24-105 f2.8IS

[briansquibb]

I think a 24-105 F2.8L IS USM would kill the market for the 24-70 F2.8L II. I am not so sure if it would do so much for other lenses. I would still like to use my 50mm F1.4, and I will never stop using my 135mm F2.0L for any lens

My 24-105 and 70-300L are my walkabouts, the 135 is my favourite prime which I use for portraits of humans and animals.

A 24-105 fits nicely onto a 1.3 and ff so I would get one

 

[Quasimodo]

Brian.

I have been looking at the 70-300, but I have not gone for it yet. I have a 70-200 F2.8L IS II, and I am planning on buying the 2x teleconverter mk III. Would it not cover it for me?

 

[briansquibb]

Brian.

I have been looking at the 70-300, but I have not gone for it yet. I have a 70-200 F2.8L IS II, and I am planning on buying the 2x teleconverter mk III. Would it not cover it for me?

Yes it would, nearly.

The 70-300L is more of a walkabout/travel lens. Short and quite light. The bigger range means you dont have to change the lens so often - yet gives as good IQ as the 70-200II.

On a 1.3/ff it is a dual purpose lens - at the wide end it is a good portrait lens, at the long end a medium telephoto.

 

[Quasimodo]

Yes, thanks

I have a couple of lenses that I hope to buy in not a long time. I have been drooling over the MP-E65 for quite a while now, and the new 24 with is looks very nice too (don't understand what to use the 28 for, as it is not either or..?), and finally I have to make a plan on how to save for the new 24-70 which is extremly good according to my friend who had and used it the whole weekend.