Upgrading lens.

[C_Dave45]

So, for the past year or so, I have not been impressed with any of my photo's. I've come to the realization that I've outgrown my "walk around" Canon EF-S 17-85mm f/4-5.6 IS. Either that or it's shot. Just crappy photo's all around.

SO. I rented the 24-105 4L today and have been playing around with it. A world of difference! It has renewed my vigor of photography again.

My question is; I don't know if I should get this one, or the shorter 24-70 F4L. I like the longer range, but I also like the general consensus that the 24-70 is much sharper. Also a few hundred cheaper.

Thoughts? (I also have the 70-200 F4L).

[Darell_n]

I use the 24-105 4L as my walk around lens and I really like it other than its weight, but I have never shot with the larger or smaller versions.

[msommers]

Kelly is actually selling a 24-70/2.8, an absolutely stellar lens!

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by msommers
Kelly is actually selling a 24-70/2.8, an absolutely stellar lens! Reeeeally...who's Kelly? On beyond?

[D'z Nutz]

Originally posted by C_Dave45
Reeeeally...who's Kelly? On beyond?

kvg

[msommers]

KVG. Maybe it's sold now, but on Facebook he had/has an ad up for it.

See if this works for you:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/186164031442129/859906514067874/?ref=notif&notif_t=group_activity

[rage2]

Rent the 24-70 and see if you like it better. Honestly, the 24-105 is my favorite lens. 90% of my pics are shot with it. It works well for so many types of shots on my full frame.

[The_Penguin]

If you're staying F4 the 24-105 us a great all-purpose lens.
If you're going to spend the $ on a 2.8 the 24-70 is a no-brainer.

KVG is selling a 2.8, I've been trying very hard not to buy it :).

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by msommers
KVG. Maybe it's sold now, but on Facebook he had/has an ad up for it.

See if this works for you:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/186164031442129/859906514067874/?ref=notif&notif_t=group_activity
Ha! I ran across his ad on kijiji. Recognized the cat lol.
Hmmm...shit dunno what to do now.

[blitz]

Cheaper, sharper, and 1 more stop of light, I know what I would do :)

[msommers]

Let me put it this way, Dave. I'm a Nikon guy. I own the 24-120 f/4. If someone was selling a 24-70/2.8 for Nikon for $1,000, I'd be all over it. Except everyone in the Nikon world thinks they're worth pretty much the price of new at $1,600+ instead LOL.

I'd buy it to be perfectly honest, it's a good deal and if you end up changing your mind, you won't lose money on it. The beauty of buying used.

[kvg]

Originally posted by C_Dave45

Ha! I ran across his ad on kijiji. Recognized the cat lol.
Hmmm...shit dunno what to do now.

Sold and gone today

[C_Dave45]

*edit*

Shit...didn't even your post Kelly. Damnit

Oh well. Thanks for the advice guys. I'll keep looking.

[kvg]

Get a 24-70 2.8, it's worth every penny. I sold one only because had two of them.

[98type_r]

24-70 F4 has less distortion than the 24-105 at wide/tele.

24-70 2.8 is amazing glass if you don't mine spending the extra cash, ver. 2 is even pricier

[blitz]

If this is a crop sensor body, you could also look at a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II or a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 dc hsm. Just as fast (or faster), cheaper, and the zoom range would be better suited for the camera.

[The_Penguin]

Originally posted by C_Dave45
*edit*

Shit...didn't even your post Kelly. Damnit

Oh well. Thanks for the advice guys. I'll keep looking.

FYI:

Another one popped up for sale in the Facebook group "Photographers Garage Sale" It's in SE Calgary 1100.00

[taemo]

Originally posted by blitz
If this is a crop sensor body, you could also look at a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 XR Di II or a Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 dc hsm. Just as fast (or faster), cheaper, and the zoom range would be better suited for the camera.

+1

there's also the EF-S 15-85mm if you want a more versatile focal length, decent performer too

[Mitsu3000gt]

I'm pretty sure you shoot a crop body, and I assume your 17-85 was your widest lens before. 24mm ends up being 38.4mm, which is not very wide, so you will lose quite a bit on that end. Of course you gain on the other end up to 168mm, but you already have a 70-200 which does a better job.

To replace a 17-85, I'd be looking at the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS ($520), Tamron 17-50/2.8 XR Di-II VC LD ($600). The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is a really great lens if you're after that super wide aperture, but it has no stabilization and is $900.

The Canon 24-105 is a pretty average lens. It's 15 years old, has a T-stop of over F5, and is easily outclassed by newer designs. The Canon 24-70/2.8 L is cheaper on the used market because it is 13 years old and was replaced by the 24-70/2.8 L II in 2012, which is a significantly better lens albeit very expensive ($2100 new). If you think you will move to Full Frame sometime soon, you might consider grabbing one of the 24-70/2.8's or the new 24-70/4, otherwise I would go with something a little wider than 24mm for a general purpose lens and for half the price.

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by Mitsu3000gt
I'm pretty sure you shoot a crop body, and I assume your 17-85 was your widest lens before. 24mm ends up being 38.4mm, which is not very wide, so you will lose quite a bit on that end. Of course you gain on the other end up to 168mm, but you already have a 70-200 which does a better job.

To replace a 17-85, I'd be looking at the Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS ($520), Tamron 17-50/2.8 XR Di-II VC LD ($600). The Sigma 18-35/1.8 is a really great lens if you're after that super wide aperture, but it has no stabilization and is $900.

The Canon 24-105 is a pretty average lens. It's 15 years old, has a T-stop of over F5, and is easily outclassed by newer designs. The Canon 24-70/2.8 L is cheaper on the used market because it is 13 years old and was replaced by the 24-70/2.8 L II in 2012, which is a significantly better lens albeit very expensive ($2100 new). If you think you will move to Full Frame sometime soon, you might consider grabbing one of the 24-70/2.8's or the new 24-70/4, otherwise I would go with something a little wider than 24mm for a general purpose lens and for half the price.

Yes I'm shooting a crop sensor. (T4i) I WAS thinking of going up to a FF, but then I'm starting from scratch again. I just got this body at Christmas, plus the battery grip. I think I'll stay with this body. I shot all day with the 24-105 and was amazed compared to my EF-S. I didn't find the 24 too long actually. I think I'd find a 17-50 too short. Leaves that gap between 50-70mm.

I have seen the examples of how much sharper the 24-70 is. But unless I buy used, the prices that retailers are asking for the 24-70 (old version) is insane!! Amazon is asking $2300!!!! It was only around $1300 when it was available, no? Vistek, TCS, Henry's etc all don't carry it anymore. And the MKII is out of my price range.

Decisions, decisions.

[C_Dave45]

Originally posted by The_Penguin


FYI:

Another one popped up for sale in the Facebook group "Photographers Garage Sale" It's in SE Calgary 1100.00
Thanks for the heads up. I'll give her a shout.

[kvg]

check these out.


http://www.kijiji.ca/v-camera-camcorder-lens/calgary/canon-ef-24-70mm-f-2-8l-i-usm-canon-ef-24-70mm-f-2-8l-ii-usm/1058477853?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true

[Wakalimasu]

If you are sticking with a crop body, you should get the EFS17-55 F/2.8 IS. IF you are thinking of upgrading to a FF, you should look at the EF24-70F/2.8L ver 1 or 2. 24 is not wide enough for a Crop body. I take my 17-55 everywhere. Sigma also has a 18-35 F/1.8. Great for indoors.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx


http://www.kijiji.ca/v-camera-camcorder-lens/calgary/mint-canon-efs-17-55mm-f-2-8-is-usm/1057533098?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true

If you chose that lens, make sure to check it out for dust as they suck in dust because it's not as sealed as an L lens. Easy remedy is adding a filter to one.

The EF24-105F/4LIS was a great lens but it's not really made for a crop body. It's great for outdoors, but I found it weak inside if you don't have flash.

[dragonone]

the dust gets in that lens through the zooming action, having a filter won't save you from internal dust

dis-assembly is actually not that difficult, though. I'd be more worried about the IS failing sooner or later which will require a trip to Canon

it was a great lens while I had it for 3 years:burnout:

[Mitsu3000gt]

Originally posted by dragonone
the dust gets in that lens through the zooming action, having a filter won't save you from internal dust

dis-assembly is actually not that difficult, though. I'd be more worried about the IS failing sooner or later which will require a trip to Canon

it was a great lens while I had it for 3 years:burnout:

+1

A Filter isn't going to stop all dust from coming in. If you can zoom the lens, air is coming in & out and so is dust.

Also, IS failure on that lens is as high as 25%, and Canon's warranty is only 1 year, which is 6-7 times shorter than other options if you are going to stick with a crop body lens. Just something to think about.