I currently have a T3i with the kit lens, a Canon 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM II Macro Zoom Lens and a Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX DC OS HSM that I'm selling. I will be buying the Canon 6D with the 24-105 f/4L In your opinion will I be able to get low light shots with the 24-105 f/4L on the 6D, as I have with the Sigma f/2.8 on my T3i?
Canon 24-105 F/4L
- Thread starter MagnumJoe
- Start date
- Status
MagnumJoe said:
Yes, all you will need to do is shoot at one stop higher iso. IE, if you are shooting f2.8 on the t3i/sigma combo at iso400 you can get the same shot with f4 on the 6D/24-105L combo at iso800. The DOF will be will be pretty close as well. The big plus being the 6D will have a lot less noise even shooting at one stop higher ISO then the t3i.
Upvote
0
I have a t2i with the Sigma 17-50 f2.8 and a 5Dmark3 with the 24-105 f4.
I find that the 5D with kit lens combo much better at low light even with the loss in aperture. You can go really high in ISO. Plus you can further push the exposure in Lightroom much better with the 5D files.
I also find it much easier to achieve bokeh with the 5D combo as well.
I find that the 5D with kit lens combo much better at low light even with the loss in aperture. You can go really high in ISO. Plus you can further push the exposure in Lightroom much better with the 5D files.
I also find it much easier to achieve bokeh with the 5D combo as well.
Upvote
0
By now you'd think I'd remember who it is who regularly makes the point...neuro, maybe?...but, anyway, the 24-105 on full frame is better in every single specification than any f/2.8 standard zoom on APS-C. It's wider and longer, for starters, and you can get a shallower depth of field with it, and you even get less noise with the same exposure (meaning a higher ISO to compensate for the "loss" of a stop) to boot.
If you like your f/2.8 standard zoom on APS-C, you'll love the 24-105 on 135 format.
I'm not big on standard zooms, myself...but I keep thinking from time to time that maybe one of the alternatives might be worth considering, and very quickly come right back to concluding that the 24-105 is the best for me. The Tamron has IS, sure, and an extra stop, but it doesn't have 70-105. And the Canon 24-70 II doesn't have IS or the extra range, even if its image quality is better...and it's stupidly expensive. The 24-105 isn't at all a slouch in the IQ department; quite the contrary -- it's better than the original 24-70, just not as fast.
In short, it's the most versatile standard zoom there is, with great image quality. Each of the others beats it in one metric, sure, but it beats them in two or three other metrics.
Which is why it'll remain my standard zoom for the foreseeable future. Like, say...until Canon releases the TS-E 12-1200 f/1.0L DO AF for $999.
Cheers,
b&
If you like your f/2.8 standard zoom on APS-C, you'll love the 24-105 on 135 format.
I'm not big on standard zooms, myself...but I keep thinking from time to time that maybe one of the alternatives might be worth considering, and very quickly come right back to concluding that the 24-105 is the best for me. The Tamron has IS, sure, and an extra stop, but it doesn't have 70-105. And the Canon 24-70 II doesn't have IS or the extra range, even if its image quality is better...and it's stupidly expensive. The 24-105 isn't at all a slouch in the IQ department; quite the contrary -- it's better than the original 24-70, just not as fast.
In short, it's the most versatile standard zoom there is, with great image quality. Each of the others beats it in one metric, sure, but it beats them in two or three other metrics.
Which is why it'll remain my standard zoom for the foreseeable future. Like, say...until Canon releases the TS-E 12-1200 f/1.0L DO AF for $999.
Cheers,
b&
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:@ TrumpetPower - yes, me.
Low light shot with an f/4 lens:
EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II, 1/160 s, f/4, ISO 10000
Nice shot!
And, the specs...the thought of hand-holding a 600mm lens at 1/160 second is insane, as is ISO 10K. I'd call you a liar...except that, just playing around, I've gotten motion-free shots with the 400 f2.8 in the tenth of a second range, and I don't worry much about taking the 5DIII to ISO 12,800....
What an amazing photographic world we live in!
Kit. said:Yep, because tilting a 1.2m-wide front lens for a 12mm shot is such fun :TrumpetPower! said:
Oh, but that's what the pony is for!
But seriously, though...this lens doesn't just extend and contract lengthwise when zooming, but its girth also expands and shrinks. At 12mm and when it's in your bag, it's no bigger than the Shorty McForty. Sure, fully zoomed, the front objective is almost as big as the Perkins Telescope at Lowell Observatory -- but, even then, it still only weighs four pounds -- barely more than a gripped 5DIII -- so it's not at all a problem to handhold.
Cheers,
b&
Upvote
0
PhotographerJim
Explorer of Life
MagnumJoe said:
I bought the 6D with the 24-105L, fantastic kit! Works quite well in low light, I've been able to get some great shots.
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:@ TrumpetPower - yes, me.
Low light shot with an f/4 lens:
EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II, 1/160 s, f/4, ISO 10000
That's remarkable; and there are those howling that Canon are behind the curve ..... :
Upvote
0
neuroanatomist said:@ TrumpetPower - yes, me.
Low light shot with an f/4 lens:
EOS 1D X, EF 600mm f/4L IS II, 1/160 s, f/4, ISO 10000
Thanks you all for your help, your replies and comments. A special thanks to TrumpetPower and Neuroanatomist for their inputs and awesome photo.
I wanted to update you on my post/status, I've was able to sell my Sigma 17-50mm today for 515.00, I really liked that lens on my T3i. However, I'm very excited about upgrading to a Canon 6d and the 24-105 f/4 and the lenses I already own the Canon 50mm f/1.4 and the Sigma 70-200 f/2.8 without OS.
However, after reading your inputs, seeing the photo and knowing what a full frame can do at f/4. I'm now considering selling the Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 and replacing it with a Canon 70-200mm f/4 with IS.
Your thoughts?
Would you sell the Sigma f/2.8 to purchase a Canon f/4 with IS?
Upvote
0
as i've said before if you are happy with the 18MP crop sensor image quality at 1600 iso then you will be fine with a 5Dmk3 at 16,000 iso would imagine the 6D would be pretty similar
Upvote
0
MagnumJoe said:
What do you use the 70-200 for?
If landscapes, the Canon f/4 non-IS is perhaps the best choice, with the IS model being a good alternative if you tend to eschew tripods.
If sports, all you care about is speed, so f/4 anything is generally a poor choice.
If weddings, IS isn't going to stop people from moving at slow shutter speeds, so you again want as much speed as you can get in addition to IS.
Horses for courses and all that....
Cheers,
b&
Upvote
0
MagnumJoe said:
Congrats! you won't be disappointed. I'm on my second 24-105, not because there was any problem, but rather that I sold the first one for more than the difference between a 5d3 body and a 5d3 kit.
Upvote
0
I acquired the 24-105 as the kit lens with the 5d3, I didn't really want it but I needed the camera for a wedding. I loved that lens right up until my wife stole if from me for her camera. Its a remarkable lens, take it you won't regret it.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
