Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

In need of a quick Lens suggestion...

profile picture
rlee
Posts: 593 - Karma: 1,144
Right, I know there are masses of topics on these two lenses and posts all over the net but I keep going back and forth between the two. I cant decide whats best for me and my needs and people I talk to in person are either clueless or really unhelpful. Just need some people to voice there opinions and help to push myself in one direction or the other.

If you haven't already guessed , the two lenses are Canons 24-70 and 24-105. I know both the pros and cons to each one but just making that final decision... its tough. 70 is sharper, and f2.8 but heavier and more expensive. 105 has a longer reach, IS, but not as sharp and only f4.

For me, I can only afford one lens, and will most likely not upgrade for a while. Ideally I would get the 24-70 and then 70-200, as I know this is one of the most elite setups you can get, but unfortunately the 70-200 wont happen, at least not for a while.

Currently I own a 7D with a tamaron 18-200 which is what im selling to replace. An 85 1.8 and sadly my 50 1.8 just broke. I shoot mainly video but take a lot of photos too when I travel and with friends.

So really its a question of is the f2.8 and apparent better sharpness of the 24-70 that much better to sacrifice the extra length and ease of the 24-105 for a walkaround lens?

I hope that all made sense
Dec 27 2011 10:44AM
0 0
profile picture
blatt
Posts: 5584 - Karma: 3,097
My votes for the 24-70. You have the 85 and if you need extra reach you could save up for. 70-200 f/4 (550 used).
Dec 27 2011 10:48AM
0 0
profile picture
eheath
Posts: 61601 - Karma: 123,029
keep the 18=200 until you can afford a 70-200. check out the tamron 24-75 for a cheap alternative to the 24-70 range.
Dec 27 2011 10:50AM
0 0
profile picture
rlee
Posts: 593 - Karma: 1,144
hmm.. thinking about it that does seem to be a good idea... I find i do shoot more under 85.

When I say i cant buy another lens for a while it really means probably not for at least a couple more years, if that changes anyones thoughts. eheath - the 18-200 is really pretty average and when i had the 50 i rarely even used it as I would try find a way to use the others instead, although your suggestion is good and will think about it...
Dec 27 2011 11:54AM
0 0
profile picture
rlee
Posts: 593 - Karma: 1,144
Anyone else?
Dec 27 2011 9:16PM
0 0
profile picture
123+ski
Posts: 2832 - Karma: 581
what about a tamron 17-50 2.8 non vc, and a canon 70-200 f4l?
the tamron is a solid and well liked lens, much wider than the 24-70 or 24-105, and the 70-200 is great. you would use a rig or tripod for video anyways, and you want to turn IS of for those, plus both of those lenses together are about the same price as one of the other ones, and this is straight from b&h. the 24-70 and 24-105 are great lenses, but I feel like you might limit yourself a little on the wide end. Also I should throw out that I don't shoot on canon, simply pulling from my somewhat limited knowledge and what I have heard on here. Heres a link to the list I pulled up on b&h in case you want to look

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?mxp=1700&atclk=Zoom+Focal+Lengths_17-70mm&ci=274&mnp=250&N=4288584247+4294185281+4261208161+4261208185+4261208183+4261208195+4261208196+4261208198+4261208201+4261208200&Ns=p_PRICE_2%7C0

Dec 27 2011 10:10PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)