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

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 5, 2007, 4:02 PM   #1
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10

I own a Canon 30D.... I am looking at 2 lenses.... 24-70/2.8 and 16-35/2.8.... I need advice from any of you on which one of these would best suit this camera for an everyday and night walk around lens....

The Factor is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Apr 5, 2007, 4:25 PM   #2
Senior Member
Corpsy's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879

Between those two, personally I'd much prefer the 24-70. It gives a 3x zoom range as opposed to the 2x range of the other, and while I can appreciate a very wide angle lens, I didn't feel limited with my digicam that started at 35mm equivalent (the 24-70 being about 36-105mm equivalent with the crop factor).

The 24-70 would also be a far better portrait lens because you have a narrower depth of field giving you a softer background, you don't have to get as close to the subject which can make a person's face appear to bulge, and it's easier to get good candid shots.

The extra reach would also be a bit better for nature photography of animals, though not as useful as something with even longer reach.

The only way I'd consider the other lens would be if the majority of my photos where wide landscapes or perhaps photos of architecture like cityscapes from ground level or indoor photos that take in entire rooms.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2007, 4:32 PM   #3
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 8,529

Unfortunately, you haven't provided enough information about what you want to shoot. These are 2 completely different focal length lenses. One is a wide angle and the other is a midrange. You need to provide my subject detail to determine which is appropriate.

16-35 obviously is a better landscape lens.

24-70 is exactly what it's intended to be - a midrange zoom (which I agree with Corpsy is a more useful focal range).

Neither is very long, however.

I would ask what your expectations are for "night walk around". What types of shots are you intnending on taking at night. 2.8 is not nearly bright enough to take night time shots. So what types of night time shots are you intending on taking with your lens?

Which leads to the follow-up question - do you need a 2.8 lens? Depending on your answer to the above question (what do you want to shoot at night) you may need a tripod or a flash. So money might be better spent on those accessories rather than 2.8 which isn't going to be very useful at night.
JohnG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 5, 2007, 5:54 PM   #4
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 10

JohnG.... I will be taking pics of flowers, butterflies, birds, etc.... I guess nature would be a better description.... When football season begins, I will be taking pics of high school games.... Picsin the stands, tailgating, etc.... Basically the atmoshere of the crowds....

PS: I will also be taking pics of action shots from the sidelines.... I plan on getting a 70-200/2.8 for those type pics....
The Factor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 6, 2007, 6:58 AM   #5
Senior Member
NHL's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,567

Unless you plan on upgrading to a full-frame later or a Mrk III why not compromise with the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 instead?
-> Almost as wide as the 16-35 and sharper than the 24-70 but much smaller and lighter than either for a "walk-around"...
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote

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 7:58 AM.