Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 20, 2006, 3:44 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3
Default

I'm having a terrible time deciding between the 24-105L and the 35 1.4L. The zoom is more versatile, but the prime is faster no doubt sharper. I already have a 50 1.4, so I'm more inclined to go with the 24-105. I'm hoping there are some 24-105 owners here who will let me know if they are happy/unhappy with this lens and if it's worth the money. I've read mixed but mostly positive reviews elsewhere. Some complain about getting soft copies and that concerns me.
nitrocat2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Dec 20, 2006, 3:54 PM   #2
RJR
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 42
Default

I have the 24-105 L lens and it is a great all around lens. Once in awhile I get into a situation where the lighting is just not enough and then I go to my Tamron 17-50 f2.8. In decent lighting conditions it is very good and the IS is really nice to have and it also really works great with my Canon EX430 add on flash, they are a perfect match for each other. It's not perfect but it is really a very good lens on the crop body cameras but when I get a full frame camera it will most likely be even better.
RJR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2006, 4:54 PM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3
Default

Thanks for the input. I'm looking for the best "leave on" lens for 1.6 crop camera and the 24-105 looks like the best way to go. I have a 17-40, but I'd like more range without having to change lenses all the time. The 24-105 also has IS which will be another big plus. I'm in my mid 50s and I'm not quite as steady as I used to be.
nitrocat2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 20, 2006, 6:46 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
philby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 407
Default

The 24-105 is the "resident lens" on my 5D. I am happy with the shots I get with it. I was told when I bought it that the 24-70 f2.8 was sharper and it probably is but I personally think that the IS feature is a greater factor for sharpness when shooting off tripod than the differences in glass between those two lenses.
philby is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 21, 2006, 9:35 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 171
Default

If you already have the 50 1.4, I can see little advantage to adding the 35 L except to save some $$$. The comparison is a little odd to me, considering a 35 prime vs. a 24-105 L zoom. For my 5D, I carry 3 lenses generally - the 24-105L, 100-400L and a 135 f/2 L prime. I also have two 1.4 TC's. This set covers all my bases quite nicely. I think the 24-105 (my copy is sharp) is the best choice given the limited info you've provided.

Have a look at these sites for more:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/

http://www.pixel-peeper.com/
flint350 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2006, 12:45 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
AlpineMan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 357
Default

The 24-105mm IS serves as my everyday lens on my 5D. When I had the 20D (later replaced by a 30D), the Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 (later replaced by the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8) served that purpose. During my crop DSLR days, I just didn't feel 24mm was wide enough for my camera...
AlpineMan is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 1:06 PM.