Next Lens for 30D....help me decide

[poker]

Hello! It's me again...hehehhehee

I've decided to get the Canon EF 300mm f/4.0 L IS to top off my lenses for sports and nature. With the 300 and my 70-200 L f/2.8. I think I'll be happy with this couple for that type of photography projects. I already have the x2 and will be getting the x1.4.

I've always wanted the 24-70 f/2.8 L but have been leaning towards the 24-105 L f/4 IS. My old event lens was of the same focal length (in the full frame film days). I used a no longer produced Sigma 28-105 f/2.8-4. I enjoyed that lens and still use it when possible.

So what's your vote and why? Should I get the Canon 24-105 L f/4 IS or the Canon 24-70 L f/2.8?

The purpose is mainly for event photography but would like to use it for portraits as well.

To help your decision, I already have:
Tamron 17-50 f/2.8
Canon 50mm f/1.8
Canon 85mm f/1.8
Canon 70-200 L f/2.8
Sigma 28-105 f/4

Thanks in advance...

[poker]

I guess my question is really do I go for the f2.8 and the shorter focal length or go the longer focal length and believe Canon marketing in regards to IS. Canon likes to put this in their ads, "Image Stabilizer Technology steadies camera shake up to three stops."

I kept the old Sigma 28-105 on my camera all of Saturday to see if that focal length really works for me but I'm still not sure.

One arguement for the 24-105 is the finding of Photozone.de site saying the resolution on the lens was a bit better than the 24-70.

Personally, I count on f2.8 for indoor creativity in low light situations. Will f/4.0 and IS give me the same results?

[poker]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/re...s/28-105.shtml

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Ca...mL/page6.shtml

After reading these two article, I whink I'll go with the 24-105 IS. It appears that comparing the 24-105 and the 24-70 is a common arguement. I need a flexible event lens an dI feel the reach to 105 will give me that flexibility. I'll throw on one of my f/1.8 or f/2.8 lenses if I need some low light creativitiy in case the 105 IS doesn't hack it.

If anyone has any thoughts on the subject...please share.

Thanks.

[setiprime]

Well...that was a short thread. You just became you own best friend.

[poker]

Well...that was a short thread. You just became you own best friend.

Well, although nobody responded I still continue my research as I'm sure we all do. I like it when somebody follows up with their own questions with the eventual conclusion.


I hate looking through problem/answer threads and the person ends it with "it's ok, I found it!"

[mjs1973]

I don't know how much help this is going to be, but here it goes. I have the 24-70 f/2.8 L and I love it. I used this lens for a couple of weddings, and the focal ranged worked out well. On the other hand, I attempted to use if at my nephews basketball game a few weeks ago, and found it to be just too wide for what I wanted. In that situation, I would have much rather had a 70-200 f/2.8. Since I don't have that lens, I opted for the 100mm f/2.8 Marco.

I have a kit lens that covers about the same range as the 28-105mm lens, but I don't remember exactly what it is. It's a kit lens, so I don't use it much, but it does have it's good points. It's much lighter and easier to carry around than the 24-70mm L lens, and I find the focal range to be much more usefull. Both lense have their place, but I find the 28-105mm to be a better choice, and will fit the bill in more situations than the 24-70mm. Unless you're in low light, then I always opt for the faster glass, and try to find a way to work around the focal length limitations.

[poker]

Thanks for the input Michael. I'll take it into consideration.

One of the big differences is the weight of the 24-70 compared to the 24-105. The 105 weighs less. I am thinking of renting the 105 for $25 this weekend to shoot a formal birthday this Saturday. It should help me make a final decision.

[OmahaAdam]

Keep us posted on your thoughts and reviews. I'm in the same conundrum as you are!

[readingr]

I just bought the 24-70 F2.8L USM with a 5D - I have no complaints with this lense. Its pin sharp and works in low light - well low enough for me.

On the 5D I get no vignetting in the corners at full open and 24mm. Its the lense I keep on by default for landscapes.

The macro is quite useful too.

Ask me to swap it and the answer would be NO CHANCE.

I can post examples if you want.

Roger

[poker]

Ask me to swap it and the answer would be NO CHANCE.

Thanks Roger. I'd like to see a sample. Why did you buy that lens and for what purpose? I'm still confused on what to get.

Do I want f/2.8 up to 70mm?

OR

Do I want f/4 with IS up to 105?

I've been using my old Sigma 28-105 to see if I really appreciate the focal length. I still can't decide. I'll want to make a decision soon. I'll either rent one or buy one tomorrow morning.

Hmmmmm.....

[readingr]

My photography is Landscape, Seascapes, Macro, Still Life, Night shots, and now wildlife just starting again.

After talking to a Pro he suggested a few lenses which were all F4's. After playing with them in the store I asked to try the 24-70mm F2.8L USM and his words were Darn Good Lense - his words a little more colourful.

As soon as I put that lens on the front of the 5D I fell in love with it. It was so balanced and it lets loads of light in. It is pin sharp and well worth the extra money for me.

Plan is to get a Canon 50mm F1.2L USM and a Sigma 10-24mm in the future.

I now need to get a polariser and the choice of lenses I made means I only have to buy one as they are both 77mm - didn't realise that until I got home.

I will post a 24mm, 50mm'sh and 70 mm photo tonight. The current photo in the critique is a 70mm @ F22 - Title Early morning Hamble.

Roger

[SmartWombat]

I went for the 24-70 and the 70-200, I didn't see any need for an overlap in focal length.
I couldn't afford a 400 prime but instead got the 100-400L.

So I'm biased ...

[readingr]

Here are some of the photos taken with EXIF:

File Name _MG_0259.CR2
Camera Model Canon EOS 5D
Shooting Date/Time 14/04/2007 17:20:47
Shooting Mode Aperture-Priority AE
Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/60
Av( Aperture Value ) 14.0
Metering Mode Evaluative Metering
Exposure Compensation 0
ISO Speed 100
Lens EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Focal Length 24.0 mm
Image Size 4368x2912
Image Quality RAW
Flash Off
White Balance Mode Auto
AF Mode AI Focus AF
Picture Style Neutra


File Name _MG_0295.CR2
Camera Model Canon EOS 5D
Shooting Date/Time 19/04/2007 13:18:34
Shooting Mode Aperture-Priority AE
Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/40
Av( Aperture Value ) 4.5
Metering Mode Center-Weighted Average Metering
Exposure Compensation 0
ISO Speed 1600
Lens EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Focal Length 70.0 mm
Image Size 4368x2912
Image Quality RAW
Flash Off
White Balance Mode Auto
AF Mode One-Shot AF
Picture Style Standard


File Name _MG_0310.CR2
Camera Model Canon EOS 5D
Shooting Date/Time 19/04/2007 13:24:11
Shooting Mode Manual Exposure
Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/30
Av( Aperture Value ) 5.6
Metering Mode Spot Metering
ISO Speed 1600
Lens EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Focal Length 63.0 mm
Image Size 4368x2912
Image Quality RAW
Flash Off
White Balance Mode Auto
AF Mode Manual focusing
Picture Style Standard


File Name _MG_0210.CR2
Camera Model Canon EOS 5D
Shooting Date/Time 14/04/2007 08:34:03
Shooting Mode Aperture-Priority AE
Tv( Shutter Speed ) 1/50
Av( Aperture Value ) 22.0
Metering Mode Evaluative Metering
Exposure Compensation 0
ISO Speed 100
Lens EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Focal Length 70.0 mm
Image Size 4368x2912
Image Quality RAW
Flash Off
White Balance Mode Auto
AF Mode One-Shot AF
Picture Style Standard


Hope these help.

Roger

[poker]

Thanks Roger.

I am surprised at the indoor chimp shot. Nice exposure at 100ISO at f22 and 1/50. The other shot at 1600ISO shows almost no noise. Nice setup you got there. The 5D sensor is impressive and the lens as well.

I went to a camera store and tried both lenses. The feel of the lens was just like what I read.

The 24-70 is heavy and the 24-105 is light.
The 24-105 IS works great at slow shutters but doesn't not freeze movement.
The 24-70 was 1 to 1.5 stops FASTER in the same lighting conditions at 400ISO (in the store)

Just using the 24-70....I kinda see how shooters love that lens so much.

I still haven't fully decided.

[Loupey]

Hi, Eric - sorry I didn't see this thread until now.

You know my love of IS However, I can tell you that I have the 24-70mm and I still wouldn't trade it for the 24-105mm IS. I started out with the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS first, then tormented over the 24-70 vs. 24-105 question (the 24-105 had just been introduced at that time). For a few days afterwards I still thought about the question but soon disappeared.

#1) I agree with SmartWombat about NOT overlapping focal lengths. Moreover, having the f/2.8 max aperture going from the 24-70 and the 70-200 is very convenient.

#2) being able to go to f/2.8 to blow out the background is something you can't do in-camera with the f/4 if necessary

#3) being able to use a faster shutter speed with the f/2.8 is not possible with the 24-105 unless you crank up the ISO (the 30D has a maximum useable ISO of 400 IMO)

#4) the IS advantage of the 24-105mm is not that big of factor for this range of focal lengths IMO (105mm every so often, 70mm once in a while, 50mm almost never, 24mm never)

I have the 17-40mm f/4 and I consider that lens a dog for indoor work due to its f/4.

Your thoughts to my thoughts?

[poker]

Thanks for the mind meld, Loupey!

You know my love of IS However, I can tell you that I have the 24-70mm and I still wouldn't trade it for the 24-105mm IS.

That says alot. I was looking forward to my first IS lens in my camera bag. I thought you'd be happy for me!

#1) I agree with SmartWombat about NOT overlapping focal lengths.

I somewhat disagree partly based on some article I read. For the sake of controlling camera bag weight and NOT having to switch lenses during the shoot, wouldn't overlap help? BUT, no need to reiterate. I trust everyone that commented here. I'll believe it.

Moreover, having the f/2.8 max aperture going from the 24-70 and the 70-200 is very convenient.

Can't deny that. Although I have a love hate relationship with my Tamron 17-50 f2.8, I love having the f/2.8.

#2) being able to go to f/2.8 to blow out the background is something you can't do in-camera with the f/4 if necessary

Blow out the background? Do you mean BLUR or blow out WHITE? Please tell me you mean blur because the PR society has trained me to believe that anything BLOWN out means 20 lashes to the photographer.

#3) being able to use a faster shutter speed with the f/2.8 is not possible with the 24-105
unless you crank up the ISO (the 30D has a maximum useable ISO of 400 IMO)

That's what I was planning to do. Bad on me I guess. I had more faith in ISOs above 400 on the 30D but to be honest I've never printed anything that high so I shouldn't make assumptions. In the store today using the 24-105, I had to crank up the ISO between 600 and 800 to get similar shutter speeds to the 24-70.

#4) the IS advantage of the 24-105mm is not that big of factor for this range of focal lengths IMO (105mm every so often, 70mm once in a while, 50mm almost never, 24mm never)

Deep down I kinda knew this but chose to ignore this. The other issue here the pronounced barrel distortion (based on reviews) at 105 with that lens. Might not be worth using 105 anyway therefore not needing IS at all.

I have the 17-40mm f/4 and I consider that lens a dog for indoor work due to its f/4.

I think this comment takes the cake. My old Sigma kinda has spoiled me. I get a bit of 2.8 and 4.0 based on focal length since it is variable. I've never used a lens with just f4.0 on a shoot before. Can you elaborate a bit more here regarding indoor work?

In the past few hours I was leaning towards the 24-105 now I'm not sure again...flash back sequence "remember how Loupey told you to get the 70-200 IS and you didn't listen now you are regretting it??? Eric??? Remember!!! You cheap bastard???"

[Loupey]

flash back sequence "remember how Loupey told you to get the 70-200 IS and you didn't listen now you are regretting it??? Eric??? Remember!!! You cheap bastard???"

You funny guy!!!

First of all "blown" = "blurred". Sorry, my bad.

As for the 17-40mm, I originally purchased it as a general walk-about lens and also for shooting parties and candids indoors. I generally do not like to use flash so using the f/4 inside, no flash, at or under ISO 400 means shooting at like 1/15s or 1/30s. Not really good with people who are awake. I still use it for home interior shots since I use f/16 or f/22. But I've replaced this lens with the 28mm f/1.8 and 50mm f/1.8 as my walk-about lenses. Yeah, the 24-70mm is WAY too heavy to have swinging around your neck or shoulders for too long. You can take out 3~4 kids if you turn around too fast.

Hate to make you even more confused, but if I started over from scratch, here would be my middle range lenses:

28mm f/1.8
50mm f/1.8
85mm f/1.8
135mm f/2L
300mm f/4L

Yeah, not a big fan of zooms. But then again, I hardly shoot any sports. I did post some pictures shot with the 24-70mm in the sports forum recently.

Have fun deciding. I'm going shooting!

[rovowen]

Manaca
I am fairly new to the DSLR world, only about six months. Before that I was a Point & Shoot kinda guy.
What I have found out in regards to the lens that you need. You have to know what you are planning on shooting and how you are going about shooting it.
I for example, shoot a lot of Middle & High School sports. I started out with two kit lens, since it was winter almost everything was in a gym. I had to take photos using F/4.0-6.0 because that was the biggest f/stops for the lens. ISO of 1600 and the shutter speed was somewhere around 60-80. Now these are not good numbers to be shooting a basketball game with just the existing gym lighting.
Because of budget, I opted for a third party lens, Sigma 50-150 f/2.8. Now this is a great third party lens. But don't compare it to an L-glass. Since one of the coaches use to shoot for her college sports, she told me to go under the hoop to get better shots. The out of bound line and the walls in most gyms here are only about 10 feet, I didn't have an option of walking back. When the players were under the hoop at the end I am on. The players arms would be cut off because I could not zoom out far enough so at times wished that I had the 24-70 and when the players were at the other end and a ball got loose, I wish I had a 70-200. So, even sometimes one lens will not do all that you would like.
I feel if I could afford it, "SmartWombat's" lens subjection would be the best combination for me. For you only you would know.
One last thing, I have found out that when getting new glass, I would love to get the best quailty with a fast lens for my budget. If you have a fast lens, it is there when you need it and if you don't need such a big aperture, just stop it down to where you need it. But if you don't have a lens with an f/2.8 and need it. I have to crank the ISO up and I prefer not to do that if at all possible.

Newbie here
rovowen

[readingr]

Thanks Roger.

I am surprised at the indoor chimp shot. Nice exposure at 100ISO at f22 and 1/50. The other shot at 1600ISO shows almost no noise. Nice setup you got there. The 5D sensor is impressive and the lens as well.

I went to a camera store and tried both lenses. The feel of the lens was just like what I read.

The 24-70 is heavy and the 24-105 is light.
The 24-105 IS works great at slow shutters but doesn't not freeze movement.
The 24-70 was 1 to 1.5 stops FASTER in the same lighting conditions at 400ISO (in the store)

Just using the 24-70....I kinda see how shooters love that lens so much.

I still haven't fully decided.

Hmmm! didn't notice I had taken that at such a high ISO. Guess from now on I don't need to worry to much. Last night I was playing with low light and high ISO. Guess it all works.

I looked at the 24-105 but dismissed it as the 24-70L is much much much better - my opinion of course and I bought it so I have to say that I guess. Mind you if it wasn't I had the option of taking it back to be exchanged for another lens. Its NOT going back.

The weight of lens or the body doesn't seem to bother me at all and the 30D is only slightly lighter than the 5D;100g I think.

Go and buy it you won't regret it. As for filling the whole range. Never seemed to bother me in the past and not now either and I have a 70mm - 100mm gap. I just use my feet for that small gap, which normally means a few meters walk.

Roger.

[poker]

Newbie here
rovowen

Rovowen, great advice and train of thought from someone who considers himself a newbie. My purpose for the lens is event photography and specifically for typical low light reception hall conditions (usually tungsten lighting). I wanted the 105 because it gives me the better range and I thought the IS with an ISO bump would help. The idea of that gets voided since I use to comfortably shoot events with a 28-105 on film (full frame). With a 24-70 and the crop factor on the 30D, I'll be at 38-112. So I'm not losing reach but losing wide angle. I'll have to use my Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 for typical table/group shots or creative dance floor stuff.

Regarding L glass. I learned the value of it when I got the 70-200 and used it for nature stuff. I wonder if they make L sunglasses. I better propose the idea to Canon :thumbsup:

Thanks for your input.

[poker]

Go and buy it you won't regret it.

I'm sold! Or one was sold to me 3 hours ago.

I went to CANOGA CAMERA at opening and stood there for a good hour staring at all the toys. Man do they have a lot of stuff and they are so busy. I mean people were just buying bodies and lenses. Someone bought a Nikon D80 and 3 VR lenses in one transaction. Geez.....when will I buy a MarkIII??? Maybe never....unless I win the lottery and book a ticket to a safari.

So I have a 24-70 and to compensate for the weight I bought a new Tamrac Neoprene camera strap. It has two pockets for CF cards on it! Yeah, I'm a dork.

I also got a omni bounce for my flash.

Now here is a quick sample. I can not believe the amount of contrast and saturation in this shot. It's honestly better than seeing it in person. It's a bit soft so I'll need play around with it and confirm. My benchmark is my super sharp 85 f1.8.

I'm shooting a birthday at a hotel. I'll come back and share the shots.

THANKS FOR ALL YOUR INPUT. PR comes through for me again!

[poker]

This came out sharper than the first.

Camera Model Name
Canon EOS 30D
Shooting Date/Time
4/21/2007 13:33:29
Tv(Shutter Speed)
1/100Sec.
Av(Aperture Value)
F3.5
Metering Modes
Spot
ISO Speed
400
Lens
EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Focal Length
70.0 mm

I better stop messing around. I have a few things to do before tonight.

Wish me luck on the shoot tonight :thumbsup:

[readingr]

I'm shooting a birthday at a hotel. I'll come back and share the shots.

How did it go?

Roger

[poker]

Thanks for asking Roger.

Well, I'm not too happy with the work but it is the photographer and not the lens. I still have major problems understanding ETTL but that's for another thread. I'll discuss how I used the 24-70 last weekend.

First I used it at the birthday party in a typical hotel reception hall. Tungsten lighting everywhere. I had not choice to use ISO800 for non-flash photography. I probably should've used higher but I felt the noise would've made the shot unacceptable. It was difficult to get a good shutter speed. I was at a painfull 1/20 to 1/40 whenever I did this. I should've brought my 85 f/1.8 but didn't think of it. It would've been nice to compare.

ISO800
1/25
f2.8
WB on Tungsten


When I used my 580ex with a diffuser (@45 degrees) I got typical results.
ISO400
1/60
f4.0
AWB


So if I got the 24-105 the f/4.0 would not have done any better without flash but would have done just as good with flash. The only time I wish I had the 105mm was when they did speeches on the dance floor and I hate stepping foot on the dance floor as they do it. It's best to try and be invisible. The weight of the lens did not bother me and I owe part of that to my new neoprene strap.

The next day we went to Disney's California Adventure on a heavy overcast day. Here is one shot using the lens.

1/60
f8.0


I'm still trying to sort things out in my head regarding the two lenses. I know this lens is loved for good reason. Any thoughts on the samples?

I put up a product review just for PJ! :thumbsup:

P.S. I brought the lens to work today to shoot the botanical garden at lunch. Will post some photos tonight.

[poker]

Here's a nice little semi macro from lunch today. The lens focuses pretty darn well close up.