Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:25 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 2:10 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 131
I'm in the marked for a Canon EOS 5D mk III
I thought about mk II but the better ISO and auto focus system, especially in low light situations are important to me, since i shoot a lot at night.
24-70mm f 2,8 mk II is just too f...ing expensive and heavy, so would the kit lens 24-105 f 4,0 be a good match for an all-round lens?
Or is the f4.0 a big problem for indoor?
I've heard a bit of mixed opinions about it.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 3:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 1:36 am
Posts: 620
Location: Toronto, ON
I wouldn't shoot an f/4 lens indoors without flash, that's for sure. f/2.8-f/4 is only one stop, which *can* make a big difference (shoot at ISO 6400 instead of 12800 for example), but you're right... there is definitely a big physical (weight) difference between the lenses.

I'd be pretty happy shooting a 24-105 for general purpose stuff definitely, but I'd have a 50 f/1.8 on hand for when it gets darker, or spend some more and get a decent flash (580EX II would be my recommendation) and learn to bounce it if you're sticking with your 24-105. I bounce my flash at pretty much every wedding I shoot these days, and get away with exposures of 1/50th, f/3.5, ISO 1000, and flash at 1/8-1/4 power (full manual everything) shooting an 85mm f/1.8 lens. The flash power really depends on the height and reflectiveness of the ceiling in question, since I'm bouncing straight up or one "click" backwards behind me.

_________________
Canon EOS 5D MkII | Canon EOS 7D | Canon Digital Rebel XSi | EF 35mm f/1.4L | EF 50mm f/1.8 II | EF 85mm f/1.8 | EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM | EF 135mm f/2L | EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS | 580EX II | LumoPro LP-120

My Flickr


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 7:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 12:48 pm
Posts: 8022
Location: UK
The Tamron 24-70 VC does well in reviews so could that be another option if you don't mind the backwards zoom ring? I think it's the only way you get both the aperture and stabilisation at the moment. The weight difference between these are not really that significant.

_________________
Canon DSLRs: 7D, 5D2, 1D, 600D, 450D full spectrum, 300D IR mod
Lenses: EF 35/2, 50/1.8, 85/1.8, 135/2+SF, 28-80 V, 70-300L, 100-400L, TS-E 24/3.5L, MP-E 65, EF-S 15-85 IS
3rd party: Zeiss 2/50 makro, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300 f/2.8 OS, Celestron 1325/13
Tinies: Sony HX9V.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 12:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:22 pm
Posts: 1310
Location: Speyer (Germany)
The reasons for me to get a 24-105mm is more the 105mm at the long end - 70mm is just too short for me. Using this lens I have to say I'm pretty happy with it. F4 is usually enough - and with the 5D3 you can just raise the ISO and it doesn't really hurt. With my old 500D I used the ISO up to 800 and sometimes 1600 - with my 5D3 I don't feel bad using ISO 12.800 :mrgreen:
But yes - I do have a 580EX II for some dark situations and I also have a 100mm 2.8 if I need more light.

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III + Canon EOS 33v
Canon EF 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 USM + EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 50mm 1.8 II + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 2:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 131
Well my thoughts are that I have the 100-400 mm, I have the 100-400 mm then they overlap, a the 70-100 mm gap will probably bother me, it does with my 17-55 mm f 2,8 IS - unless the lens sucks and I have to buy one more lens to compensate for its shortcomings.
And I'm thinking a 16-35 mm f 2,8, and I should be pretty much covered.

I shoot outdoor, wildlife, lots of wide angle and night shots, northern lights etc, and some indoor, but no studio and hardly ever sports.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Oct 25, 2012 6:33 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:22 pm
Posts: 498
Location: 1 AU from the nearest star
If you are worried about the lens quality, then check out Gordon's review of it on a full frame camera.
There is a good reason why a lot of people are very satisfied with this lens.
I am even happy with it on a crop camera.

_________________
Canon 5DIII, Rebel XTi/400D
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO, 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX Macro

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
Canon 430EX II
Opteka 13mm, 21mm, and 31mm extension tubes
Vivitar 50mm f/1.8 for OM System


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:49 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 131
I did consider the Tamron 24-70, but I know that twisting "the wrong way" to zoom will bother me, and reviews has been sort of mixed. But it's supposed to compete with the canon 24-70 mk2, and at half the price.
And I did read both gordon and others reviews of the 24-105

I think the 24-105 is the lens for me, but that f 4.0... We'll see


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:33 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:22 pm
Posts: 498
Location: 1 AU from the nearest star
Well, you did say general purpose lens to complement the 5DIII.
If you think you want some lower light performance, but not be too expensive, then I would direct you to a 50mm f/1.4 USM.

Why do you think you need f/2.8? Are you wanting low light performance or are you wanting to blur the background more?

The unfortunate thing is there is no single lens that can do everything really well for a cheap price while being lightweight and durable.
The good news is you can customize what lenses you have based upon your needs.
Whereas I have a selection of lenses that I enjoy, what you may want could be different.

_________________
Canon 5DIII, Rebel XTi/400D
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO, 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX Macro

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
Canon 430EX II
Opteka 13mm, 21mm, and 31mm extension tubes
Vivitar 50mm f/1.8 for OM System


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 131
I have the 50 mm f 1/4.
I had the 15-85 mm for my 7D and I later bought the 17-55 mm f2,8 and i love it.

I like the low light performance, were the 15-85mm gave me some problems with shooting indoor without flash and I really couldn't blur the background. The result was shaken and grainy pictures, and that wasn't the look I was going for.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 6:24 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:22 pm
Posts: 498
Location: 1 AU from the nearest star
Well, if you are trying to get similar shots to your 17-55mm f/2.8, then you will really enjoy the 24-105mm f/4L on a full frame.

17mm on a crop equates to roughly 27.2mm on a full frame sensor for a field of view perspective.
This means that the 24mm will give you a wider perspective on a full frame camera than your 17-55mm does on your crop frame camera.
Unless I am misunderstanding something, f/4 on a full frame camera gives you a similar out of focus effect as a f/2.8 does on a crop sensor camera.
Unless you are freezing the action or need to blur out the photo even more, (which you can do even better with the 50mm) then the 24-105mm will probably suit your needs better; especially if you are worried about weight and price.

From everything I read, with the same lens the 5DIII tracks better in lower light than the 5DII or other older cameras.

You could always try to rent a copy to confirm you would like it before you buy it.

_________________
Canon 5DIII, Rebel XTi/400D
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO, 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX Macro

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
Canon 430EX II
Opteka 13mm, 21mm, and 31mm extension tubes
Vivitar 50mm f/1.8 for OM System


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 7:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:23 pm
Posts: 12
Location: The Netherlands
I have the 5D mk3 & 24-105 and it is a truly brilliant combination, especially as a walkabout, take everywhere lens. The 24-70 doesn't have IS so the one stop advantage is only an advantage sometimes, and of course the price difference is significant. I waited until the 24-70 came out before buying my 24-105 and since buying it's hardly been off my 5D mk 3, so for me at least, no regrets.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:49 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 131
BleuDragon: I live in the arctic and we don't have a photo shop and no place to rent one. And I don't know anyone who has one.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 10:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:22 pm
Posts: 498
Location: 1 AU from the nearest star
Arctic area would make renting difficult.
From everything else you said though, the 24-105mm sounds like the best option for you.

_________________
Canon 5DIII, Rebel XTi/400D
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L II, 24-105mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.4, 70-300mm f/4-5.6 DO, 85mm f/1.8
Sigma 150mm F2.8 EX Macro

Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX, Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 II
Canon 430EX II
Opteka 13mm, 21mm, and 31mm extension tubes
Vivitar 50mm f/1.8 for OM System


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:14 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 11:13 am
Posts: 131
I think so too, but one thing is specs and reviews, another is real life. If those "tiny flaws" really are that tiny or they make a big difference for your, then they might make you hate the lens.
"kit lens" just doesn't sound that sexy and pretty much everyone has a 24-70mm, and that many people cant be wrong.
On paper a 24-105 would match my 100-400mm perfectly and it sounds like it will too in real life as well.

M


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat Oct 27, 2012 1:03 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 9:22 pm
Posts: 1310
Location: Speyer (Germany)
Well - my combination is the set of the Sigma 12-24mm, the Canon 24-105mm and the Canon 100-400mm - great set that covers the whole range.

On the 24-105mm you get a similar depth of field at 105mm F4 as you could get with the 24-70mm at 70mm 2.8. On the wider end you just have slightly shallower depth with the 24-70mm but in the end I don't really care after looking at the shots. :) My personal choice is the 24-105mm ;)

_________________
Canon EOS 500D + Canon EOS 5D Mark III + Canon EOS 33v
Canon EF 28-80mm 3.5-5.6 USM + EF 24-105mm 4L IS USM + EF 100-400mm 4.5-5.6L IS USM + EF 50mm 1.8 II + EF 100mm 2.8L Macro IS USM + Sigma 12-24mm 4.5-5.6 EX DG HSM + Canon Speedlite 580 EX II + Nissin Speedlite Di 466


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 18 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group