astronomical in cost. Not sure if I could justify that price right now. Also, I noticed they don't have Image Stabilization... what are people's opinions on that? Should I prioritize that? (Tamron has a 24-70/2.8 with VC Image Stablization... I don't even know what that means...) Would that be a comparable lens to the Canon?

I've also seen a Tamron 28-75/2.8, with no IS, for $500 compared to the 24-70/2.8 from canon, also with no IS for $1800.

I see Canon 24-70/2.8 L series for around $800 though, compared to the 24-70/2.8 II for $1800. What is the difference between those two?

It's likely I'll never own the top of the line canon professional camera, but it's also likely I'd upgrade my body slightly one day (like, if it ever just stopped working...) So I would want to make sure any lens I buy would work on a future canon camera I might own too. Are there any restrictions here? I read something about EF-S lenses not working on some cameras but I got confused.

I know that is a lot of questions! Thanks in advance for considering and for any help

Derrel · Nov 4, 2015

Yes, the Canon EF-S line of lenses is pretty much useless on anything except a Canon APS-C body. So...there is that one big issue that Canon designed in: incompatibility with the whole range of camera bodies.

Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 is a noisy focuser, has an auto/manual focusing switch that should be disengaged to do manual focus override or MF, is not always a good focuser in low light, flares easily when shot toward the light, has harsh, hashy, nervous bokeh on many background types...it creates horrible, "jittery" bokeh on backlighted foliage for example, like overhead deciduous trees as one really good example. The Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 on the other hand is a good focuser, focuses well even in low light, and focuses quietly, plus it has nice bokeh, and can be shot toward the light. One is an econ-50, the other is a professional grade lens. I owned both for several years and shot them on two different Canon bodies. I disliked the f/1.8 model for its limitations, and really liked the f/1.4 model for its strengths.

The pre-VC Tamron has a reputation for sharpness, the newer VC model, not so much; they are different designs.

The 24-70 Mark II is $1800 because it is the best 24-70 on the market. The earlier lens is $800 because it is older. Canon's newer, Mark II versions of it's L-series zooms really are kick-ass lenses. They're just what the professionals need and want for today's higher-MP cameras, and they're built pretty solidly.

Image Stabiliser has been added to several Canon zooms. Should you assign that high priority? I dunno...it is a handy feature sometimes. The answer is a long one, potentially. But if you need to ask, I would say no, probably not.

Punisher911 · Nov 4, 2015

I personally have the 24-105 f/4 L lens for daily activities and such.. Got it 10/10 condition used for 650. So that would be my suggestion for a daily/walk around lens. Of course, get the f/2.8 version if it's in your budget.

From what research I've done, the 50mm f/1.4 isn't worth the price difference over the f/1.8. At least in the new 50mm STM model. I've read a few reviews for the 70-200mm f/2.8 L lenses that compare older to the newer mkii that state there was quite an improvement in pic quality with the newer mkii version. (not that the older version is bad) The 70-200 f/2.8 mkii is listed as the most popular "pro" portrait lens, so that speaks to it's image quality. I suspect that would hold just as true for the 24-70 family. For a day to day general lens, I'm sure the non-mkii varieties will be more than enough in the quality department for you. Not too mention, much lighter to carry. The mkii 70-200 is a TANK! Can't speak for the 24-70 mkii weight, but I'd bet it's much heavier than the older one.

Edit: to above post, the older 50mm f/1.8 ii is a noisy focuser, the new STM variety is not.

DB_Cro · Nov 4, 2015

The 24-70 is probably the best general/regular zoom range lens Canon makes, like the 70-200 is in the tele
end of things hence the price. It's virtually flawless. However, I don't think that range is something I'd use
on a crop body camera unless you're planing on going to a full frame later, which you say you don't intend to do.

24-70 would be a 38-112 on your (and my) camera and while the long end is useful, it's virtually unusable inside
in smaller rooms because it's not wide enough. What I use is a Tamron 17-50 and while it's not as good as the
Canon 17-55 version (look that up) it's still great and gives you a range of 27-80, which is obviously aimed at the
range you get with the 24-70 on a full frame camera.

I can't afford any of that FF goodness but it would actually make my life easier since I could live with only the
24-70 and 70-200 for 99% of the shots, and I can't seem to find such nice coverage on the crop bodies without
using at least 3 lenses.

Also, I don't think the 50 F/1.4 is THAT much better unless you shoot both at F/1.8.

People seem to like the Tamron 24-70 too, but I've never even touched it.

tl;dr - I'd rather buy the 17-55 F/2.8 IS Canon for the crop bodies.

p.s. Here's a few shots with my T2i using the 24-70 2.8 Canon (first two) and 50 F/1.4 (the other two).
Click the images to get full EXIF info on Flickr.

(24-70)

Josipa #4 [Explored #15] by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr

Josipa #2 by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr

(50 1.4)

Aletta (2) by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr

Aletta (1) by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr

ronlane · Nov 4, 2015

The decision about the 24-70 is something that I have been looking at myself.

At this point, I am considering the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L because it is a quality lens and there are some to be found used, as people upgrade to the new mark II. I think other than being a newer technology, the 24-70 L the barrel extends, where as, the mark II does not..

reneecook3 · Nov 4, 2015

Wow! This is all helpful so far.

Okay, so it sounds like knowing the difference between a full frame camera and a crop body camera would make my search a little easier... can anyone explain it? (in layman's terms...)

I infer from the context of some of these replies that my t3i is not a full frame camera

Is that worth an upgrade instead of new lens? Are the full frame cameras from canon only the super high end top of the line Mark ones or all the upgrades above the Rebel T series a full frame? And am I also right then that I can't get any EF lenses for my Rebel t3i?

DB_Pro, am I right in understanding that the 17-55 ish range would function like a 24-70 on my t3i?

I think I also understand that for a t3i, I'd have to get the 24-70/2.8 L NOT The new II version... is that right? If correct, do people think the 24-70/2.8 L is a good one, or would the 17-55 work?

Punisher911 · Nov 4, 2015

You have the APS-C crop sensor in your T3i. Yes, you can use both EF (full frame) and EF-S (crop sensor) lenses. Quality glass is a worthy upgrade for any modern DSLR. You can get the mkii variety of the lens if you can afford/want it. It will work just fine.

However, be aware that your camera "crops" into the photo. So using a 50mm EF lens on your camera will give you a field of view comparable to a 80mm lens because of the crop factor of your sensor.

DB_Cro · Nov 4, 2015

reneecook3 said:
DB_Pro, am I right in understanding that the 17-55 ish range would function like a 24-70 on my t3i?

Yeah. Sort of. 27-88 like I mentioned, not as wide as 24-70 on FF, so, yeah, your T3i is not full frame.

Maybe you'd like a FF body, who knows, 6D is where the fun starts on the Canon side and the main advantage is
being able to raise the ISO a lot more, read: shoot in low light with less noise & grain in your images. Also, FF
bodies blow out the background more.

Negative thing is that for the price of 6D which is the lowest end FF body (slow focusing, only 1 cross type focus point,
under 4 frames a second) you can get the top of the line crop body - the 7D mkII which is an animal.

You can use both crop-only and FF lenses on a crop sensor body, but not the other way around, on a FF body you NEED
expensive FF lenses (look at lens names, EF-S is crop only).

Good thing about forking out all this money is.. you might never need to upgrade.. like.. EVER.. if you get a 6D and lenses
that 99% of people would put on it.. the 24-70 and 70-200.

On your crop body, the 17-55 is the best lens there is in that range, it's virtually flawless like the 24-70 for FF and it's like
half the money and still has stabilization. Waste of money if you ever upgrade to FF since you can't use it on a FF tho.

Anyways, the aps-c sensor bodies like yours have smaller sensors then the FF bodies so let's say the sensor sees only a part
of the full image of a FF sensor (hence the commonly used "crop body" term), the result is like cropping the mid portion of
the image.

To get the FF (35mm) equivalent filed of view you need to multiply the numbers by 1.6x on the Canon side, and 1.5x on the Nikon
side. So.. 17x1.6-55x1.6 = 28x88mm. If you were to use a 24-70 on a FF body it would be exactly 24-70mm, so, wider and shorter.

reneecook3 · Nov 4, 2015

Punisher911 said:
You have the APS-C crop sensor in your T3i. Yes, you can use both EF (full frame) and EF-S (crop sensor) lenses. Quality glass is a worthy upgrade for any modern DSLR. You can get the mkii variety of the lens if you can afford/want it. It will work just fine.

However, be aware that your camera "crops" into the photo. So using a 50mm EF lens on your camera will give you a field of view comparable to a 80mm lens because of the crop factor of your sensor.

a previous commenter (Derrel) said "Yes, the Canon EF-S line of lenses is pretty much useless on anything except a Canon APS-C body." I think I misunderstood him. So I do have the APS-C sensor in mine. Where is the incompatibility? Or is it just that if I were to ever get a full frame camera, the lenses would function differently?

jaomul · Nov 4, 2015

If you are looking for an f2.8 zoom you could buy the 17-55 Canon as suggested, there is also the tamrons as suggested, then there is also a sigma 17-50mm f2.8 is that is highly recommended.

The thing with a 24-70 on your camera is 24 isn't that wide if you want to use it as a day to day lens.

Personally, if I was looking at the 24-70 I'd try to get a 17-50 and a 50-150 f2.8 from sigma, both with optical stabilization. For less money than a 24-70 you'd have 17-150 covered with a fast pair of zooms.

The problem If that route suited is the 59-150 os is only available second hand now as it's discontinued

reneecook3 · Nov 4, 2015

jaomul - thanks! that's a good rec. i'm on the fence about sigma, not because i care very much about brand, but i read that the way they design them means you risk it not being compatible with a newer canon camera if i ever upgrade... any thoughts about that?

reneecook3 · Nov 4, 2015

DB - thanks! that's super helpful!!! didn't realize some of the D lettered camera models were still crop body. I'm sure I would never need a camera nicer than the 7D! like you said, it's a beast. Probably quite good, even for an amateur photographer who does some portrait sessions here and there, right?

DB_Cro · Nov 4, 2015

jaomul said:
If you are looking for an f2.8 zoom you could buy the 17-55 Canon as suggested, there is also the tamrons as suggested, then there is also a sigma 17-50mm f2.8 is that is highly recommended.

I own the stabilized Tamron 17-50, and I'd recommend the Sigma over it, but the Canon version is the last lens in that range that anyone would need to buy so
it's well worth the extra money.

DB_Cro · Nov 4, 2015

reneecook3 said:
jaomul - thanks! that's a good rec. i'm on the fence about sigma, not because i care very much about brand, but i read that the way they design them means you risk it not being compatible with a newer canon camera if i ever upgrade... any thoughts about that?

Same thing applies for Tamron.

jaomul · Nov 4, 2015

reneecook3 said:
jaomul - thanks! that's a good rec. i'm on the fence about sigma, not because i care very much about brand, but i read that the way they design them means you risk it not being compatible with a newer canon camera if i ever upgrade... any thoughts about that?

This unfortunately is true. I do believe sigma are pretty good at updates if required but have never done that. Their newer lenses can be updated with a dock that can be bought, no doubt original Canon lenses are the safest bet