Dylan777 said:
Maybe. But the wide angle + thin DoF with a close subject is something you can't get with the 24-70/2.8 II.
Upvote
0
24-105 &/or 24-70
- Thread starter ksuweh
- Start date
- Status
Maybe. But the wide angle + thin DoF with a close subject is something you can't get with the 24-70/2.8 II.
FTBPhotography said:
On the 60D it is great, no issues at all.
But on the 5D, there is definitely some distortion and softness toward the edges.
Still, despite those flaws, I find it a much more versatile lens on the 5D than the 60D. Although the lens gave more reach at the telephoto end with the 60D, it often wasn't enough for true telephoto shooting so it could be a bit awkward sometimes...
Upvote
0
gshocked said:
By far the 24-70 f/2.8 version I or II would be better for low light than the 24-105 f/4 IS for objects in motion such as at events. The IS of the 24-105 only helps with stationary objects. The f/2.8 lets in twice as much light as the f/4.0 so that you can either have a shutter speed that is twice as fast or an ISO that is half as much for the same exposure. The high ISO capabilities of these newer cameras just keep getting better & better, making this low light/larger aperture issue less & less important. By NO means is it a non existent issue, just not as big of an issue as it has typically been.
Upvote
0
robbymack said:
If you are cropping a pic taken at 70 mm then that means that the plan is to keep the perspective the same. I guess you don't understand perspective. Perspective is based strictly on the distance between subject and camera.
Upvote
0
Just get the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC and you get the best of both worlds. It is an awesome lens, great build quality, f/2.8 aperture, and image stabilization. How do you beat that! Plus it is way cheaper than even the version 1 Canon 24-70 f/2.8. The new V2 Canon 24-70 f/2.8 is a slightly bit sharper than the Tamron but the Tamron is still way better than what you have been using, the Canon 24-105mm and is even better than the new Canon 24-70 f/4L IS
Canon 24-70 f/4L IS vs Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC - FIGHT!
Canon 24-70 f/4L IS vs Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC - FIGHT!
Upvote
0
I have both, originally got the 24-105 and then added th 24-70 ii. I use the 24-105 when I hand hold and / or want extra reach. I use the 24-70 when I work from a tripod. May sell one, not sur which.
Upvote
0
T
Tanja
Guest
dswatson83 said:
well.. only when you get a good exemplar.
every good review website reported great sample variance as far as i know.
Upvote
0
Hi all,
I rented out the 24-70 f2.8II and it was fantastic. I used it to shoot a conference event with down lights and the focus was still great even on a 5D mk II. Some shots were still blurry but I didn't want to push the ISO too high. Although I'm wondering if I should've got the 24-105 is instead, as I was mainly shooting static people...? Anyone got any thoughts.
Just a opinion on a different lens. I also had a 70-200 2.8 IS II and that lens was my savior! I found myself using this more than the 24-70. Has anyone else been in this situation?
I rented out the 24-70 f2.8II and it was fantastic. I used it to shoot a conference event with down lights and the focus was still great even on a 5D mk II. Some shots were still blurry but I didn't want to push the ISO too high. Although I'm wondering if I should've got the 24-105 is instead, as I was mainly shooting static people...? Anyone got any thoughts.
Just a opinion on a different lens. I also had a 70-200 2.8 IS II and that lens was my savior! I found myself using this more than the 24-70. Has anyone else been in this situation?
Upvote
0
I thought perspective was sensor to subject distance? How would standing 20 feet away and shooting at 105mm and then stay put and shoot it at 70mm change the perspective?? I guess if you walked closer due to shorter focal length that would change the perspective, but how does cropping the 70mm photo taken at the same distance change the perspective?
Upvote
0
gshocked said:
i've personally owned both and used both for events before. For generic events like like company functions etc..the 24-105 is fantiastic because of the IS and focal range. What it loses in is the distortion and sharpness and the photos lack the "punch". However, like i mentioned for company events, these points are usually not that important and this lens will work great.
For more important events like weddings, then those points above will be very important. This is where the 24-70 shines. you can shoot the 24-70 at f4 and take the same shot with the 24-105 at exactly the same focal range and you will see a difference in the quality. With the current FF sensors being soo good in high ISO, for important events i will usually use the 24-70 and bump up the ISO if need be..i just trust that lens more thant he 24-105 when it comes to outright quality
Upvote
0
Just bought the Tamron. Mine is very good. Go to the Shop and check it in the Shop. I tested also the Canon 24-70 and spoke to the sales about variation in samples for the Tamron. He confirmed that they also received variations in quality of the Canon.Tanja said:
I am happy with the Tamron.
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=11251.msg273191#msg273191
Upvote
0
Call me old fashioned and snobby if you like, but buying into Canon as I have is because of the glass - I can't quite get my head around wanting the highest quality then buying a third party lens, other than for the fun aspect of a lens like the Lensbaby which gives me wild odd photos.
Upvote
0
I can understand that. All my lenses are Canon and L-class. But I did an actual comparison of the two lenses and just could not justify the high price difference. The difference in IQ, build, accuracy in AF is just too small (for me) to pay extra 700 euro. The sales btw confirmed also that the big price difference is one of the reasosn for 300 euro cashback. Though it is still not enoughHaydn1971 said:
Upvote
0
I have the 24-105 for my 6D and am pretty happy with it. I will be renting the new 24-70 in November for an event and letting a friend use the 105 on his 7D. A lot of the events I go to have less than adequate lighting, and even though my 6D is a low light monster, I'd prefer to keep the ISO to a minimum. I'll also be renting the 70-200 2.8. I have the f/4 non IS version, but it's not the greatest in low light. My only fear is that I'll like them both so much, I'll end up selling my organs to upgrade them.
Upvote
0
@op
I kept my 24-105. I like this lens as outdoor walkaround because of the range to 105mm. And, I use it icw with flash indoor. For that it is also a great lens.
I kept my 24-105. I like this lens as outdoor walkaround because of the range to 105mm. And, I use it icw with flash indoor. For that it is also a great lens.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
