****17-55 f/2.8 IS vs 24-105 f/4 L IS**** REALLY NEED HELP!

[An drew]

Thanks for all of your helps

Reading through some review, I see that the 17-55 is actually sharper than the 24-105. Unbelievable:bigeyes:

However, I shoot in low light but not very often and used to set F5.6(at least)+ flash to get the DOF. I think the 24-105 is more suitable for me as I can get longer range. Moreover, I also intend to upgrade to 5D next year so need a full frame lens.

But really, I still always ask my self why should I go for full frame? Using 1.6X, I can get great lenses with cheaper price like 10-22 or 17-55 (actually sharper than 17-40 and 24-105). Knowing that DOF is different in a full frame cam but how much I can really appreciate it? Moreover, a full frame cam produce more distortion and so require better lens also. Then, after much calculation I see that full frame cam is just a waste of money as I always do things according to phrase "pay for what you can really see".

What do you guys think? Should I buy a full frame later or just stick with 1.6X body and the 17-55 IS? Please correct me if I am wrong at some points.

Thank a lot

Which lens to buy hinges on your decision to go full frame or not. The merits and needs of FF have been discussed elsewhere.

If you are staying with 1.6X then there are few better lenses than the 17-55 at f2.8. In fact you should thank Canon for making this lens because two years back I had to try so many different lenses and brands of lenses and yet I hardly get this image quality. The bokeh of this lens at 2.8 can equal that of some prime lenses. So you have almost all you need in one fast lens. Only problem is price and perhaps build quality for some. The 17-55 goes from 68 to 23 degrees.

If you are going full-frame then there are several options. e.g. 24-70/2.8, 24-105/4. Photoshop cannot turn a picture taken at f4 into f2.8. But photoshop can easily crop a picture taken at 70mm into 105mm with little virtual loss in picture quality as the mpix of FF DSLRs keep rising. The 24-70 goes from 74 to 29 degrees. The 24-105 goes from 74 to 19 but with half the light as the other two lenses.

 

[planetg]

this is a good statement

"Photoshop cannot turn a picture taken at f4 into f2.8. But photoshop can easily crop a picture taken at 70mm into 105mm with little virtual loss in picture quality"

 

[miniUltraman]

The other factor I consider 24-70 vs 24-105 is the weight and IS... they are priced almost the same... :lovegrin:

 

[planetg]

is it true the 24-70 and 24-105 is priced similar?

The other factor I consider 24-70 vs 24-105 is the weight and IS... they are priced almost the same... :lovegrin:

 

[miniUltraman]

Not sure about now.. but when I was deciding mine a month back.. they are almost similar :lovegrin: about 100-200 diff(?) so back then the decision was like
a) IS
b) longer range (I wanted to reach further during event coverage... especially to shot up stage without the trouble of changing to my 70-200:thumbsup: 105mm is better)
c) F2.8 or 4.0 (f2.8 is good.. while 4.0 is ok as I have my 580EX)
d) weight (since this is my walkaround lens and I bring it when I travel. 24-70 seems too heavy for my liking.. a piece of solid brick :sweatsm: )
e) it seems hard to get a sharp copy of 24-70 from the literature I read in the earlier batch. Not sure of the new ones.

The above is ranked in the order of priority for me and cost of both lens was not a factor. NOw I think the 24-105 price drop.. it is a no brainer decision then...

 

[miniUltraman]

opps I think I am out of topic.. it is comparing 17-55 to 24-105 not 24-70 to 24-105. sorry :embrass:

 

[planetg]

by the way, i was invited to some D&D last week and used my kit lens with 580EX. however, I'm still pretty disappointed with a lot of shots. Even PnS probably better. I wonder is it me or is it the lens? wonder if 2.8 helps under such conditions

Not sure about now.. but when I was deciding mine a month back.. they are almost similar :lovegrin: about 100-200 diff(?) so back then the decision was like
a) IS
b) longer range (I wanted to reach further during event coverage... especially to shot up stage without the trouble of changing to my 70-200:thumbsup: 105mm is better)
c) F2.8 or 4.0 (f2.8 is good.. while 4.0 is ok as I have my 580EX)
d) weight (since this is my walkaround lens and I bring it when I travel. 24-70 seems too heavy for my liking.. a piece of solid brick :sweatsm: )
e) it seems hard to get a sharp copy of 24-70 from the literature I read in the earlier batch. Not sure of the new ones.

The above is ranked in the order of priority for me and cost of both lens was not a factor. NOw I think the 24-105 price drop.. it is a no brainer decision then...

 

[yannick]

by the way, i was invited to some D&D last week and used my kit lens with 580EX. however, I'm still pretty disappointed with a lot of shots. Even PnS probably better. I wonder is it me or is it the lens? wonder if 2.8 helps under such conditions

Well, i think kits len is good enough to take sharp and nice photo. Its the tehnic to use it.

This pic took with 580ex and kits len.

 

[planetg]

i totally agree. which is why i'm seeking my shifu's help instead of jumping on the lens bandwagon!

Well, i think kits len is good enough to take sharp and nice photo. Its the tehnic to use it.

This pic took with 580ex and kits len.

 

[Zplus]

Let's just say that the Kit Lens at 18mm, f3.5 is already pretty sharp if its calibrated. Yeah, even the kit lens can be calibrated... hehehehhee.

And its 1/2 stop faster than the 17-40... hahahahaha!:bsmilie:

Its just that it does not resolve more details. But for day to day, its already pretty usable.

 

[miniUltraman]

Well, i think kits len is good enough to take sharp and nice photo. Its the tehnic to use it.

This pic took with 580ex and kits len.

Pretty leh :lovegrin:

 

[yannick]

Pretty leh :lovegrin:

@_@ i though u saying the pic sharp :sticktong yea she is indeed leng lui and cute girl

 

[nuxnewbie]

Well, i think kits len is good enough to take sharp and nice photo. Its the tehnic to use it.

This pic took with 580ex and kits len.

The kit lens is decent, but it will be a stretch for one to believe that technique alone can compensate for inherent limitations like aperture and image stablisation.

In the photo the background is close enough for the 580EX to illuminate. You need an environment where the ambient light is really low and the background is out of your flash illumination range to tell the difference between fast and slow lenses.

In fact, this photo can also be used to illustrate that you don't need a 580EX. The pop-up flash in this instance is more than sufficient.

But we're going off-topic really.

 

[miniUltraman]

@_@ i though u saying the pic sharp :sticktong yea she is indeed leng lui and cute girl

erm.. u take like that hor.. girl sharp guy not sharp.. like being ignored leh his expression :bsmilie: since u have the flash.. u should move back and stop down.. but then kit lens zoom limited lah..

 

[TYM76]

Yes, indeed technique is important. But once you have experienced the basic lens, you can move up and experience what other lens can offer your experience in your photography, which can be plentiful. eg. bigger constant apertures for better lowlight shooting or places where flash is not allowed or not useable, Image Stabilizing function to help nail more "keepers", USM with faster focusing for action shots eg sports/ birding, specialised macro for ... Macro shots. The list is endless. And if all else doesnt matter, having sharper clearer more colour-saturated photos that means alot to you can be quite satisfying in its own rights.

Choose a lens within your means and use it to the best ability. The kit lens can only satisfy you so much (and Canon knows that). Once you can upgrade, you will have more things to try and experiment which will hopefully push your techniques further and experience more what you can do with the equipments.


Ok, back to topic, i feel the 17-55 will be more useful for your camera. This is a impt focal range that has many variants on the market for APS-C cameras. (Canon 18-55, 17-55, 17-85, Tamron 17-50, 17-35, Sigma 18-50, Sigma 17-70, Nikon 17-55 2.8, Nikon 18-55) See my point?

 

[TYM76]

erm.. u take like that hor.. girl sharp guy not sharp.. like being ignored leh his expression :bsmilie: since u have the flash.. u should move back and stop down.. but then kit lens zoom limited lah..

Maybe he is trying to capture only the girl (i am sure, who cares about that guy :bsmilie: )
Ya, can stop down to increase DOF to capture both the girl and guy. If not, then use a large aperture lens and "blur" the guy out to show only the girl, more effective.

 

[yannick]

Maybe he is trying to capture only the girl (i am sure, who cares about that guy :bsmilie: )
Ya, can stop down to increase DOF to capture both the girl and guy. If not, then use a large aperture lens and "blur" the guy out to show only the girl, more effective.

haha..yup lor, tat is my purpose ma to capture and focus on the girl hehe...the guy behind is a bit distrating. hehe I put the larger aperture already i think...then the outcome is like this...

 

[BePositive]

btw, why you want to buy? i mean, 17-40 f4 with 28-75 2.8, i think that's a pretty good setup for the wide to semi-tele range already. the losses and costs you are incurring dun seem to be worth the IS, cos like what you said, you dun shoot low light often. i think that buying a macro lens or a tele lens is more worth it (assuming you dun have those ranges yet).

but if this is a BBB virus and you just have to buy something, i vote for 24-105. i dun think quality should be the first deciding factor of your lens. the first deciding factor should be focal length. if you wun use that focal length, no use having a top-notch quality lens. for your current interest in street photography, the 24-105 will be more useful.

but i still think it is best to spend the money in some other focal lengths. btw, what's your current lens lineup?

My current equipments include Canon 17-40 f/4L; Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Canon 70-200 f/4L plus 20D.

Thank you for your answer , I want IS as I find that I need IS to shoot in situation like the late afternoon (or even morning when I want DOF) when you can shoot handhold but the picture will not be very sharp (not that blurry that you must throw away). And if got the 24-105, I dun need to change lens often.

I think I will look through all my picture again, see what is the focal length that I use most

Anyway, I am finding a program that can detect the focal length and setting of the picture. Anyone know about that program and where to download it (assuming that it is free;p)?

 

[satay16]

My current equipments include Canon 17-40 f/4L; Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Canon 70-200 f/4L plus 20D.

Thank you for your answer , I want IS as I find that I need IS to shoot in situation like the late afternoon (or even morning when I want DOF) when you can shoot handhold but the picture will not be very sharp (not that blurry that you must throw away). And if got the 24-105, I dun need to change lens often.

I think I will look through all my picture again, see what is the focal length that I use most

Anyway, I am finding a program that can detect the focal length and setting of the picture. Anyone know about that program and where to download it (assuming that it is free;p)?

right click picture, properties, summary, advanced.

yeah, good move. if you dun find yourself using wide(17) very often, but yet you still need it, you can do this: 24-105 + 17 prime. (on the assumption that you have to sell both lenses for the new lenses.)

 

[BePositive]

The kit lens is decent, but it will be a stretch for one to believe that technique alone can compensate for inherent limitations like aperture and image stablisation.

In the photo the background is close enough for the 580EX to illuminate. You need an environment where the ambient light is really low and the background is out of your flash illumination range to tell the difference between fast and slow lenses.

In fact, this photo can also be used to illustrate that you don't need a 580EX. The pop-up flash in this instance is more than sufficient.

But we're going off-topic really.

He he..., never mind, the thread is for the sake of learning and getting experience We can just talk about anything that seems interesting and helpful for others.
However,they are not irrelevant, I see your point that the techniques are more important than the lens. So, just use anything that you can afford and improve your skills.