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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 19, 2007, 1:30 PM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3
Default

This is my first post so thanks for listening. I have a Canon 30D along with a EF-S 17-85mm IS and a EF 70-300mm IS USM and 50mm 1.8 lenses and EX 580 flash. Spent most of the winter getting to know my camera and took literally 1000's of minor hockey photos using the 70-300mm lens. Was generally very pleased with the results but learned the value of light in these poorly lit arenas.

I have been relatively pleased with my 17-85 as well but it seems to be less sharp than I would like as well as not having great control on wide settings. Again it seems to be limited a bit when it comes to aperture.

My question is this: I am willing to spend the needed amount to get to a high end lens, especially when it comes to a 70-200mm f/2.8. My issue is with a better walk around, general purpose lens. I have come to really like Image Stabilization. Takes a bit of the work out of holding a camera perfectly still. But a 24-70mm f/2.8 is not available with IS. Will it allow for enough light to get most photos up to a high enough shutter speed to limit the need for IS. Or is the 24-105mm f/4.0 with IS a more versatile lens.

They cost within $100.00 of each other where I live. What do you think?








what04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 19, 2007, 4:17 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

do u want f2.8.

if ur answer is YES definitely then 24-70 is the way to go. If u can live with that one extra stop at f4, 24-105 is a great lens for its range.

I have it and i have shot some pictures even at 1/10th hand held. Great lens for walk around

weighs less than 24-70. Only question u need to ask urself is whether u need the f2.8



one shot from 24-105

http://www.flickr.com/photos/godvivek/362390908/
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2007, 7:15 AM   #3
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3
Default

I really would like to have my camera bag filled with f2.8 lenses. However, I guess my real question must be, which is the better lens?
what04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2007, 5:27 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Caboose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 625
Default

what04 wrote:
Quote:
I really would like to have my camera bag filled with f2.8 lenses. However, I guess my real question must be, which is the better lens?
well they're both pretty darn good lenses. I havea Sigma version of the 24-70mm f2.8 and use it pretty much for my walk around lens and it is a great lens. But let me tell you the extra range of the 24-105 would really come in handy and f4 with IS will probably get you about the same hand holding capibilities and the f2.8 as far as shutter speeds go, maybe better, I've heard about 2 stops.
Caboose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 20, 2007, 6:35 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

will probably get you about the same hand holding capibilities and the f2.8 as far as shutter speeds go



the f2.8 would be better to stop action. The f4 will give u ability to handhold. Handholding and stopping action would differ here.

though in a given light where the shutter speed with a f2.8is 1/60 and in f4 is 1/20 or so, the f4 with IS will help u hand hold the shot. WHile the shutter is too slow to stop an action. Even 1/60 is too slow to stop an action but relatively better. 1/60 and 1/20 are two worst example i took. imagine a situation where f2.8 gives say 1/250 to stop the action, even though f4 has IS it will still give something around 1/100 not enuff to stop the action.

But thats the difference between the two lens. the 24-105 is better for its range and IS and it all depends on the usage. Build wise, quality wise both are almost identical.

Here is another shot with the 24mm...longer exposure.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/godvivek/427800492/
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2007, 5:55 PM   #6
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 9
Default

I have both and am playing with each to see which one might get the boot. They are both excellent lenses in their own right. I find the 24-70 to be extremely sharp. Did I say extremely? Especially up close and personal with the subject. The 24-105 gives awesome colors and is also very sharp. I do appreciate the reach of the 24-105 more than the 24-70. Now if Canon would only make a 24-105 IS f/2.8. But it would weigh 8 lbs and have a 100mm filter size and cost $3,000.
overclock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2007, 6:20 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,105
Default

or alteast add IS to the 24-70 and sell for 2200
nymphetamine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 22, 2007, 6:36 PM   #8
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3
Default

Yes, 24-70 with IS would be my choice. Thanks for the input. I'm still not sure. and then there's the 17-55 f2.8 IS. Hmmmm...




what04 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 12:33 PM.