Canon 24-70 MKii vs 5D mkIII choice (moved)

[Ozarker]

Well, I thought I would be ordering a 5D Mark III this week. While that would have been great, I think I'd have been getting the cart before the horse. Recently I sold all my EFS lenses (Except for my 1 STM lens) and my T5i to help fund this purchase. This sort of left me with a hole in the shorter focal length range. While having a 5D Mark III will be wonderful later on, I decided instead to get the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L Mark II today. It will be here from Adorama tomorrow.

It just makes more sense for me to round out the lens kit more before the jump to Full Frame bliss. That is something I can keep looking forward to. That and a Canon EF 11-24mm f/4 late next year.

This is a wonderful forum to be a part of. The information to be had here has really helped me make better decisions, more informed decisions.

Thanks to all of you!

I'm not sure if that approach makes much sense. The focal lengths on FF are different and you will learn to love totally different lenses than what you do on a crop body. Buying the lenses beforehand might not really be possible. I for one mainly use the 24LII and the 85LII on a FF body. On a crop body those two would have been quite weird lens choices. The 24mm lens is already quite wide on FF and taking photos of people with it is not all that simple. On crop it would be a totally different lens and the wide end would be missing from the kit if that'd be the widest lens. I'm not too sure why you want so many zooms either. The shallow DOF that people want comes with different kinds of lenses. That would once again be a FF specialty.

Hello Dick! I've had many EFS lenses... From the EFS 10-22mm all the way up to 250mm. I started with an XSi when it came out, the T5i, and now the 70D. The one EFS lens I have left is Canon's EFS 18-55mm 3.5-5.6 IS STM lens because I very occasionally shoot video and I like the way the 70D focuses for video.

Why so many zooms? Well, while it is a zoom I won't count the STM zoom because i do not take photos with it. So now we are only talking about 3 zooms. I have two and now just want the EF 11-24 f/4L.

Granted, the zooms will not give me the beautiful bokeh an 85L would give on a FF camera. On the other hand, I hope to live long enough to cruise the rivers of Europe. I'll have a FF camera by then. Personally, the zooms make perfect sense to me for that (so would a wide angle tilt shift lens).

As far as portraiture goes, I do have the EF 200mm f/2L on my list. Besides, I don't get much chance at portraits. I am such a hideous looking man that women tend to run. That's why I think I shall prefer the EF 200mm f/2L... it will be much easier on the girls that way. The speedlites allow me to set a kind of "speedlite trap" for my quarry.

We aren't talking about years to go to full frame for me. Hopefully that will happen by the end of the year. Then the 70D will serve as back-up and for birding (which I enjoy).

I decided about a year ago that it makes sense for me to have at least the FF zooms in hand before getting the camera.

Fair enough?

Here are the only portraits I've taken in the last year. All with my 70D and EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS II. No bokeh at all with low key shots.

While I am a complete hack... not bad for a first try with one speedlite and 43" soft box. I don't know super models like Pookie does. ;D His models pay him. I'd probably have to pay mine.

Also, I'm a hobbyist... I'll never be a pro. My lack of raw talent limits me.

 

[eninja]

Continuing in the theme of very simple equipment and lighting, this was shot again with just 55/1.8, on camera flash + reflector and a 5DII. Pretty simple stuff but I think it has produced a pleasing effect.

Hi Sporgon,

What exactly you did there? did you mean you direct on camera flash to the reflector and bounce from it? Could you share your gear: reflector and its stand?

Appreciate a lot.

 

[Sporgon]

Continuing in the theme of very simple equipment and lighting, this was shot again with just 55/1.8, on camera flash + reflector and a 5DII. Pretty simple stuff but I think it has produced a pleasing effect.

Hi Sporgon,

What exactly you did there? did you mean you direct on camera flash to the reflector and bounce from it? Could you share your gear: reflector and its stand?

Appreciate a lot.

You've got it. This was an example of keeping things really cheap and simple. The flash was on cam for simplicity, but the head directed away about 100 degrees and shot back into a portable 42' 5-in-1 lasolite, which was directed at the subject. The stand was me, holding the lasolite up high, pointing down, the camera was on a tripod. Ambient exposure was set to under expose by about 1 stop, and the flash was about +1 EV, but the lens I was using doesn't sent any distance information to the camera, and this does make it a little more trial and error.

Anyway, upping the ante now, and turning the heat up in anticipation of the bikini clad beauty I'm having a session on the beach with soon, here's a shot with a little more sophistication. The 55/1.8 Takumar has changed for the wonderful EF 50 1.4, so there is E-TTL this time, and carefully choosing the subject so as not to cover any flaws in the technique; this lass means business. Once again shot just using the faithful old 550EX, and a cheap lens. Simples.

 

[privatebydesign]

Sporgon,

That seems to illustrate 'the look' very nicely with a modest setup, not quite the 50 f1.8 but I am certain the 50 f1.4 is well beneath Garfield's teddybear's (amongst other cartoonish caricatures) level, it doesn't have a red ring for a start.

Can you confirm for us that the 550EX, a sub $100 flash, does stop working on beaches? Thanks :

If I was a generous soul I'd be tempted to point out how appropriate the lighting is to the subject, an interesting play on the female form with softer light on her 'fuller' figure yet harder light on her face, a real slap round the face for conventional female portraiture and oh so appropriate for her pose and obvious attitude, certainly no hint of formulaic or inappropriate posing and lighting as so glaringly displayed by others posting this same 'look'.

 

[Sporgon]

Sporgon,

That seems to illustrate 'the look' very nicely with a modest setup, not quite the 50 f1.8 but I am certain the 50 f1.4 is well beneath Garfield's teddybear's (amongst other cartoonish caricatures) level, it doesn't have a red ring for a start.

Can you confirm for us that the 550EX, a sub $100 flash, does stop working on beaches? Thanks :

If I was a generous soul I'd be tempted to point out how appropriate the lighting is to the subject, an interesting play on the female form with softer light on her 'fuller' figure yet harder light on her face, a real slap round the face for conventional female portraiture and oh so appropriate for her pose and obvious attitude, certainly no hint of formulaic or inappropriate posing and lighting as so glaringly displayed by others posting this same 'look'.

Thanks Private ! I agree that this one does have a more professional touch about it.

I must pull you up on the red ring though. I always use a Hoya rubber collapsible hood with the EF 50/1.4, and this has a red ring around the front of it. One can only go so far in simplifying gear.

Regarding the 550EX flash; well I was within about two hundred yards of the beach, and its performance did seem to drop a little, but I put this down to fading batteries rather than the proximity of sand. I'll find out for sure later on when I'm shooting on the actual beach.

 

[Pookie]

Sporgon,

That seems to illustrate 'the look' very nicely with a modest setup, not quite the 50 f1.8 but I am certain the 50 f1.4 is well beneath Garfield's teddybear's (amongst other cartoonish caricatures) level, it doesn't have a red ring for a start.

Can you confirm for us that the 550EX, a sub $100 flash, does stop working on beaches? Thanks :

If I was a generous soul I'd be tempted to point out how appropriate the lighting is to the subject, an interesting play on the female form with softer light on her 'fuller' figure yet harder light on her face, a real slap round the face for conventional female portraiture and oh so appropriate for her pose and obvious attitude, certainly no hint of formulaic or inappropriate posing and lighting as so glaringly displayed by others posting this same 'look'.

Thanks Private ! I agree that this one does have a more professional touch about it.

I must pull you up on the red ring though. I always use a Hoya rubber collapsible hood with the EF 50/1.4, and this has a red ring around the front of it. One can only go so far in simplifying gear.

Regarding the 550EX flash; well I was within about two hundred yards of the beach, and its performance did seem to drop a little, but I put this down to fading batteries rather than the proximity of sand. I'll find out for sure later on when I'm shooting on the actual beach.

Ok, great work. Lovely actually, love the pose but man you totally missed the comp, you didn't get the whole bike in the photo. That's why people pay professionals, so those little touches don't slip by. I'm not afraid to admit it's an admirable attempt but this is a pale comparison... You're not in the sand, not at the beach, not in the afternoon. That is a street right there : Take this model out to the beach now, around 2pm.

So your image took no talent at all right? You have absolutely no talent... not any at all because everyone can do this super simple lighting setup. This is where the difference lays between us. I say it does take talent, even to pull that shot off. I'd say you probably know what you're doing but if you say no, ok... If you claim your talentless, you're well within your rights to make that point. Who am I to argue if you have talent or not... I'm not PBD.

Great try but clearly not the same. Now, PBD and Sporgon, tell me again why you don't need a battery pack above the salt water or HSS when you're shooting wide open. Again, as I said before... tell me how you would do it in the same circumstance as I do and why you had to do this on dry land.

And PBD... you never answered the challenge did you? You let Sporgon try and answer it.

Oh... Thanks Sporgon. The fact that you went out to try and replicate my work, it's actually a great compliment.

EDITED to address the talent issue... I missed that point when replying.

 

[privatebydesign]

Sporgon,

That seems to illustrate 'the look' very nicely with a modest setup, not quite the 50 f1.8 but I am certain the 50 f1.4 is well beneath Garfield's teddybear's (amongst other cartoonish caricatures) level, it doesn't have a red ring for a start.

Can you confirm for us that the 550EX, a sub $100 flash, does stop working on beaches? Thanks :

If I was a generous soul I'd be tempted to point out how appropriate the lighting is to the subject, an interesting play on the female form with softer light on her 'fuller' figure yet harder light on her face, a real slap round the face for conventional female portraiture and oh so appropriate for her pose and obvious attitude, certainly no hint of formulaic or inappropriate posing and lighting as so glaringly displayed by others posting this same 'look'.

Thanks Private ! I agree that this one does have a more professional touch about it.

I must pull you up on the red ring though. I always use a Hoya rubber collapsible hood with the EF 50/1.4, and this has a red ring around the front of it. One can only go so far in simplifying gear.

Regarding the 550EX flash; well I was within about two hundred yards of the beach, and its performance did seem to drop a little, but I put this down to fading batteries rather than the proximity of sand. I'll find out for sure later on when I'm shooting on the actual beach.

Ok, great work. Lovely actually... but, not in the sand, not at the beach. This took no talent right?

Now, PBD and Sporgon, tell me again why you don't need a battery pack above the salt water or HSS when your shooting wide open. Again, as I said before... tell me how you would do it in the same circumstance as I do and why you had to do this on dry land.

And PBD... you never answered the challenge did you? You let Sporgon try and answer it.

I think Sporgon would agree that he didn't find it particularly difficult to take the shot

Can you explain why the exact same setup wouldn't have worked at a beach or in sand? Or why it didn't need HSS or a battery pack?

I have never said having better specced gear doesn't make it easier or extend the window of shooting time, all I said was you don't need $2,000 lenses and $2,000 lights to take those kinds of shots. The above image shot with a 50 f1.4 and single 550EX with RF-602 triggers proves my point it true.

 

[Pookie]

Sporgon,

That seems to illustrate 'the look' very nicely with a modest setup, not quite the 50 f1.8 but I am certain the 50 f1.4 is well beneath Garfield's teddybear's (amongst other cartoonish caricatures) level, it doesn't have a red ring for a start.

Can you confirm for us that the 550EX, a sub $100 flash, does stop working on beaches? Thanks :

If I was a generous soul I'd be tempted to point out how appropriate the lighting is to the subject, an interesting play on the female form with softer light on her 'fuller' figure yet harder light on her face, a real slap round the face for conventional female portraiture and oh so appropriate for her pose and obvious attitude, certainly no hint of formulaic or inappropriate posing and lighting as so glaringly displayed by others posting this same 'look'.

Thanks Private ! I agree that this one does have a more professional touch about it.

I must pull you up on the red ring though. I always use a Hoya rubber collapsible hood with the EF 50/1.4, and this has a red ring around the front of it. One can only go so far in simplifying gear.

Regarding the 550EX flash; well I was within about two hundred yards of the beach, and its performance did seem to drop a little, but I put this down to fading batteries rather than the proximity of sand. I'll find out for sure later on when I'm shooting on the actual beach.

Ok, great work. Lovely actually... but, not in the sand, not at the beach. This took no talent right?

Now, PBD and Sporgon, tell me again why you don't need a battery pack above the salt water or HSS when your shooting wide open. Again, as I said before... tell me how you would do it in the same circumstance as I do and why you had to do this on dry land.

And PBD... you never answered the challenge did you? You let Sporgon try and answer it.

I think Sporgon would agree that he didn't find it particularly difficult to take the shot

Can you explain why the exact same setup wouldn't have worked at a beach or in sand? Or why it didn't need HSS or a battery pack?

I have never said having better specced gear doesn't make it easier or extend the window of shooting time, all I said was you don't need $2,000 lenses and $2,000 lights to take those kinds of shots. The above image shot with a 50 f1.4 and single 550EX with RF-602 triggers proves my point it true.

You said a lot more than that. One point I want to make right off the top... 2000$ lenses and 2000$ lights are not high-end by any means. You say you work in the industry, you do know this to be true? I wish I could afford a Phase One and some Broncolor but instead I go Pentax, Canon and Profoto because it's what I can afford as a working photographer.

His was not a difficult shot, my point exactly... See, we do agree. He shot after sundown... why is that? Maybe he was power limited using just a 550ex and couldn't overpower the sun. He shot on dry land. There was no sand, no surf. Let me point out again the difference...shoot in the day, shoot on the beach... have your lighting in the surf, shoot wide open. Show me with a 50 1.8 and a single 550ex. Or even five speedlite, which will come pretty close to a Quadra or Profoto rig in price. Or your vaunted Buff with the battery hanging in the surf. Then tell me again from the ER when the battery electrocutes you why the Profoto B1 on a boom isn't necessary (battery 8 feet above the water). Or 500ws with HSS isn't necessary to overpower the sun. I know it can be done without HSS or ETTL but I am asking you to show me. I really want to SEE YOU do it.

You talk of no talent and no need for quality gear. I disagree wholeheartedly especially when it's your job, you get paid and have to decline jobs because you're overbooked... My answer to your points have never wavered because I know from years of working in the industry and owning my own business, you do need talent and gear to survive more than a few months. Sometimes you do need a little better equipment to perform like this daily, not a one off shot... daily for clients. You wanted to chime in with no talent and you don't need a 24-70. Funny, the OP was asking specifically about the 24-70 II/5D3 and nothing about talent. I showed a few photos to show real world use. You were the one with the snarky comments out of left field. It looks very much like jealousy from this end, especially when I know you don't own the 24-70 II. Your points were absolutely unwarranted. If you ever showed your work and someone made a comment like that, you'd roll over for it? Not me, I will call BS on you or anyone else every time because I take pride in what I do for a living, I don't hide in the shadows.

Let's just kiss, make up and agree to disagree that it does take talent and yes, some specialized gear to take pictures of any quality, hobbyist and professional alike. I apologize for calling you a poser but you talk a lot of smack for someone without a portfolio. I admit it was totally unprofessional of me. You don't need to show your work but I don't and will never understand that coming from a photographer. I gotta say... that doesn't fly in the crowds I work with. You'd get eaten alive here in Cali.

 

[Sporgon]

You don't need to show your work but I don't and will never understand that coming from a photographer. I gotta say... that doesn't fly in the crowds I work with. You'd get eaten alive here in Cali.

Actually the shot of the girl on the bike was taken by private - quite a few years ago in fact.

CR is lucky to have a genuine professional like private who genuinely makes his living from photography, participating on the forum, and can give a reality check to the thirst for gear now and again.

Personally I've got drawn into posting here too much, and I've got tired of it being used as a platform by those who's main desire in life seems to be to spread misinformation about Canon sensors.

 

[Ozarker]

Continuing in the theme of very simple equipment and lighting, this was shot again with just 55/1.8, on camera flash + reflector and a 5DII. Pretty simple stuff but I think it has produced a pleasing effect.

Hi Sporgon,

What exactly you did there? did you mean you direct on camera flash to the reflector and bounce from it? Could you share your gear: reflector and its stand?

Appreciate a lot.

You've got it. This was an example of keeping things really cheap and simple. The flash was on cam for simplicity, but the head directed away about 100 degrees and shot back into a portable 42' 5-in-1 lasolite, which was directed at the subject. The stand was me, holding the lasolite up high, pointing down, the camera was on a tripod. Ambient exposure was set to under expose by about 1 stop, and the flash was about +1 EV, but the lens I was using doesn't sent any distance information to the camera, and this does make it a little more trial and error.

Anyway, upping the ante now, and turning the heat up in anticipation of the bikini clad beauty I'm having a session on the beach with soon, here's a shot with a little more sophistication. The 55/1.8 Takumar has changed for the wonderful EF 50 1.4, so there is E-TTL this time, and carefully choosing the subject so as not to cover any flaws in the technique; this lass means business. Once again shot just using the faithful old 550EX, and a cheap lens. Simples.

Nice photo. Brings back memories of waiting for the ice cream truck when I was a kid.

 

[Pookie]

You don't need to show your work but I don't and will never understand that coming from a photographer. I gotta say... that doesn't fly in the crowds I work with. You'd get eaten alive here in Cali.

Actually the shot of the girl on the bike was taken by private - quite a few years ago in fact.

CR is lucky to have a genuine professional like private who genuinely makes his living from photography, participating on the forum, and can give a reality check to the thirst for gear now and again.

Personally I've got drawn into posting here too much, and I've got tired of it being used as a platform by those who's main desire in life seems to be to spread misinformation about Canon sensors.

That's quite odd because he can't remember taking this and had to confirm with you what you shot this with? Regardless, you have to admit the quality of light coming from 1 speedlight has nothing on 500ws. There is a real & definitive reason why 500ws on-location professional strobes like these exist and sell like hot cakes.

In regards to this site. It is the main reason I post images instead of talking about cameras and endless blathering about DR/sensors. Call it my personal crusade if you will but I believe showing real world use trumps talk any day of the week. The whole point of a camera and all this gear is making photos, not the other way around. It's what I do for a living and I take pride in it... if I didn't then I would never have survived this long. Too often I find people who complain and moan about their purchase yet can't use 50% of the capabilities of the very same camera they deem "inadequate". One who shall remain nameless here is absolutely delusional.

Prior to these comments about my work from PBD, I use to think he was well intentioned and fairly informed but have always found it hard to understand not showing any work, especially if he's in the business as he says. I used to post here under a different profile but killed it when the 5D3 madness hit here. Now back but really questioning the group of individuals that are frequent posters and whether I should stick it out. I do enjoy photography though and even more, I really enjoy the company of those that share my same interest. I've been in the business paying the bills for 15 years and had photography in my life much longer. I am a member of ASMP, WPPI and WPJA for many, many years... I go to critiques, contests and conventions all the time. Never met a single professional photographer that won't show any work and I have never been confronted by anything less than professional attitude in this realm. I give workshops and share all the time. I am also keenly aware that there is always something new to learn or see from a different POV. When critiques are given in public forum the requirements are mutual share. When PBD makes comments about talent, and I am well aware they were directed at me and not a general statement no matter how much he claims they are not... I will respond. I understand his point that there is little new about this work or anyone else's. Hell, if you get right down to it that is true of most any art these days. To say it takes no talent and quality equipment to perform at a high level day after day is plain and simple wrong, completely wrong and sounds very bitter. Don't get me started on the 50 1.8 or 1.4 you both mentioned. You ever had the AF drive on the 1.4 crap out on ya? I have, more than once.. in front of paying clients. I do get snarky here too when I see less than a solid effort or really poor form because it does take a LOT more to take quality photographs than going out to the mall and buying a camera. It does take more than 20 minutes of fiddling to do what you've shown or I show as our work. It takes years to get past fiddling and know what is needed when you walk on set. It takes years to evaluate the light and then dig into the bag, pull the right gear and more importantly... know exactly what to do almost instantly. Not luck, by design. Sorry, that is directed at the ever increasing flood of soccer mom photographers I constantly deal with but bite my tongue

I'm going to chalk all this up to bad days by everyone involved, I've been hammered by wedding after wedding, and gals wanting beach photos. In the winter I get a bit of a break but right now it's pure madness and I am fraying ever so slightly. But who in their right mind would pass up shooting cheerleaders in bikinis if they want to pay you.

Again, I stand by my words but apologize for the flame war.