24-105L+EX580II vs 24-70L

[kodeiko]

Hi people,

I'm new to photography so I would like to seek some enlightenment regarding a dilemma that I've been facing regarding some choices of purchase. Of course, I have a budget that allows either of the above mentioned, which explains the predicament that I'm in.

Initially I liked a lens that will provide relatively great low-light shots so I was contemplating about 24-70L as the f2.8 seemingly allows more light than its more focal length zoom cousin at f4. And not to mention the promising bokeh.

Now that I've reconsidered my priorities (and putting aside situation where flash lights are not allowed or suitable), I am wondering if getting a 24-105L with EX580II will compensate for the amount of light that would otherwise be absorbed by the 24-70L cousin efficiently? Because sooner or later I'm gonna need a flash as I progress into the world of photography, so I thought maybe this combination will be a greater choice.

And with the built-in flash, the limit in shutter speed is fastest at 1/200, will I get faster speed if I couple my 400D with EX580II in use, like 1/2000 for capturing with really fast motion and yet get the light advantage of the flash?

The bokeh issue will take care of itself when I eventually save up enough for 135L, or just stick with my 50mm 1.8 for the moment.

I'm trying not to look into lens of other brands, but if based on your experience you have really great recommendations with equivalent performance[focusing speed, image quality, etc] at a lower price, I'll love to hear your feedback too.

Thanks in advance for your kind advice.

 

[hammie]

The flashlight will give u a lot more option den the 1 stop of light. There is situation that even the 24-70L cant handle

 

[kodeiko]

The flashlight will give u a lot more option den the 1 stop of light. There is situation that even the 24-70L cant handle

Hey thanks for the advice regarding the limitation.

I can see that you've the set up that I'm considering. I don't know if it's appropriate to be asking this but does the shutter speed go faster than 1/200 with EX580II for capturing of really fast movements?

 

[hammie]

With High Speed Sync, you can sync shutter speed higher den 1/200 with a cut down in available power.

 

[feetless]

im not using EX580II but i think for external flash, the max shutter speed u can go is 200

 

[kodeiko]

With High Speed Sync, you can sync shutter speed higher den 1/200 with a cut down in available power.

Okay I'm not exactly good with flash terminology so I suspect this means I can indeed go beyond 1/200 with EX580II? And what's the fastest I can go with that method (or any other methods, preferably without any negative side effect)?

And what do I have to lose with a cut-down in available power though? Sorry I'm really new and have no idea whether the method for the faster shutter speed is accomplished with any negative side-effects or not.

 

[jjj849]

I thought the max is only 1/250. But then at that shutter speed, the background will be very dark. so you have to use at about 1/40-1/100 in order for everything to be bright...which is rather slow at times, but the 24-105 IS should cover for that However with a 24-70 your shutter speed may be higher with or without a flash.

Another thing you need to take note is that the 24-70 is heavy and big. If you put it with a 40D body(like what i do)or even with a 400D you can get tired after a while. Also the 24-70 does not have IS so it is quite difficult to get steady shots. So the f/2.8 does not really help much.

Another thing you may want to look at is what focal length you really need. If you only need up to 70 then just get the 24-70 however if you need slightly more than go for the 24-105. Also in terms of quality of lens, the 24-70 is better than the 24-105.

i suggest that if you need a flash then get the 24-105 as the IS cover for the slow shutter speed. However, if you dont really need a flash then get the 24-70 is image quality is better(however it takes some time to get use to the weight). But i rather get a 24-105 IS, because of the IS and the size and focal length. another lens you might want to consider if you are using a 1.6x is the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS USM.( fast with IS =D)

 

[hammie]

Okay I'm not exactly good with flash terminology so I suspect this means I can indeed go beyond 1/200 with EX580II? And what's the fastest I can go with that method (or any other methods, preferably without any negative side effect)?

And what do I have to lose with a cut-down in available power though? Sorry I'm really new and have no idea whether the method for the faster shutter speed is accomplished with any negative side-effects or not.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/syncspeed.htm

Try to get the basic idea for flash in here
http://photonotes.org/articles/eos-flash/

 

[kodeiko]

Okay, thanks for all who have contributed possible scenarios and definitive guides to deciding. With what I have now, I think I'll be adding 24-105L+EX580II to my arsenal unless I got a sudden windfall monetary gain. xD

 

[calebk]

This is how flash photography generally links to your camera exposure settings:

ISO and shutter speed determine how much ambient light you are letting into your image to mix with your flash's light

Aperture determines how hard your flash has to work.

 

[-ReignOfComputer-]

I'm new to photography...

If you are new to photography then why do you want a pro 24-70mm f2.8?
Reconsider...Do you need the f2.8 and the excellent IQ?
Anyway,I would stretch my budget buy the 24-70mm with a 430EX flash.

 

[kodeiko]

If you are new to photography then why do you want a pro 24-70mm f2.8?
Reconsider...Do you need the f2.8 and the excellent IQ?
Anyway,I would stretch my budget buy the 24-70mm with a 430EX flash.

I'm new as in I've been using my 400D for roughly a month plus. I don't know how long or what great shots I have to take to professionally justify the desire for a 24-70 or even a L lens to begin with, but I think I want to get gears worth their price tags and deliver, which the mentioned lens seem to do based on reviews and comments everywhere (though the 24-70mm not so).

This is how flash photography generally links to your camera exposure settings:

ISO and shutter speed determine how much ambient light you are letting into your image to mix with your flash's light

Aperture determines how hard your flash has to work.

Thank you, point taken.

 

[calebk]

...but I think I want to get gears worth their price tags and deliver, which the mentioned lens seem to do based on reviews and comments everywhere (though the 24-70mm not so).
...

I fail to understand this. Are you trying to say that every lens that has a good review to price tag balance is, sooner or later, going to be in your inventory?

Whatever happened to buying what you need?

 

[kodeiko]

I fail to understand this. Are you trying to say that every lens that has a good review to price tag balance is, sooner or later, going to be in your inventory?

Whatever happened to buying what you need?

I should have rephrased the sentence to mean that for the focal length zoom range that I'm looking for, I believe the L-series (which happens to be in the range) is superior to the others in line from other brands. So far I've only managed to read reviews about Sigma's equivalent and if I were to believe what the reviews say, I don't think I'll like the auto-focus speed albeit it being a cheaper alternative.

I need the auto-focus speed to be (really) fast as I like candid shots a lot and (50mm 1.8 could use a little more reach though I'm also considering 135f2 in the not-so-distant future) on top of other general-purpose indoor events photography. I personally dig capturing of frozen moments so it was a really tough debate between the 2 lenses I'm considering, so I wouldn't be surprised if I end up with 24-70L when I'm back from the shop.

And short answer is, no. Not every lens that's a bang for its buck will end up in my inventory. I have a set of priorities before considering any lens. Money issue aside, I try to save up for a lens that will last, and deliver better results e.g. fast AF(and as far as this is concerned I usually count on reviews), large aperture for frozen moments and low-light moments w/o the use of flash. And within the focal length that I need to carry out what I usually take photos of e.g. 135f2 is an example for candid/portrait shots in future.

I know what I need (f2.8;bokeh,low-light conditions,faster lens), I just need to learn to let go of what I want(24-105;longer reach,3-stop IS) when comparing the 2 L lens of equivalent builds physically and similar AF speed(not too sure about this though).

That's the problem with me being new. I have not enough exposure to confirm where my interests lie -- I have been taking pictures of landscape, portraits(candid), low-light conditions(cars in garang,kids playing with fountain..etc.). Maybe I should get myself a EX580II first and experiment before jumping onto the bandwagon of L. Maybe I'm just not ready yet since I'm only theorizing the possibilities of both lenses without practical proven usage.

 

[calebk]

Since you are not on a 1.3x crop, nor a FF body, why not consider the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? Its focal range is more catered towards a 1.6x crop user, giving close to a classic 28-80 equivalent field of view.

 

[mingvy0621]

for me i world like more bigger aperture. 24-70mm f2.8L is a good lens for protrait. but the bad thing is dun have any is function. for 24-105m f4l i not very like cos a small aperture not enought i use normaly i use around f2 at 14mm 53mm 50mm 85mm 135mm and 200mm. the 24-105 can say the colour not as well as 24-70mm. and the body quality also not as well as 24-70mm. 24-70mm i can use around 1/8 shutterspeed but wont get blur i shooting protrait. but depend u skill looo

 

[calebk]

for me i world like more bigger aperture. 24-70mm f2.8L is a good lens for protrait. but the bad thing is dun have any is function. for 24-105m f4l i not very like cos a small aperture not enought i use normaly i use around f2 at 14mm 53mm 50mm 85mm 135mm and 200mm. the 24-105 can say the colour not as well as 24-70mm. and the body quality also not as well as 24-70mm. 24-70mm i can use around 1/8 shutterspeed but wont get blur i shooting protrait. but depend u skill looo

There's a 14mm f/2 in existence? You have a 200mm f/2?

Colour and build wise, both the 24-105 and 24-70 are pretty much evenly matched. I would not expect inconsistency of colour from both, since both are pro lenses, and pros expect consistent colour lens to lens.

Between both, actually, the only deciding factors are f/2.8 vs f/4, IS, and how much weight you are willing to carry around.

 

[cg171s]

....the 24-105 can say the colour not as well as 24-70mm. and the body quality also not as well as 24-70mm....

like what calebk said, I also beg to differ with this statement. Both lenses are categorized as L lenses which normally or should I say most of the time means excellent lenses providing if you know how to use it properly and using it at the right situation. Of course there will always be limitations with every lens, in the end it depends on how well you know your equipments. Hey, even a pocket camera can take award winning photos...

to TS, I would suggest you go down to a camera store, try both lenses, see if the 24-70 is too heavy for you, see if you miss the longer zoom and the IS in the 24-105, etc... Trying is the best way to decide which lens is for you... Good luck

 

[Lost Dog]

Get the 24-105 + 430EX flash..it's already a good combo.. Youre not always shooting f2.8 anyway. f4 is enough..

 

[kodeiko]

Since you are not on a 1.3x crop, nor a FF body, why not consider the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM? Its focal range is more catered towards a 1.6x crop user, giving close to a classic 28-80 equivalent field of view.

According to the ClubSnap price list, the mentioned EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is around $1300. I'm not sure if I'm willing to pay 13x more for a focal length range my kit lens at 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 NON-IS is already delivering. I don't believe I can tell the difference in IQ from the images from the two lenses anyway, and my 50mm 1.8 is doing most of the portrait shots at this range so that covers the need for a max aperture.

And that's exactly why I'm considering 24-105L as I have plans to get 135L too. The only problem is how much longer can I hold out till I'm able to get the 135L in hand. Yes you may argue that 50mm 1.8 vs 70mm 2.8 is of not much difference. But I really think at 70mm 2.8 the L lens will focus fast enough for me to make a difference, and with more focal length background blur comes in another way. Tell me 50mm 1.8 is good enough vs 70mm 2.8 and I'm good to go.

for me i world like more bigger aperture. 24-70mm f2.8L is a good lens for protrait. but the bad thing is dun have any is function. for 24-105m f4l i not very like cos a small aperture not enought i use normaly i use around f2 at 14mm 53mm 50mm 85mm 135mm and 200mm. the 24-105 can say the colour not as well as 24-70mm. and the body quality also not as well as 24-70mm. 24-70mm i can use around 1/8 shutterspeed but wont get blur i shooting protrait. but depend u skill looo

Get the 24-105 + 430EX flash..it's already a good combo.. Youre not always shooting f2.8 anyway. f4 is enough..

I can't say this is not true. I flipped through my pictures and realized most of my pictures are shot in the day. And night shoots are done with f/11-f/16 for long exposure shots. But I have the tendency to force the most out of ambient light so I don't use the built-in flash at all. I'm just worried that buying the F4L will result in days when I lament to myself 'if only I get the 2.8 and this wont happen!'. I might be worrying too much, but for the price, I don't think I'm being unreasonable worrying so much.