24mm on a crop body?

[bykes]

Is anyone using the 24-105L or 24-70 on a crop body? If so do you find 24mm to be limiting on that wide end?

Thanks

 

[Loswr]

Not anymore. I did use the 24-105L on a 7D, and found it too narrow an AoV for many indoor uses, but good as an outdoor walkaround lens (but I had the 10-22mm if I needed UWA). Still...my primary general purpose zoom of choice on the 7D was the EF-S 17-55mm.

 

[Michael_pfh]

I was using both the 24-105L and 24L II on 7D/550D and did find the 24mm to be limiting on the wide end - was always using my 16-35L II instead but since I got my 1D4 I am really in love with the 24L II, prefer it over the 16-35L II.

 

[Chris_prophotographic]

24 1.4 mkII is tres sexy 35 ish equiv on 7D

 

[extremeinstability]

Could also snatch up a Samyang 14mm F2.8 for half the 10-22. Looking into that lens for full frame and kinda amazed it beats the canon 14mm F2.8 in most aspects and at $400 compared to $2200. http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=239

 

[RC]

Yes, but rarely do I have my 24-105 without my 16-35 unless I know for sure I won't need wide. I consider wide starting about 28 or 24 FF.

I bought my 24-105 to fill a zoom gap between my 16-35 and 70-200 and for a walk-around lens on a FF. I don't have a FF yet so my 24-105 is my least used lens.

 

[lucuias]

That depends what type of photography you are doing.
If you shoot wedding,24mm will not be wide enough for crop body.But if you just do street photography,24-105 is pretty decent range on crop body.

 

[Canon6D]

First I got a Canon 450D / Rebell XSi together with the kit lens EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS. Since then I bought three lenses: EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM (+ Kenko C-AF 1.4x Teleplus MC4 DGX) and EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM. Next will be the Canon 5D Mark III.

I like the 24-105 as my walk around lens. I don't find 24mm to be limiting on the wide end - if I really need to go wider I can still use the 18-55. Even as a landscape photographer I use 18mm infrequently. Especially if you plan to go full frame in future the 24-105 is a very good choice (I prefer the 24-105 over the 24-70).

 

[EYEONE]

In my opinion yes, 24mm on a crop is very very limiting. I constantly had my back to the walls with my 24-70mm on a 7D and it drove me crazy. I would highly recommend the 17-55mm f2.8 or a FF camera.

The 24-70mm is a glorious focal range on FF. And 70-200mm is (more) beautiful also on FF also.

 

[buzz]

I have been using 24-105 on T2i.
I shoot landscape and for most landscapes it worked great.

I was at valley view in Yosemite and 24mm was wide enough to capture all the scene.
For Yellowstone and Tetons it was plenty wide.
People forget sometimes you need to zoom in to landscapes.
For grand prismatic and many other landscape I was even zooming in.
There were couple of instances at Mount Rainier (reflection lakes), I felt I was not able to get right composition.

Fwiw, I used to hate pictures coming out of T2i but after I upgraded I am loving it.
Canon kit lens is awful (resolution, sharpness and everything).
It was so awful I shot with 50mm 1.8 on every trip even for landscapes.

 

[picturesbyme]

Limiting in what way?

Used and sometimes still use a 24-70mm on a 60D if my 5D is otherwise engaged.
No problems at all but it really comes down to what are you shooting.
For portraits I loved it, for landscape I would probably use the 5D.

 

[bhavikk]

I traveled USA with 24-105 and 16-35 and I found I was just using the 16-35 most of the time. And for anything indoors 24mm on a crop is not wide enough.

 

[bykes]

I currently have a 7D. Lenses i own are the Canon 17-55, 10-22, 70-200L f2.8 non IS and 100 mm L macro. I DO want to go to a full frame body. But the 5D3 is pretty expensive now. So I figure I'd slowly upgrade as I save. So I'm trying to figure out how to go about it. I was thinking of selling the 17-55 and 10-22 and getting the new 24-70 and a 17-40. I have a lot saved up and figure I can get those for what I sell the 17-55 and and 10-22. Then probably get the 5d3 next year. I just want to get a sense of what that 24mm will mean for my photography which includes landscapes, architecture, macro, and occasional portraits.

 

[silversurfer96]

I think it depends on your style of shooting. I have had the 24-105 and 7D for the last two years and it's been a great combination, especially at the long end. I do have the 10-22mm as well, but most of the times, I have the 24-105 attached. I have not tried it with the 17-55, but I am sure it's also a fantastic combo. Didn't want to give up the reach from 56-105.

 

[Deleted member 7828]

Use a 24-105 on my 60D (and also on the T2i I had earlier) Great range, at least outdoors walking. 24mm is only limiting when you get inside, especially in small rooms. But in that situation, the f4 aperture is another limit to deal with and the 17-55mm is a better choice indoors. Like I mentioned in another thread I'm contemplating moving up to FF which would turn it into a wider lens (might miss the reach of 105, although even on 1.6x it wasn't long enough for many applications)

I didn't like the variable aperture on the EF-S zooms, so I was willing to give up the wide angle which I hardly used anyway.