Considering a swapping lenses...

M

martyp

Messages
1,332
Name
Marty
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all,


Okay I'll admit it, I have L glass lust. :D

Now, I have two Canon lenses 28-135mm IS and 70-300mm IS. I'm looking at changing the 28-135mm for a bit of L glass.

I'm up in the air as to whether to go for a 24-70 f/2.8 or the 24-105 f/4 IS.

The 24-70 is a more expensive and also lacks IS which I feel to be a useful feature, although I can always use a tripod.

Question is, what is the difference in optical quality between these? Is it worth going for the faster glass or saving some cash.

I mainly shoot landscapes so the extra 4mm will be appreciated.

Thanks in advance and sorry if there are 300 posts before this asking the same thing... :thinking:
 
Well you're shooting on a 5D, the same as me and I also shoot a lot of landscapes, and I can tell you for one thing that 24-70mm on a full frame sensor is quite a limiting focal range unless you've got a second body with a 70-200mm with you all the time. The 24-105mm has great range and like you said, has IS. The Image Stabilisation compensates for three stops worth of light which is an equivalent of f/1.4!

That and the fact that the 24-105 will give you a great walk about lens and covers a large focal range means you'll literally be able to take wide angle and long focal length landscapes without ever changing lenses. Really the only deciding factor is are you planning on using f/2.8? For landscapes you'll likely be shooting at f/8 or smaller so for landscapes alone it's a no brainer! :)

My 24-105 rarely comes off the camera body so I've got plenty of example photos at all focal lengths in all conditions if it helps persuade you to join the EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM club! Whichever you choose I'm sure you'll love the step up to an 'L' :)
 
I think for your uses I would agree and suggest the 24-105.

I have owned both lenses and don't/didn't use either that much as I often jump for primes, but the 24-105 is the more useful of the two. The IS gives it more handholdability than the 24-70. I'd only go for the 24-70 is you wanted to shoot weddings or a lot of indoor ambient light portraits where shutter speed was more important.

Phil
 
Thanks for the swift reply Steffan! :)

Good to hear your experiences with the lens on the 5D too. I can't see myself needing anything lower than f/4 to be honest, if I did I would probably just buy a 35mm or 50mm prime lens - or a flash.

I'm was more concerned about the optical quality differences between the two and if it was a massive jump I would be tempted, although I'm guessing the only real benefit is the aperture.
 
I must admit I find the IS useful on my 24-105, and it used to be a permanent fixture on my camera, but I have recently discovered the 17-40. I havn`t tried the 24-70 but it does sound alot of money for it not to have IS.
 
martyp said:
Thanks for the swift reply Steffan! :)

Good to hear your experiences with the lens on the 5D too. I can't see myself needing anything lower than f/4 to be honest, if I did I would probably just buy a 35mm or 50mm prime lens - or a flash.

I'm was more concerned about the optical quality differences between the two and if it was a massive jump I would be tempted, although I'm guessing the only real benefit is the aperture.
Click to expand...

The 24-105 is a very sharp lens - you'll not be disappointed. The 28-135 is a decent lens but the 24-105 smokes it.

Phil
 
Marty

Have you considered getting a legacy prime 24mm (i.e. an older Manual lens) - the lack of AF might not be a problem for landscapes and keep your current lenses. Paul Beastall (Grumpy Badger) got a set of old Olympus OM lenses to use with his 1D for landscapes. There are other options (not Canon FD, unfortunately) that you could use with an adapter. Lots of fun using the old glass and the results should be good on a full-frame body.
 
Excellent thanks Phil and Ian!

I can't say I'm disappointed with the 28-135 I have but I just feel it doesn't show the 5D to its full potential. By the sounds of it the 24-105 will more than satisfy my needs without selling my kidney too! :D

Andy, I did have a look at wide angle primes a little while ago although I'd rather have one really sharp zoom lens to cover the majority of my shots. Thanks for the suggestion though! :)
 
I've had both the 24-70L and the 24-105L, I kept the 24-70L because for me it suited at the time to do so, in your case I would have gone for the 24-105L as it is a much more useable walk around lens. I have considered more than once swapping back to the 24-105L for general use on my 1DsMk3.
 
Thanks Ed!

The 24-105 was my first choice really (mainly due to the fact its cheaper!) so now my minds set.

I'll get my lens on the 'bay and hopefully get my first L by next weekend!! :D
 
martyp said:
Thanks Ed!

The 24-105 was my first choice really (mainly due to the fact its cheaper!) so now my minds set.

I'll get my lens on the 'bay and hopefully get my first L by next weekend!! :D
Click to expand...

Fantastic! Glad to hear you're joining the club :) I was about to link to the-digital-picture too but looks like somebody beat me to it! There's a couple on TP on the moment too that might be worth keeping an eye on too but however you get one if you were anywhere near as happy as I was when I got mine then trust me "estatic" is an understatement ;)
 
Awesome, can't wait to get the 24-105 now!

I just put my lens on eBay so hopefully someone will buy it within the next 3 days and its upgrade time... :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top