Can i have your opinions on the following lenses please?

scottduffy

scottduffy

Messages
3,348
Name
Scott
Edit My Images
Yes
I am thinking about purchasing one of these lenses in the next month or so and was wondering which one you would go for. I have started helping a friend out as a second shooter in the weddings he's covering and this is the reason why i need to purchase a new lens. I have no plans on going full frame any time soon and the options are listed below.

Canon 17-55 is
Canon 24-70 L
Canon 24-105 L

I know the 17-55 is and the 24-70L might be better for inside the churches/chapels and halls but will they all have similar IQ when shooting outside? Any advice welcome. I was also toying with the idea of the 70-200 2.8 is but i am not sure if the range will be too long and i don't have money for a second body and another lens to compliment this.
 
I'd go for the 17-55 IS every day of the week. 17mm is a much more useful focal length than 24mm on a crop-sensor camera, and the combination of wide angle, f/2.8 and IS means that it has amazing low-light capability - if you can see it, you can shoot it handheld.

All three lenses have very good IQ. I'm not sure how useful it is to debate which one is better, when they're all that good.
 
Next to weddings this has to be the most covered topic on this, and many other forums. Do a quick search and you'll find more info and opinion than you can shake a stick at.

I shoot with a 5D, I needed f2.8 so I bought the 24-70.

I've never used the 17-55 but the 24-70 is generally a bit better than the 105 optically.

Image quality will obviously be high on all three though. Weather sealing and build may be a bit better on the L lenses if that matters to you.

No one can really tell you what to buy though as we all need different things.. will 55mm be long enough for you? Will 70mm?

Do you find you're needing IS often or not? Do you like to shoot at f2.8 often? A lot of people shoot weddings and find a way around it as they like to have more depth of field.. and so on.
 
70-200 will be too tight for weddings on a cropped body. I use the tamron equivalent to the Canon 17-55mm and it is very good for cropped bodies, it stays on the 40d during the wedding (may I suggest you look at it as a much cheaper but not optically far option to the canon). But back to your original question I would say 17-55 is a much more useful focal length on cropped bodies. The 24-70 is a handy length too, but i feel it is wasted to some extent on a cropped body as you lose a fair bit on the short side.
 
Would this be the Tamron 17-50? Sorry daft question. Just noticed your lens listed at bottom of your post.
 
scottduffy said:
Would this be the Tamron 17-50? Sorry daft question. Just noticed your lens listed at bottom of your post.
Click to expand...

yep, the tamron 17-50 2.8, theres a image stabilised version coming out soon as well so it may be worth waiting for that, it may also bring the canon down in price a bit as it may be a worthy alternative.

what lens do you currently shoot with at weddings?
 
I have used a Canon 50mm F1.4 that i had borrowed but i really need something other than a prime lens. As i was only helping out i was taking mainly portrait type shots but i would rather be able to at least chip in with some other types and this is why i need the flexibility of the zoom and good IQ would be hugely beneficial to my mate and well as those paying.
 
scottduffy said:
I have used a Canon 50mm F1.4 that i had borrowed but i really need something other than a prime lens. As i was only helping out i was taking mainly portrait type shots but i would rather be able to at least chip in with some other types and this is why i need the flexibility of the zoom and good IQ would be hugely beneficial to my mate and well as those paying.
Click to expand...

what lens does your friend use? it may be an idea to follow him/her on what they use. I know as a 2nd shooter you are required to cover different things, but there may be a reason why they prefer one lens over another.

but if you are taking portraits mainly, then 24-70 or 24-105 would be very very useful and great for picking off nice candids of the b&g and guests. the ultimate answer to your question would be trying some of these lengths out for yourself.
 
I can't as he shoots Nikon. He has a Nikon D200 and i think a 18-70 lens. Not quite sure if thats correct but it's close to that focal legnth. I am swaying toward the 24-70 to be honest. Just because of the low light stuff. I think the longer reach it has over the 17-55 is might be the clincher.
 
scottduffy said:
I can't as he shoots Nikon. He has a Nikon D200 and i think a 18-70 lens. Not quite sure if thats correct but it's close to that focal legnth. I am swaying toward the 24-70 to be honest. Just because of the low light stuff. I think the longer reach it has over the 17-55 is might be the clincher.
Click to expand...

i think you have your answer. If you feel that your 50mm is not close enough then you should go for the 24-70. Its a cracking lens, but not very cheap unfortunately.
 
I know it's quite expensive but so are most unfortunately. I might head into Jessops in Glasgow at the weekend or calumet and ask to try out the Tamron and the Canon and see what suits. Thanks again mate for your input. Just to add that the more i read about the Tamron the better it sounds.
 
i know how you feel, but if you can get the money together then go for it. you wont regret it and hopefully if your work is good, you may be able to get paid for your services and eventually offset the cost of the lens. good luck! :thumbs::
 
scottduffy said:
I know it's quite expensive but so are most unfortunately. I might head into Jessops in Glasgow at the weekend or calumet and ask to try out the Tamron and the Canon and see what suits. Thanks again mate for your input. Just to add that the more i read about the Tamron the better it sounds.
Click to expand...

Getting the Tammy 17-50 delivered tomorrow. Will let you know all about it, hopefully it will be :love: and not :'(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top