I Need Your Help

[tomohdi]

Hi ,
first i have to apologies for my bad English.
i am canon guy and i own canon EF 16-35 , 50mm f/1.4 , 24-105 , 70-200 M2.
i traveling every year summer time and do landscape and some indoor party photography.
i carry my 24-105 lens with me most of the time but it is not good for indoor and low light shots. i would like to buy 24-70mm canon if i sale one of my lenses or buy 24-70 tamron and keep my lenses.i really need your opinion, which lens i have to sale and which one to buy.
i appreciate your kind help.

 

[goodguy]

First I am a Nikon guy
Secondly which lens to sell ?
You are the only one that really knows the answer to that.
Which lens to buy ?
Well Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VC is a fairly good lens and has a fantastic VC which is a big benefit but I heard Tamron has some QC on this lens, maybe its earlier versions but still thats what I heard.
I was in your shues only few months ago and I boght the Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G so I personally would get the Canon 24-70 2.8 preferably Mark II but if not Mark I is good too.

Good luck.

 

[Robin Usagani]

If you get a 24-70 L, you must get the mk2. It is worth it.

I personally think your 24-105 will work just fine. What body do you have? I mean it is only 1 stop slower. The only reason why I think my 24-70L is amazing is mostly for how sharp it is at 2.8. I love the way it looks with low depth of field. If you dont care much about the depth of field, just bump up ISO one more stop (compared to 24-70) and you will be fine.

 

[tomohdi]

First I am a Nikon guy
Secondly which lens to sell ?
You are the only one that really knows the answer to that.
Which lens to buy ?
Well Tamron 24-70mm 2.8 VC is a fairly good lens and has a fantastic VC which is a big benefit but I heard Tamron has some QC on this lens, maybe its earlier versions but still thats what I heard.
I was in your shues only few months ago and I boght the Nikon 24-70mm 2.8G so I personally would get the Canon 24-70 2.8 preferably Mark II but if not Mark I is good too.

Good luck.

thanks for your honest opinion. VC is very important for me as well as image quality. i don't know why canon or nikon not making one with VC. probably i will go for canon 24-70 mark 2.

 

[grafxman]

Hi ,
first i have to apologies for my bad English.
i am canon guy and i own canon EF 16-35 , 50mm f/1.4 , 24-105 , 70-200 M2.
i traveling every year summer time and do landscape and some indoor party photography.
i carry my 24-105 lens with me most of the time but it is not good for indoor and low light shots. i would like to buy 24-70mm canon if i sale one of my lenses or buy 24-70 tamron and keep my lenses.i really need your opinion, which lens i have to sale and which one to buy.
i appreciate your kind help.

I often photograph museums and other dark areas with my Canons. A year or so ago I photographed the Henry Plant Museum in Tampa FL with my 7D. Flash was not permitted. There was practically no light except what came through the windows. The inner hallway was "illuminated" with the original Edison bulbs which are about the same as a candles. It was extremely dark. However I started out in the '60s with a 35mm and there were no stabilized lenses back then. You couldn't instantly check your photo either. I learned a skill which every photographer should possess. That skill is how to hold a camera steady and take a photo with a slow shutter speed. Here's just a few examples:

IMG_0378 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! 1/20 sec shutter speed

IMG_0383 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! 1/40 sec shutter speed

IMG_0558 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! 1/15 sec shutter speed

There are many more examples in that set of photos and in other sets. The technique is quite simple. If you use it enough it will become completely natural and your body will automatically do it when photographing in low light situations. All I do is separate my legs a bit, lightly press my elbows against my ribs, take a deep breath, exhale half way and gently press the shutter button. If possible I will place my back against a wall then my body becomes a tripod. I prefer to use Sigma lenses which have an excellent stability system. I have never, ever felt the need for a fast lens. The sweet spot of most lenses is somewhere around f8 anyway. I'm constantly amazed at people who spend large sums of money for an f1.2 or f1.4 lens when, to me at least, it is clearly unnecessary. I suspect the lenses you currently own are probably adequate. I suggest you practice shooting some low light photography. Get some photography time in a situation where it's too dark for your lens to focus and you have to manually focus it. That's what happened when the Tokina 11-16mm (not stabilised) refused to focus on this black cabinet:

IMG_0159 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! 1/15 sec shutter speed 6400 ISO @2.8

Once you attain the easily acquired skills necessary for low light photography you'll be able to photograph just about anything your eye can see. I hope this helps. Good luck.

 

[shaylou]

I'm confused on why you feel the need to buy another lens. You have the 16-35 2.8 for wide shots and if you need even more light you have the 50mm. I have the 24-70 II by Canon and it's a great lens but I would not go out and spend that much on a lens that you basically have all the focal ranges covered with fast lenses. But,,,, if I absolutely had to replace one of those lenses it would be the 24-105 for a 24-70 mrkII. But that's just me.

 

[tomohdi]

I'm confused on why you feel the need to buy another lens. You have the 16-35 2.8 for wide shots and if you need even more light you have the 50mm. I have the 24-70 II by Canon and it's a great lens but I would not go out and spend that much on a lens that you basically have all the focal ranges covered with fast lenses. But,,,, if I absolutely had to replace one of those lenses it would be the 24-105 for a 24-70 mrkII. But that's just me.

Dear shaylou ,

thanks for sharing , i feel like you i have been using my 50mm for low light conditions but when I'm in restaurant then i need wilder angle that is why i using 24-105mm which make me to use high iso and noise in my image. I'm not really sure that noise in coded by iso or my camera has some problem.

 

[Braineack]

I'm in the use the 16-35mm and 50mm camp.

It seems if you buy the 24-70mm you'll only be using it between 24-50mm anyways. so if anything you're missing out on what? 15mm of focal length? Easy enough to make up with your feet, plus the 16-35mm goes wider, which would be better in this setting, right?

If you dump the 24-105mm, then you lost a more useful lens in other circumstances.