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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Nov 24, 2005, 7:47 PM   #1
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 31
Default

For using in my Canon 20D, is Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM a good lens for taking Portraits and landscape pictures. Anyone has it can give me some feedback on pics quality with the 20D will be great.


Ceddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Nov 25, 2005, 8:29 AM   #2
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

For portrait all you need is a 50mm f/1.8
... and IMO a 24mm is not wide enough for landscape!

-> Use $70 for a 50mm f/1.8, and spend the rest on a good wide angle standard zoom :idea:
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2005, 3:11 PM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 31
Default

$70 for a 50mm /f1.8 ? Any recommendation hehehehe.

Ceddy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 25, 2005, 10:14 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339
Default

i think there's only one 50 1.8 (with that price)and thats the canon ef 50mm 1.8.

I'm trying to look for a wide lens, too... I've been looking at the sigma 12-24, sigma 17-35, canon 17-40, and canon 16-35. usm/hsm is a must for me... i would definitely like to save up for the 16-35, but then i'm afraid I'd use my sigma 30 less often (and it seems to get quite a few complaints for a >$1k lens). So then I looked at the sigma 17-35 because it was fast on the wide end... but i keep reading a lot of complaints about it (A lot in comparison to the 17-40 and the 12-24).

if usm/hsm is not a requirement for you (well it shouldn't if you really consider to get the 50 f/1.8 ), then there's also the sigma 18-50, sigma 15-30 (actually, i'm not too sure if this one is non-hsm), the tokina 12-24.

But if you were actually willing to spend that much for the 24-105L, then you can probably get one of the wide angles mentioned above and get a nicer portrait lens. ie, the ef 85 f1.8

Or you could try using one of the wider lenses as a portrait lens (i.e. the ef 17-40 or sigma 18-50)
BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2005, 10:26 AM   #5
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

BoYFrMSpC wrote:
Quote:
... So then I looked at the sigma 17-35 because it was fast on the wide end... but i keep reading a lot of complaints about it (A lot in comparison to the 17-40 and the 12-24).
Here's an image from the sigma 17-35 EX which has a lot of complaints:






... and from the same lens at sunrise with f/2.8! :blah:


NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2005, 10:35 AM   #6
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

BTW I've also read there's a lot of CA with the Sigma 12-24 EX...
See any (@12mm)? :lol: :-) :G


NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 26, 2005, 12:13 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
BoYFrMSpC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 339
Default

Those are very nice pictures. You have both lenses, right? (or at least tried both of them) Even though they cover different focal lengths, which one do you prefer?
BoYFrMSpC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 27, 2005, 8:46 AM   #8
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Yes I have both lenses - I prefer the 12-24 EX of course because it's effect is much more dramatic, especially when you play around with the lens perspective that you can't never get with a 17mm (Imagine about doing this on a full-frame!):






... I now tend to restrict the use of the 17-35 f/2.8 EX only to the fleeting low-light moments at sunrise or sunset where I still need the shutter speed to 'freeze' the ocean waves. :idea:


NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 22, 2005, 2:35 AM   #9
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 16
Default

I had a 24-105 for a week or so and found it a great lenses for general shooting.The copies I tried were not as sharp as I would have liked so I chose against getting it.
D20nut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 5, 2006, 8:24 AM   #10
Senior Member
 
NLAlston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 264
Default

I am nowhere even NEAR the caliber of you guys (and gals), but I soon hope to be taking the sweet plunge into more serious photographical efforts. I just wanted to say that I thought you shot some very nice photos (I especially like the first, and the third one). Maybe, before too long, I will have some pictures to post and - hopefully - they will come at least somewhat close to what you have submitted.



I just love this kind of stuff :-).



Blessings,

Nathan
NLAlston 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 6:57 PM.