24-70 dilemmas

Discussion in 'Canon Cameras' started by reneecook3, Nov 4, 2015.

  1. reneecook3

    reneecook3 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2015
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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 :)


     
  2. Derrel

    Derrel Mr. Rain Cloud

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    42,393
    Likes Received:
    16,163
    Location:
    USA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. Punisher911

    Punisher911 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Warren, Michigan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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.
     
  4. DB_Cro

    DB_Cro No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2015
    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    73
    Location:
    Croatia
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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)
    [​IMG]Josipa #4 [Explored #15] by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr

    [​IMG]Josipa #2 by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr

    (50 1.4)
    [​IMG]Aletta (2) by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr

    [​IMG]Aletta (1) by Dalibor Bauernfrajnd, on Flickr
     
  5. ronlane

    ronlane What's next? Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2012
    Messages:
    9,147
    Likes Received:
    3,760
    Location:
    Mustang Oklahoma
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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..
     
  6. reneecook3

    reneecook3 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2015
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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?
     
  7. Punisher911

    Punisher911 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2014
    Messages:
    82
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Warren, Michigan
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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.
     
  8. DB_Cro

    DB_Cro No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2015
    Messages:
    430
    Likes Received:
    73
    Location:
    Croatia
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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.
     
  9. reneecook3

    reneecook3 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2015
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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?
     
  10. jaomul

    jaomul Been spending a lot of time on here!

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2011
    Messages:
    5,657
    Likes Received:
    1,522
    Location:
    Cork Ireland
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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
     
  11. reneecook3

    reneecook3 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2015
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    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?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. reneecook3

    reneecook3 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2015
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    2
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit


    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?
     

Share This Page