model mayhem gallery Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>My Canon 5D Mark II was recently stolen. My renters insurance has sent a check for the replacement.<br> At the time the camera was stolen my Canon 17-40 F4L lens was on the camera. I love this lens espeacially on my Canon 30D but my main lens is my Tamron 28-75 f2.8. Now I have several options available to me.</p> <ol> <li>Get the Canon 5D Mark II with the 24-105 F4 IS. (not bad since I still have the Tamron 28-75 F2.8)</li> <li>Purchase another 17-40 F4L and keep using my Tamron 28-75. (Gets me back where I started)</li> <li>Upgrade to Canon 24-70 F2.8 which means I will have to invest another $700 bucks or so. (probably the closest I will ever be to owning a 24-70 F2.8). I am just not sure it is worth the difference over the Tamron 28-75 F2.8. Plus I will still have to buy another 17-40 later anyway.</li> </ol> <p>Not really so fund of the 24-105 because of its distortion at 24 which would have been ok if I still had the 17-40, but on a Canon 5D I think the 24-105 is a more usable lens than 17-40. The Tamron takes great photos but doesn't have full time manul focus over ride and is noisy when shooting video. My heart is saying get the 24-70 my pocket is saying get the 17-40. Any suggestions?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charles_clark1 Posted September 13, 2010 Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>I have the 24-105 for my 5D (old classic version that only shoot pictures :-). I like the range of the lens but it isn't the best at challenging focusing situations. It hunts and seems to take forever. I can put my 70-200 f4 on and it focuses wonderfully. If I were in your situation, and you could live without the last 35mm of reach, I would spend the money and get the 24-70.</p> <p>BTW, I shoot landscpaes so distortion hasn't really bothered me. I do occasionally use the lens distortion correction build into Lightroom 3.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
model mayhem gallery Posted September 13, 2010 Author Share Posted September 13, 2010 <p>That is certainly what my heart is telling me to do. It's so much living without the last 35mm reach because i have a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 (next to be upgraded to L), it's living without the wide angle for a while.<br> Also, if I change to the kit I get the 24-105 IS cheap abot $800?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_felber1 Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>I get the 24-70 and 17-40 they are the best wide angle lens canon has on the market.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markonestudios Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 MP, what is your usual subject matter? Also, with the benefit of hindsight, what focal lengths have you always felt you were lacking with your previous setup? It may well be that your previous kit was more than enough. I have the 17-40 and the 24-105 on my 5D2. I have found over the past few weddings that easily 80-90% of my shots have been with 17-40 on my FF. Maybe 6% on my 24-105 and the remainder on my 50 f/1.8 (mounted on my crop dSLR) <p>Check your EXIF data for past shots. Gauge what you feel you've been missing then fill that gap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
model mayhem gallery Posted September 14, 2010 Author Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>Thanks Marc,Mark & Charles (Sounds like a law firm :-)<br> Ultimately I have broken it down to this decison. I now have the opertunity to basically upgrade my Canon 17-40 F4 L to the 24-105 F4L IS for a couple hundred dollars since I can now re-purchase my Canon 5D Mark II as kit. I primarily photograph people in studio or under some sort of studio lighting. I have come to the conclusion I will have to have the 17-40 F4L no matter what because it is the best and most affordable wide angle. I can basically have both the 17-40 F4L and 24-105 F4L IS for about the same amount as the 24-70 F2.8. I will still have my Tamron 28-75 F2.8. I do find since my camera does not have a builtin flash when I leave the studio I always have at least one 2.8 lens and my fast 50 1.8. My delima is if I pay $800 bucks would I be happy with the 24-105 or should I just wait until I can get what you all know I really want the 24-70 F2.8. I only have about 10 more days to decide while I can still return the Camera body to Calumet.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddomonkos Posted September 14, 2010 Share Posted September 14, 2010 <p>My vote is buy the 17-40 F4L and 24-70 F2.8L and sell the Tamron to offset the upgrade.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
model mayhem gallery Posted September 15, 2010 Author Share Posted September 15, 2010 <p>Agreed. I just don't think I will be happy with the 24-105. I will use the insurance money to just get the 17-40 F4L (again). I will sell my Canon 30D with the Tamron 28-75, what ever I get for that I will use to purchase the Canon 24-70 F2.8.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
barmijo Posted September 16, 2010 Share Posted September 16, 2010 There's no substitute for great glass, especially on a camera as capable as the 5D mk II. Go with the 24-70mm f/2.8L. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lindsay_ramstetter Posted September 17, 2010 Share Posted September 17, 2010 <p>I would upgrade your lenses to the Canon 24-70 F2.8 </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now