24-105 L in-place of 24-70 EX on 5d & 20d

[waynelittle]

Hi,

I have been using a 24-70 EX on my 20d, but I am going to buy a 5d in

the future and use my 20d as backup. What are peoples opinions on

doing away with my sigma and getting the 24-105 /f4 L to use on the 5d

and use a 50 1.8 or my 70-200 f2.8 EX for low light work when needed ?

I see the benefits of the L glass possibly outdo the need for the

larger aperture and just rely on the 20d when low light lens is needed.

 

Best regards wayne.

[wedding-photography-denver]

It is fine if you use a flash to augment the light when in darker venues. I am using it with a 5d with great success. YMMV.

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

Having had both and compared them side by side, the AF speed and accuracy of the 24-70L in low light is very noticeably faster than the 24-105L. The viewfinder brightness is not to be discounted either.

 

I shot a large fundraising dinner last night in lighting that was almost pitch black at iso 1600 and I blessed the fact that I had sold my 24-105L and was using the 24-70L about once a minute...

 

That said, I was not at all happy with the Sigma 24-70EX Macro and sold it almost immediately for the canon, the contrast and 'look' of the 24-105L is almost certainly more pleasing but I haven't tested them against each other, I wouldn't be surprised if any advantage to AF speed and accuracy of the f4 vs f2.8 would be negated by the fact it is not a canon lens. Not that there is anything wrong with sigma per se, just that I wouldn't be surprised that canon lenses achieved focus faster and more accurately on a canon body in a side by side test.

[wedding-photography-denver]

here is a detail using this lens/cam combo...<div></div>

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

Did you put that vignetting in yourself? I don't think that my copy was quite that bad at 70mm.

 

Another reason I'm enjoying my 24-70L again from a workflow point of view is not having to correct some quite horrendous vignetting and slowing my actions all the way down by having to use PTLens for distortion correction without which this lens would be pretty unuseable. I don't have time for the extra and although my 24-70L isn't perfect, it's good enough without corrections. The 24-105L wasn't and it was eating up a lot of mine and my computers time.

[grant g]

Never owned the Sigma 24-70EX, but I'd rather have the 24-105 and think it would be a good upgrade. I'm not opposed to Sigma, but I have the 18-50/2.8 and the AF on almost any Canon USM lens is faster.

 

I think the 24-105 is a 'better' lens on a crop camera (more for focal range than the vignetting issue on the 5D at 24mm), but that's just a personal opinion. I'm thinking I might actually buy another 24-105 after I get the 20D replacement and use one on the 5D and another on the 20D replacement (I currently shoot with the 5D and 10D).

[wedding-photography-denver]

Ben, I did add some vignetting to that. I happen to like it for some shots. Regards.

[waynelittle]

Out of interest, David, what ISO speed was used for your hands & ring shot. What speed do you find yourself using most ?

I know the 20d handles 'noise grain' well, and therefore the f4 speed of the 24-105 on the 5d should not be too much of an issue, whats your opinion ?

 

regards wayne.

[wedding-photography-denver]

That was at 800iso and I find that I have used the higher ISO as frequently as I would have used 400 speed film if that gives you some perspective. Probably more than half of my shots are now at or over 400iso and a large number of those are at 1600iso.

 

D.

[waynelittle]

Thanks david,

 

just another quickie, do you then 'clean' them up at all or is the 'noise grain' ok at these speeds ?(I find up to 800 ok on my 20d) I wouldn't like to increase my workflow anymore than is necessary.

 

regards wayne.

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

Fair enuf David, I do it myself often, I would have been suprised if it had been that bad out of the camera.

[aaron_lee___minneapolis__m]

Ben, did you have the first batch of the 24-105? They were recalled and all of the distortion, vignetting, and softness was fixed.

 

I haven't done a wedding with the one I just bought, but it is absolutely fabulous, extremely sharp!

 

~Aaron

[fotografz]

I'm not a fan of zooms, but ...

 

IMO, the 24-105/4L is great. Just get it and start shooting. It's smaller, has a great range

for weddings, allows slower shutter speeds for dragging the shutter with flash, and beats

the 24-70/2.8L at 105mm every time ; -)

 

Macro's to 1.5' for ring shots,

focusing speed has been zero problem on the 5D, haven't had it hunt yet ... but I use the

center sensor for 95% of my shots. When I want low light viewfinder performance and AF

speed, f/2.8 isn't cut it anyway. That's f/1.4 prime territory IMO.

[wedding-photography-denver]

"and beats the 24-70/2.8L at 105mm every time ;-)"

 

ha ha ha ha, you're a funny guy Marc.

[ben_rubinstein___mancheste]

Everyone to their own Marc! it was you who taught me to hate the monotony of post processing (basically by showing me how to do it faster!) and correcting distortion and vignetting isn't how I like to spend my time.

 

As far as the 105mm is concerned, I found myself getting too lazy when I had it, I wasn't getting close enough and letting the zoom do the work for me and I felt it was adversely affecting my photography. The focus speed is a real issue for me but everyone to their own.

[fotografz]

All quite true Ben. Frankly, I'm never going to be a fan of zooms anyway. But they do have

their uses in this business I guess ... no matter what focal length range you favor. 105 was

always a favorite of mine, so I like that feature. But as you say, to each their own.

[edrodgers]

I use 24-105 L on a 5d and love it. I was a little worried about the f4 lens speed myself when I bought it, but I find the image stabilizer works well with my technique. I can get away with availible light at ISO 100 most times as long as the subject is reasonably stationary.. If not, I bump up to 400 or 800 ISO and go black and white to get rid of any color noise.