24-105 for landscapes? (full frame)

J

John.D

Messages
335
Name
John
Edit My Images
No
Hey all,

I'm desperate to get out landscaping but don't have anything suitable since selling on my 400d with my Tokina 12-24.

I currently have a 5D mk1, Tamron 28-75 which is my general purpose lens, a nifty fifty and a 70-200 Sigma.

I've been thinking about getting a 17-40, but i'm not sure if it'll just be too wide on my full frame. On my Tokina 12-24 and 400D I found myself edging more to the 18-24 range of the lens rather than the widest, so i'm now thinking the 24-105 is a better bet for landscapes as it's not ultrawide but still wide.

What are your thoughts? I've never used my Tamron for landscapes as i've been turned off by it's filter size (all my filters are 77mm) If I got hold of a 24-105 I would probably sell on my Tamron 28-75 as it'll probably replace that (however i'm not sure if i'll miss a lens with 2.8)
 
Sell your filters & get a cokin style set which can be used with different filter sizes
 
The 18 - 24 range on you 400D translates as 28.8 - 38.4mm on full frame... so the 24-105 will more than cover it.
 
If your into landscapes beware the 24-105mm suffers quite bad distortion at the wide end on a FF camera.
 
John.D said:
But surely the 17-40 would have more?
Click to expand...

The 17-40 is actually quite neutral and if you're not shooting straight lines then you'll probably not even see any distortion. The 16-35 is supposedly even better but then you'd hope so for 3 times the money.

Of course the normal wide angle perspective games are more apparent at 17mm than 24 but you'll get that with any choice.
 
I have a 24-105L on my 400d and it seems great I've only had it a short while b, having been using a 50mm for ages its great to be able to take wider shots, also a great walk about lens too! although wont be as wide on FF
 
24-105L distorts quite badly at 24mm, much more than the 17-40L, but it's very easy to correct in post processing. Canon's DPP Raw processor (the one that comes free with the camera) corrects distortion, CA and vignetting with custom lens profiles with one mouse click. Quite a few other processors also do this now.

Personally, 24mm is nowhere near wide enough for me for landscapes.
 
One other thing I noticed and this is a bit nooby, but I was watching cameralabs review of both lenses, and he mentions the 17-40 rotates within the lens so it will not disrupt the filters. Is this the same with the 24-105? I don't want to put a filter in the perfect place on the lens then have it rotate and mess everything up.

/end noob question

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHvUumjlhf0 (at 1:55 ish)
 
Last edited:
Both the 24-105 and 17-40 are great landscape lenses. If you're replacing your Tokina with a lens then it has to be the 24-105 as a general, all purpose lens.

I have barely touched my 17-40 since getting the 5D MarkII and find the 24-70 perfect. I've even taken quite a few landscapes recently with a 70-200 2.8 and a 300 2.8.


Dave
 
I ve just bought a 24-105 lens for my 5D MK2 for general use which will include landscapes.

Previously, I had the 17-40L on my now defunct 50d which converts to 27-64 and it was fine. I couldn't justify keeping the 17-40 though (as I m skint) so it had to go.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top