Lens discussion from another thread.

1.6x

Not too much of an issue with the 24-105 as it's then like a 35-135 type.

One thing to consider with 2.8 over 4. Yes, it's nice to have the extra stop and all, BUT, can you justify the increase in cost? Will you ever be in a situation where that extra stop is vital? For me, I very very rarely shoot bands, or low light sports action where that stop would be handy, so for me it's just extra cost for bragging rights.

Also compare the size and weight of the two.. http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-70mm-f-2.8-L-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

Lugging the 24-105 around gets a bit weighty after a while and the 24-70 is a lot bigger (due to the increased coke bottles on the end!) so bear that in mind. My backup body is a 400D, not a big camera by any means, but with the booster grip, 24-205 and flashgun it's hefty piece of kit.

Ultimately it comes down to what you prefer, the longer reach of the 105 or the faster aperture of the 70. Bear in mind the 105 has a 3 stop IS which the 70 doesn't.

In terms of price..
BHphoto give the 70 at $1100 odd and the 105 at $1050 so not much difference there.
Personally I'm liking the 105 and use it for 80% of my shoots..

This example is the 105 in action recently (excuse the washed out imageshackwantstoeditmypicsforme look)
http://img182.imageshack.us/img182/9779/buddhisttd9.jpg
 
Last edited:
schitz011 said:
Lugging the 24-105 around gets a bit weighty after a while and the 24-70 is a lot bigger (due to the increased coke bottles on the end!) so bear that in mind. My backup body is a 400D, not a big camera by any means, but with the booster grip, 24-205 and flashgun it's hefty piece of kit.
Click to expand...
I know what you're saying - I love my new 70-200 f/4 but its a big lens to be carting around and it dwarfs the camera unless I have the grip on too. :)

I should be getting my old 400D back this week so I'll have another body to play around with - I might just keep the 50mm f/1.8 on it full time. Save me having to change lenses all the time. Some how a little bit of fluff found its way into the lens and while it doesnt seem to be causing any problems just knowing it's there is really frustrating . . . :o
 
schitz011 said:
One thing to consider with 2.8 over 4. Yes, it's nice to have the extra stop and all, BUT, can you justify the increase in cost?
Click to expand...

Given the price range of both those lenses, the difference in price is not that big. But yeah, it's a lot of money.

Will you ever be in a situation where that extra stop is vital?
Click to expand...
Not really, but then the thing that seduces me abut the 24-70 is the nifty-fifty like lack of barrel distortion, even at it's widest. Pictures of straight objects that come out crooked is what annoys me the worst. I can live with softer focus and all the other problems (within reason)

Also compare the size and weight of the two..
Click to expand...

Good point, I've never seen the two side by side - had no idea the 24-70 wast that much bigger.

You make a good argument for the 28-105L and I will definitely consider it. This is not immediate short term planning though. I have no idea how much my trip is going to cost, so I'm just going to pick up the 17-85 kit for it and hope for the best. At least if I want to sell the camera at a later point I have a reasonable lens so I can sell it as a kit - makes it more marketable.
 
TBH I've not noticed any barrel distortion on my 28-105, it's not wide enough.

Both lenses are great, with all the quality you'd expect from L series stuff.. I guess it comes down to what you want/need. I needed something with longer range as I have a wide angle zoom (17-40mm f4L), so the 28-105 was perfect as it starts to act like a goodly 135mm (35mm format) portrait lens which suits my working environment.

But if I were doing lots of low level light work (say a music tog) I would have gone for the 24-70 which would give me the extra stop.

Horses for courses as they say.

If you do get an L lens, don't sell it with the camera if you upgrade, whats the point?
 
I was referring to selling the kit lens. Since there the only logical "upgrade" for the 40D is the 5D (FF, and like I said, I have no business even dreaming about this right now, but lenses last a long time), and my next SLR purchase will undoubtedly be a film camera, there's little sense hanging onto a EF-S lens. If I buy an L lens, there's no way I'm selling that.

The only reason I'm even thinking of buying a kit lens, is because I can walk into any camera shop here and buy it off the shelf. I went past a few shops today checking availability of the EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM which to me looks like the best bang for buck in terms of a all round zoom. No one has it, Jessops don't even have it in their warehouse (but they have 20 or so on order). They do have the 24-105L in one of their shops though, so there's always a chance.

You're right about the barrel distortion. After looking at the photozone reviews again, they're actually pretty close and both are pretty impressive in that respect.
 
schitz011 said:
The 24-105 f4L is probably the finest lump of 35mm glass I've ever had the pleasure of owning.
Click to expand...

schtz011 - that's an understatement. My goodness - why was I even thinking of anything other than this lens?

I went out to shop for a lens today - looked at a 2nd hand EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM. I almost bought it, but as you mentioned earlier, it's a heavy piece. I thought I'd try the 24-105 first. Kept looking until I found a shop that had the EF 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM. It's very light (completely plastic), AF is instant and silent, and it looks sharp enough, at least as far as I can tell by looking through the view finder. I can't remember the price - £160 or so - but I was tempted to buy it, until I remembered that this happened to be the particular shop that lied to me on a previous occasion. Not a good way to foster customer loyalty.

Next shop happened to have a EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM in stock and was more than happy for me to stick it on my camera and try it out. They patiently answered all my questions, posed for a few test shots, and gave me a pretty good price. Needless to say, this lens now belongs to me :D

Wow, what a nice lens! I've learned two things about it today:

1. On top of everything else, it's a macro! At 105mm I can focus about 20cm away from the lens.

2. The f/4 is actually not slow. I'm guessing the f number is relative to the width of the glass, and this is a fairly wide lens. I was able to take hand-held shots in pretty low light, even without IS. Trying it out at home with various objects, I also notice it gives amazingly shallow DOF. I don't know how to properly measure or express this, but at 105mm focussing as close to the lens as possible, I get about 1cm in focus, with a very even blur in front and behind it.

I'm truly impressed - money well spent!
 
koffiejunkie said:
I'm guessing the f number is relative to the width of the glass, and this is a fairly wide lens.
Click to expand...

I guess I was wrong: According to Wikipedia it's relative to the focal length.

The amount of light captured by a lens is proportional to the area of the aperture, equal to:

adcd8400b9cff8f5ae4ff1cac2074b07.png


Where f is focal length and N is the f-number.

The focal length value is not required when comparing two lenses of the same focal length; a value of 1 can be used instead, and the other factors can be dropped as well, leaving area proportion to the reciprocal square of the f-number N.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you can determine DOF by this or if it is dependant on the lens design too. Assuming it isn't, I'm not sure why I was seeing shallower-than-I-expected DOF - might be because I was using a longer focal length and shooting at a very short distance.

When I have time outside during the day I'll do a proper comparison with the Pentax (18-55 kit lens) and Canon (24-105L) both at the same focal length with f/4 and see if there's a difference in depth of field. Should be interesting.
 
koffiejunkie said:
They patiently answered all my questions, posed for a few test shots.
Click to expand...

The shop that I go to is so laid back that they let me walk out of the shop with the 24 - 105 L plus a 40D. I went to the parking lot and shot off about 40 shots. 20min later, I'm back in the shop and I say; "It's a bit too pricey for me. Cheers guys." :D
 
I like having a good relationship with a supplier. The shop I normally get stuff from has been happy to send me away with a lens for a couple of days and let me try it out. If I like it I buy, if I don't I return it. It works well.
 
Wynsam said:
I like having a good relationship with a supplier. The shop I normally get stuff from has been happy to send me away with a lens for a couple of days and let me try it out. If I like it I buy, if I don't I return it. It works well.
Click to expand...
I buy almost all of my equipment from overseas so I dont have such a personal relationship with my store. :o

On the other hand I save a fortune . . . . :)
 
I would very much like to have a sort of relationship, or acquaintance with my local store, but they're making it really difficult. Take my shopping excursion on monday, for example.

Of about 20 camera/electronics shops I visited, one shop had one guy who was knowledgeable and helpful. One more was helpful but didn't have a clue, but was at least honest about it. The remainder can be divided into two groups:

1. Was reluctant to help at all, didn't know much and didn't seem interested to find out.
2. Blatantly lied about particular models being "out of production" or "not available in the UK" or whatever to try to BS me into buying whatever they had on their shelves.

Oh, and there was one guy who didn't know what a lens was. No wonder people shop on-line. Of course, when things go wrong with an item purchased on-line, you now have to deal with their faceless, nameless "support" which can be like juggling snowballs in hell.
 
Sadly the guy who was knowledgeable and helpful didn't have any of the lenses I was interested in in stock, because he deserved my business. If I wasn't pressed for time (flying out tonight) I would have ordered from him.
 
koffiejunkie said:
Sadly the guy who was knowledgeable and helpful didn't have any of the lenses I was interested in in stock, because he deserved my business. If I wasn't pressed for time (flying out tonight) I would have ordered from him.
Click to expand...
Safe trip - where you headed? I put my folks on the plane back to the US this morning and I'm just off to drop a mate off for his holiday flight to UK.
 
koffiejunkie said:
I would very much like to have a sort of relationship, or acquaintance with my local store, but they're making it really difficult. Take my shopping excursion on monday, for example.

Of about 20 camera/electronics shops I visited, one shop had one guy who was knowledgeable and helpful. One more was helpful but didn't have a clue, but was at least honest about it. The remainder can be divided into two groups:

1. Was reluctant to help at all, didn't know much and didn't seem interested to find out.
2. Blatantly lied about particular models being "out of production" or "not available in the UK" or whatever to try to BS me into buying whatever they had on their shelves.

Oh, and there was one guy who didn't know what a lens was. No wonder people shop on-line. Of course, when things go wrong with an item purchased on-line, you now have to deal with their faceless, nameless "support" which can be like juggling snowballs in hell.
Click to expand...

Pity you can't come to my shop. (not my shop)





PS - Some are 40D and some are 300D. :confused:
 
Last edited:
bb_matt said:
I also won't buy another Tamron ;)
Click to expand...
I also used to be a bit wary about Tamron, but I've been using a Sony A700 together with a Sony 18-250 (which is a rebadged Tamron) and I'm blown away by it. Despite the huuuge zoom range, the lens is compact, pin sharp with minimal (much less than I was expecting) distortion at both ends. It is the ideal everyday lens for most people.
http://www.sony.co.uk/view/ShowProd...Specs&imageType=Main&category=DSL+Zoom+Lenses
edit: This is the tamron version: http://www.tamron.com/lenses/prod/18250_diII.asp
Sigma, however, is a great buy.
Got my GF a new 18-50 sigma as her kit lens borked out. It's an excellent replacement, better than the standard Canon kit lens imho.
Click to expand...
Not really difficult :), Canon's biggest crime is the quality of their entry level kit lens. It really makes sense to buy a body and lens separately. The Sigmas are pretty nice.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X