EF 24-105mm f/4L

[labla]

Hi guys, i need help with a decision on the lens 2470. I was initially thinking of purchasing the 70200 f/2.8 IS but it's 2 times the price. Before anyone of you shoot me down for not doing research, I did some already. I need to know if both this lens are compliment to the tamron 17-50mm f/2.8. I am currently using a 40D. And if i get the 70200, there will be a slight gap between the 50 and the 70 range.

Again. i am puchasing this lens for slight events and maybe casual shots. I know that the weight of the 70200 is much more than the 2470. So i again, the 24-70 wins in this area.

However, the 200 reach may be very useful for outdoor shots. If anyone who owns the 70-200 could give me some advice. I would be greatful. During events do you all use the 105-200mm range? say indoor events. such as church choir, or dance.

That's almost it. Because of owning the 17-50 f/2.8, i appreciate the apperture. and i am unsure of the f/4 abilities. So i need advice around this area. Could some experience shooters give me some advice on it? Thank you.

[slacker123]

you will not miss too much of that 20mm or so, in my honest opinion. The 70-200 would be an excellent complement to your current lens.

[CS TAN]

Are you talking about 24-70mmf/2.8 or as your title's 24-105mm f/4.0?

17-55 and 70-200 is a good combination. I had both but sold the 17-55 and replaced it with the 24-105mm when I move to FF. with 17-55/70-200 combo, you won't miss that 15mm unless you are stuck to one place and cannot move.

17-55 is good for group shots in church/indoor events and your 70-200 can do close-ups. It will be very convenient if you have two bodies so you can switch from one to the other.

24-105 is f/4.0 so you lose out a bit in indoor/low light situation. Unless your crop body can produce good high ISO/low noise photo, you might be better off with the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS...

[ManWearPants]

Originally Posted by CS TAN Are you talking about 24-70mmf/2.8 or as your title's 24-105mm f/4.0? 17-55 and 70-200 is a good combination. I had both but sold the 17-55 and replaced it with the 24-105mm when I move to FF. with 17-55/70-200 combo, you won't miss that 15mm unless you are stuck to one place and cannot move. 17-55 is good for group shots in church/indoor events and your 70-200 can do close-ups. It will be very convenient if you have two bodies so you can switch from one to the other. 24-105 is f/4.0 so you lose out a bit in indoor/low light situation. Unless your crop body can produce good high ISO/low noise photo, you might be better off with the 70-200mm f/2.8 IS...

On a 40D, I don't find much use with 70 -200 (112-320). It is too far for portrait and good only if you want to shoot bird.

[Virgo]

Go read this review if you can't decide between the 24-70 and 24-105. I have depended on it and made my choice. So far no regrets.

[charlesleong]

Originally Posted by ManWearPants On a 40D, I don't find much use with 70 -200 (112-320). It is too far for portrait and good only if you want to shoot bird.

disagree.
it's a comfortable length for discreet/candid head & shoulder shots.
and shoot bird 200mm? the bird will need to be on your window sill lor... or crop like siao.
and if you're covering some stage event, you definitely need the tele.

TS: right now i'd recommend the 70-200 for less overlap, esp if you have access (beg/borrow/steal) to two bodies.

[labla]

Hi I am sorry i needed advice on the 24-205 yea i realised the difference, still willing to take in more comments. Really want to buy the 70200 but i got not enough cash. Even though it's a good investment :P

[charlesleong]

Originally Posted by labla Hi guys, i need help with a decision on the lens 2470. I was initially thinking of purchasing the 70200 f/2.8 IS but it's 2 times the price.

Originally Posted by labla Hi I am sorry i needed advice on the 24-205 yea i realised the difference, still willing to take in more comments. Really want to buy the 70200 but i got not enough cash. Even though it's a good investment :P

walau make up your mind! =)

buying lens is NOT an investment. investment implies getting back your cash with good returns...

[labla]

Originally Posted by charlesleong walau make up your mind! =) buying lens is NOT an investment. investment implies getting back your cash with good returns...

haha u interpreted me wrongly. I meant an investments for my photography skills and my photography :P not literally an inviestment. hahaha still trying to make up my mind