Canon 24-105L on a crop

bl0at3r

bl0at3r

Messages
3,998
Name
Alan
Edit My Images
Yes
Is this a sensible lens for a crop? How does it compare to 28-70 2.8?

Been lucky enough to borrow a 24-105L from work - could have also borrowed the 5D2 body to go with it but resisted the temptation, as I don't want to start giving myself a headache wondering whether I should sell 7d to fund a 5d2 :bonk:

Anyway, I currently have a 17-85mm and a sigma 10-20 - so thought maybe I'd go for the 24-105 as my walkabout lens, sell the 17-85 and have the siggie for landscapes etc

I have also tried a 17-55 2.8 which is widely regarded as the best efs lens and is obviously a stop faster too at 2.8 a whilst this was impressive I am strangely drawn to the red ring :thumbs:

Comments or suggestions appreciated
 
I borrowed one of these and thought it was a superb lens. I think mine had IS and was f4 and it gave excellent results. The focal range was ok but nothing dramatic. I wish they would do a 2.8 IS version but that would be HUGE dosh!
 
I find 24mm on a 1.3 and 1.6 crop wide enough for most things and I think the 24-105 is a good choice of walkaround, especially if you have the siggie in your bag for when you really want the width.

Phil
 
24nmm is actually considered very wide on full frame - unfortunately, on a 1.6X crop sensor the 24-105 becomes an effective 38.4mm - 168mm, so it's hardly wide at all at the wide end. I shot a wedding where I was comfortably dealing with large groups with the 17-40L, while the second shooter using a 24-105 couldn't fit them in at all.(Both of us on 1.6 crop bodies)

Having said that, I've borrowed a 24-105 and it's a tack sharp lens which gives lovely natural looking colour. I was very impressed with it. No2 Son uses one on a 50D and he loves it.
 
it's a tack sharp lens which gives lovely natural looking colour
Click to expand...

AMEN to that! :D
 
24-105L is brilliant on full frame - there's nothing else quite like it. Got it :)

17-55 2.8 is brilliant on crop format - there's nothing else quite like it. Had it :)

:D
 
bl0at3r said:
Is this a sensible lens for a crop? How does it compare to 28-70 2.8?
Click to expand...

Where you impressed with the results?

I've got a 24-105L, it's a cracking lens, if I need to go wide it's for landscapes and buildings and my 10-22 fits that role.
I ignore comments saying that L lenses should only be used on full frame bodies because if I didn't, I wouldn't own a 70-200L IS f/4 and this also a fantastic lens.

This is the first photo I took with my 24-105 and my jaw dropped when I first saw it.
It never ceases to surprise me when I see the level of sharpness / detail in a photo taken with the 24-105L.

I know 800x600 images are not ideal as examples but hopefully, these will tempt you :)

4502997132_c1e7d146c8_o.jpg


Another from a recent holiday.

4735320267_b0e5f5f4bf_b.jpg
 
I use the 24-105 as my walkabout lens and seldom do I find it not wide enough for general use. There are few occasions where I can't take that extra step back and the longer end is quite handy. That said if I know I'll be needing something wider the 10-22 comes along with me and I don't mind changing lenses.
One reason I bought the 24-105 to use with my 7D is the weather sealing so that I don't have to worry while out n about here in sunny but sligtly damp Scotland, if they bring out a similarly sealed 17-55 f2.8 then I'd have a decision to make :thinking:
 
Both lenses are superb. On a crop I'd go for the 17-55 even if it doesn't have the red ring! You can smile to yourself knowing you have one of the best lenses out there. Some people say it flares a little too much, but I loved it because of what you could do artisically with sun flare. If I went back to a crop, I'd get another 17-55 as that range is spot on for a walkabout lens and having f2.8 is cool.

That said on my 5d2 the 24-105 is a gem.
 
wavefront said:
Both lenses are superb. On a crop I'd go for the 17-55 even if it doesn't have the red ring! You can smile to yourself knowing you have one of the best lenses out there. Some people say it flares a little too much, but I loved it because of what you could do artisically with sun flare. If I went back to a crop, I'd get another 17-55 as that range is spot on for a walkabout lens and having f2.8 is cool.

That said on my 5d2 the 24-105 is a gem.
Click to expand...

Completely agree with everything you have said. The absence of a red ring doesn't stop the 17-55 being a truly great lens. If I ever had need of a crop body again then I would have to budget for one again.

Last holiday I *only* took the 24-105, I had real reservations about leaving the 17-40 and 70-200 (f4) at home. No need to worry though, the 24-105 is the ultimate walk-a-round for FF in my opinion. Have a look at my Flickr for a small sample of the shots I took with it (I'm still wading through the other 2000+). Earlier shots on my Flickr have example of the 17-55 on my old 40D.
 
For weddings I use mostly 24-105 on 7D & keep a 16-35 on a 5D I find that the combination is preferable to the much heavier 70-200 on 7D & 24-105 on 5D that i used to use...

Al'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top