Advice for new 24(28-70(105)mm lens needed

[xps]

Hello!

Weeks ago I saw the "light at the end of the tunnel", when an downhill cyclist rammed me and my photographic gear. So, as I can leave (my) the trauma center in some days, I am looking for an new lens with an focal rage of about 24-70 or 105mm. The crashed lens was an 24-70mm 2,8 L. Now I am looking for a new one, as my remaining lens is an 28-70 2.8L (unsharp outside of the center) and I´d like to get an newer and sharper one.
I need it for landscape photography and as an allround lens inside. -remaining bodies: 7DII, 6D. Should be very sharp. AF as allround-lens preferred.
Or should I buy primes (24mm, 35mm, 50mm,70mm)?

Thx

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

You probably know better than we do. I sold my 24-105mmL (reluctantly) when it did not get any use after I bought my 24-70mm L. Then I sold my 35mmL, three 50mm Lenses, and my 85mm as well. I also sold my 135mmL since the 70-200mm MK II was getting the usage.

That leaves me with only two primes, a old Tokina 17mm f/3.5 and my 100mm L for macro.

I went from using mostly primes to all zooms because the IQ of Canon's newer zooms was good enough to replace them, and the 5D MK III had high enough ISO to make up for the slower lenses.

 

[rs]

Hello!

Weeks ago I saw the "light at the end of the tunnel", when an downhill cyclist rammed me and my photographic gear. So, as I can leave (my) the trauma center in some days, I am looking for an new lens with an focal rage of about 24-70 or 105mm. The crashed lens was an 24-70mm 2,8 L. Now I am looking for a new one, as my remaining lens is an 28-70 2.8L (unsharp outside of the center) and I´d like to get an newer and sharper one.
I need it for landscape photography and as an allround lens inside. -remaining bodies: 7DII, 6D. Should be very sharp. AF as allround-lens preferred.
Or should I buy primes (24mm, 35mm, 50mm,70mm)?

Thx

The 24-70/2.8 L mk I was a pretty damn solid lens. For that to get destroyed by a cyclist, what happened to the camera body, the cyclist, and you? I'd imagine the lens would be the most solid item there!

The 24-70 mk II is simply faultless for focus speed, accuracy and sharpness. A slower f4 lens with IS is obviously only an advantage for stationary subjects in low light.

I've just picked up the 85L, and am quickly coming to the conclusion that while great zooms buy you more options for capturing the moment, especially under pressure, a great prime gives you the ability to capture magic - as long as everything falls into place. I'd still not give up my zooms for anything - but primes do make a compelling case. Now, when is that 35L II going to drop to an affordable price?

 

[Sporgon]

I'd trade your 28-70 and replace it with a 24-105L. There probably won't be much difference in price. You have the option to buy a couple of fast primes if you want to then.

The 24-105L is a much maligned lens on the internet, underservedly so IMO.

Some of the 28-70s that I have used in the past have been quite hideous in the edges of the frame on FF.

 

[xps]

The 24-70/2.8 L mk I was a pretty damn solid lens. For that to get destroyed by a cyclist, what happened to the camera body, the cyclist, and you? I'd imagine the lens would be the most solid item there!

The 24-70 mk II is simply faultless for focus speed, accuracy and sharpness. A slower f4 lens with IS is obviously only an advantage for stationary subjects in low light.

I've just picked up the 85L, and am quickly coming to the conclusion that while great zooms buy you more options for capturing the moment, especially under pressure, a great prime gives you the ability to capture magic - as long as everything falls into place. I'd still not give up my zooms for anything - but primes do make a compelling case. Now, when is that 35L II going to drop to an affordable price?

Well, my 5DIII is NACA 7, completely destroyed too. It felt about 20m straight down an near rockface. Two lenses survived, one with scratches on the front glass and the other one suffers from dust inside on the other end. And me? Well I stayed long days on an ICU, partially just surviving because an extracorporal lung assist . I was just changing the lenses, when the young guy lost control of his mountainbike and threw me down the rockface.

You are right, primes are often visibly better. But their weight is often to much, when you walk around in the mountains. So one good zoom lens ist sometimes the better choice if you need to be flexible.
Is there any other brand, who produces an zoom lens in this range? Or yet an prime lens quad? 24 (Canon 24mm IS 2.8 )-35 (Canon 35mm 2.8 IS)-50 (? - Sigma 50mm EX 2.8 Macro)-70mm (?- Sigma 70mm 2.8 EX Macro)? But their weight in sum is quite high.

 

[rs]

Well, my 5DIII is NACA 7, completely destroyed too. It felt about 20m straight down an near rockface. Two lenses survived, one with scratches on the front glass and the other one suffers from dust inside on the other end. And me? Well I stayed long days on an ICU, partially just surviving because an extracorporal lung assist . I was just changing the lenses, when the young guy lost control of his mountainbike and threw me down the rockface.

You are right, primes are often visibly better. But their weight is often to much, when you walk around in the mountains. So one good zoom lens ist sometimes the better choice if you need to be flexible.
Is there any other brand, who produces an zoom lens in this range? Or yet an prime lens quad? 24 (Canon 24mm IS 2.8 )-35 (Canon 35mm 2.8 IS)-50 (? - Sigma 50mm EX 2.8 Macro)-70mm (?- Sigma 70mm 2.8 EX Macro)? But their weight in sum is quite high.

Wow! I hope you make a full recovery. I never imagined photography was so dangerous!

If you're thinking about carrying around four primes in the 24 to 70 range, all around the f2.8 mark, I'd probably stick with a zoom. There can be a slight difference with the quality of bokeh, but the size/weight/cost/inconvenience of primes doesn't seem worth it if you want to cover the range with that level of granularity. The main reason (for me) to go for primes is to limit yourself to one of two and force yourself to use your feet to compose. And then pick a lens which can render a scene like no zoom can, i.e. fast, macro etc. These aren't attributes that spring to mind as being useful for landscape photography to me.

If you want IS and f2.8 in a zoom, the Tamron 24-70 VC is your only choice, unless you want to jump ship and go for the bigger/heavier than 70-300L Nikon 24-70 VR. In terms of other third party zooms, nothing else I'm aware of is really competitive. The Sigma 24-70 is very old and nothing like their Art range - I certainly would't describe it as an improvement optically over your 28-70 L. I went the expensive route and went for the IS free Canon, and I have zero regrets. However, the 24-105 L (if you can get over the slightly larger than average barrel distortion at the wide end) is certainly not worth overlooking, and if narrow apertures are your thing, the 24-105 STM doesn't look too shabby.

 

[SJS]

Hello!

Weeks ago I saw the "light at the end of the tunnel", when an downhill cyclist rammed me and my photographic gear. So, as I can leave (my) the trauma center in some days, I am looking for an new lens with an focal rage of about 24-70 or 105mm. The crashed lens was an 24-70mm 2,8 L. Now I am looking for a new one, as my remaining lens is an 28-70 2.8L (unsharp outside of the center) and I´d like to get an newer and sharper one.
I need it for landscape photography and as an allround lens inside. -remaining bodies: 7DII, 6D. Should be very sharp. AF as allround-lens preferred.
Or should I buy primes (24mm, 35mm, 50mm,70mm)?

Thx

Hi

I do have a 24-105 f/4 in terrific condition. I haven't used it much since I also have the 24-70 f/2.8. I live in Mumbai India so one needs to understand how this can work if you are interested.

As for the question of whether to buy the primes - I don't think you are suggesting buying all four. Even buying two would be quite a sum in the L series at least. The 24-70 f/2.8 is your best bet although I do not find 24mm wide enough for some of the landscape work. But that is a personal I guess and since I am used to the 16-35 for landscapes. If I have just the 24-70 with me I guess I manage alright

 

[Maximilian]

...
And me? Well I stayed long days on an ICU, partially just surviving because an extracorporal lung assist . I was just changing the lenses, when the young guy lost control of his mountainbike and threw me down the rockface.

Hey xps!

First of all I wish you a really fast and full recovery. Best wishes. Your accident sounds terrible. *sigh*

Back to your question:
Having and loving my 24-105L I know the temptation of F2.8.

I think you should go for the 24-70L II. No compromides. Some say the Tamron with VC is better than the V1 but I'd go more for the super fast AF of the V2.
Primes are to be considered but only if you're not so much into zoom lenses.

Be well.