One lens for vacation

[dslrdummy]

I recently did an unpaid sports shoot and although a number of the shots were published by a local newspaper (my first ), I found out two things that are going to impact my next vacation kit. First, my 24-105 is soft on the edges wide open and marginal in low light even at high iso on the mark 3. Second, I get way better image quality with my 70-200 ii cropped than using the 2x extender. My advice if you are taking one lense is go for the 24-70 if you can afford it. I would if I could.

 

[TrumpetPower!]

Where I might actually miss the 24-105 (and probably the main reason I haven't sold it) is 'studio' portraits (lighting + backdrop). I do that at f/9-10, the 24-105's IQ is excellent there, and the 105mm means decently tight portraits whereas 70mm doesn't work (too close, wrong perspective).

Hmm...wouldn't the 70-200 trump the 24-105 in the 70-105 range?

(And I'm personally fond of the 180 for the kind of stopped-down tight studio portraits you describe. It's perfect for passport-style publicity head shots -- as if that was what it was designed for, rather than macro work.)

Cheers,

b&

 

[Dart23]

If you worry about being too far away (at the beach for example) with the 50, just get the 85 1.8 - very fast, not too bulky, fairly cheap should something happen to it, and perfect for you since you said "mostly candids/portraits".

Then get the 40 2.8 - may be bending the one lens rule but it's so small you could put it in your pocket if you needed something wider for general scenery / walkaround.

Both good for the wide open you like to shoot, and you can get both of those for less than the 24-105 even...

 

[Loswr]

Where I might actually miss the 24-105 (and probably the main reason I haven't sold it) is 'studio' portraits (lighting + backdrop). I do that at f/9-10, the 24-105's IQ is excellent there, and the 105mm means decently tight portraits whereas 70mm doesn't work (too close, wrong perspective).

Hmm...wouldn't the 70-200 trump the 24-105 in the 70-105 range?

(And I'm personally fond of the 180 for the kind of stopped-down tight studio portraits you describe. It's perfect for passport-style publicity head shots -- as if that was what it was designed for, rather than macro work.)

Sure - but for pics of young kids, I don't have time to spend changing lenses...

 

[KKCFamilyman]

I don't miss the 70-105 but the extra stop and sharpness more than make up for it. My favorite just miss the is of the 24-105. Would probably buy again if canon made a newer 24-135 f4 is with all their modern coatings and advancements then that would be a perfect vacation lens. Just bring a prime for low light and you would be set. Also another thought is you could rent the tamron 24-70vc for the trip if you want is.

 

[RGF]

au contraire! I'd suggest the best single lens to take with either of your cameras is the 28-135is for the following
reasons. It's relatively cheap to buy - around $300 - but has good enough image quality that it has been a standard package zoom with many Canon bundles. It's relatively cheap to buy so you're not going to break the
bank if it's damaged or stolen. It doesn't weigh as much as some of the alternatives suggested here and most vacations I've been on involve a lot of walking without many "rest stops". You can sell it after your vacation if it doesn't fit nicely into your long range lens plan and you won't lose much, if any, money. If you decide to take the
50 crop sensor, the 18-135 is another similarly priced option.

Have you shot with it? With a 5D3, I don't think the OP wanted to sacrifice IQ. If IQ is not paramount, then an SX50 or SX40 P&S will serve the OP well.

The OP did not discuss IQ. It would be helpful to know what will be done with the images, web, 4x6, large blowups (or tight crops and moderate blow ups)????

 

[FTb-n]

Dumb questions.

Is the difference between the 24-105 and the 24-70 II more than just an extra stop of speed with shallower DOF?

For vacation shots with a variety of subjects, including relatively still ones, could the IS on the 4.0 lens outweigh the benefits of the extra stop on the 24-70?

I know, the extra speed of the 2.8 24-70 offers cleaner action shots for it allows faster shutter speeds without having to push the ISO ceiling of the 5D3. But, that ceiling is pretty high.

On the flip side, the IS on the 24-105 opens the door to whole new world of slow shutter speed creativity without a tripod. A slow shutter speed can blur the movement of a crowd behind a relatively stationary subject. Capturing the movement of water over rocks in a stream is another example.

 

[stilscream]

If your kids are as fast as you say and if you're as old, fat and lazy as I am on a daily basis. I recommend bringing a 600 f4L IS USM so you can keep an eye on them. All kidding aside. 50 f1.2 or 35 1.4 are great general purpose lenses. 70-200 is ii for me would be hard to leave behind as an avid wildlife guy.

 

[mrsfotografie]

au contraire! I'd suggest the best single lens to take with either of your cameras is the 28-135is for the following
reasons. It's relatively cheap to buy - around $300 - but has good enough image quality that it has been a standard package zoom with many Canon bundles. It's relatively cheap to buy so you're not going to break the
bank if it's damaged or stolen. It doesn't weigh as much as some of the alternatives suggested here and most vacations I've been on involve a lot of walking without many "rest stops". You can sell it after your vacation if it doesn't fit nicely into your long range lens plan and you won't lose much, if any, money. If you decide to take the
50 crop sensor, the 18-135 is another similarly priced option.

Have you shot with it? With a 5D3, I don't think the OP wanted to sacrifice IQ. If IQ is not paramount, then an SX50 or SX40 P&S will serve the OP well.

I had the 28-135, and to be honest its IQ and build are crap compared to the 24-105. Pardon my French

 

[ScottFielding]

If your kids are as fast as you say and if you're as old, fat and lazy as I am on a daily basis. I recommend bringing a 600 f4L IS USM so you can keep an eye on them. All kidding aside. 50 f1.2 or 35 1.4 are great general purpose lenses. 70-200 is ii for me would be hard to leave behind as an avid wildlife guy.

Ha ha!! I have contemplated cancelling the holiday in favour of using the funds for a 300 2.8

I do like my prime lenses and borrowed a friends 85 1.2 last week, but don't have the $ to splash out on this lens at the moment.

I have decided to take the 50L which I am used to using, and buy the 135L which means a second lens but gives me a bit more of distance from the pool!! This lens will also come in useful back home as I love my 70-200 f2.8, but sometimes it is too cumbersome with a kid in one hand and a beagle in the other!

Thanks to everyone for their advice!!

Cheers,

Scott

 

[RGF]

May I suggest a 24-105 F/4 L IS, it's the best general purpose lens I can think of on FF (and the basis of my vacation lens set, I usually also bring a 50 mm f/1.8 MkI, a17-40 F/4 L and a tamron 70-300 USD. Wide open the 24-105 is sharp enough, and in the longer focal lengths you can get enough bokeh when needed High iso's and IS make up for low-light use.

+100. Whole heatedly great walk around lens

 

[bholliman]

I have decided to take the 50L which I am used to using, and buy the 135L which means a second lens but gives me a bit more of distance from the pool!! This lens will also come in useful back home as I love my 70-200 f2.8, but sometimes it is too cumbersome with a kid in one hand and a beagle in the other!

Excellent pair of lenses. You should come home with some great pictures.

 

[TexPhoto]

May I suggest a 24-105 F/4 L IS, it's the best general purpose lens I can think of on FF (and the basis of my vacation lens set, I usually also bring a 50 mm f/1.8 MkI, a17-40 F/4 L and a tamron 70-300 USD. Wide open the 24-105 is sharp enough, and in the longer focal lengths you can get enough bokeh when needed High iso's and IS make up for low-light use.

Agree 24-105 is a great lens if you only have one. also the 24-70 f2.8 I or II, but I prefer the 24-105 because of the IS, and it is much cheaper.

I see you are picking up a 135L, i think this leaves you with no wide option, but that is one way to go. Consider a 100mm Macro. Not as long as the 135, but it gives you a macro lens and is pretty awesome.

 

[RLPhoto]

I am going on holiday with the family and ideally would like to take just one lens. I am interested in what others would regard as a popular lens for a beach/pool holiday with young kids??

I have a 5D III and currently own a 50L and 70-200 f2.8 II. I will have enough on my hands with one lens and am therefore considering taking the 50L as love using a wide aperture for capturing my kids. I will not have a chance to take many scenery shots, so will be doing mostly candid/portraits.

I could justify purchasing a new lens before I go and have been considering the 135 f2 for a while now, but my friend recently captured some great shots with his 16-35 II.

If I am purchasing a new lens I need to get it right as don't want it gathering dust when I get back. I mainly use the 50L and nearly always try to have it at 1.2. I have previously considered the 85L but with fast kids I need a quick focus lens, and feel the 135 f2 would suit better.

I live on a small Island and have no access to wide lenses, so don't want to jump into an expensive prime.

Would appreciate any advice as my only concern with the 50L is that I would have to be close to the water to capture the kids. I am not looking to get any group shots.

Cheers,

Scott

I liked the 24-105L + 50L combo. It really covers 90% of anything that comes up but now I carry my g15 + 430II for family stuff. I like my g15 quite a bit now. ;D

 

[knkedlaya]

I carried 3 lenses during my recent trip along with 7D.
1. Tamron 17-50mm f.28 VC(95% of the time it was on my camera)
2. Canon 55-250 kit lens - 4.5% of the time.
3. 100mmL Macro - 0.5%.
Most of the photos were "I was there" kind of shots, so 17-50 was perfect. I bought Tammy just before the trip since I found 24-105(rented) was just not wide enough for my taste on 7D. I found 55-250 was useful near the water pools to avoid water falling on the camera and the lens.
My .2 cents.

 

[Dylan777]

24-70 f2.8 II will be a great choice. You can get sharp and decent bokeh at f2.8. You can shoot f9-11 for landscape shots with 24-70, where your 50L could have major focus shift. 24mm on 5D III is quite wide for travel and indoor tight space.

 

[Zlatko]

I would always recommend taking at least one back-up lens, even if is just a pancake Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Lens.

On my last vacation, the 40 f/2.8 STM was my most-used lens. It's a great combination of compact size, light weight and high image quality.

 

[meenanm]

I have he 24-105F4 and its a great travel lens. If I had the 24-70 f/2.8 I think I would use the 24-105 less often. I would like the 2.8 ability when traveling. That said, the 24-105 is a GREAT lens.

Also have the 135, you made a good choice. Lacks IS but at 2.0 its not needed that often, for me.
-Mike

 

[canonball93]

The 24-105 on my 5DIII is usually my choice on a single-lens outing.

 

[gary]

I am heading back home for a month in the summer and showing Europe to my wife. My one lens solution is the 24-70L 2.8 II. I have used it for about 2 months now and its versatile with exceptional quality.