walk around lens

[wisdom_tong]

Hi

 

I'm having some difficulty in deciding which lens would be a better walk around

lens for my 5D. I'm stuck in deciding between the EF 24-105mm F4L IS and EF 24-

70mm F2.8L. I will be using this lens as a primary lens for travelling in the

upcoming months.

 

I do like the extra 35mm of reach for portraiture but have questionable idea

about its edge sharpness and light falloff. At the same time I?m worried about

the weight of the 24-70.

 

I would love to hear some users? opinion about theses lens. Also other

alternative to these lens would be nice as well.

 

Wisdom

[chrisblake]

I have a 5D and I also have both of the above lenses. I found the 24-105 to be an ideal walk around lens. I use it for 75% of all my work. Its true that its not 'as' good a lens as a 24-70 but the problems it has are easily fixed in post processing. The extra reach and IS makes up for any short comings.

 

I only use my 24-70 now in doors in very low light, and even with the extra stop I find I'm using it less and less.

[emraphoto]

the 50mm f1.4

[drew_para]

Unless you are traveling really light, I would lean towards the 24-105 and keep a 50 or 28 prime handy if the light goes south on you.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>If you're asking for a one-lens solution, I'd have to go with the 24-105. The extra reach would be quite useful, and while both one extra stop of light and IS are useful (and sometimes in different situations), IS is more generally useful to me than the extra stop is. In the film days, I used to use the 28-135 (and, before I had that, the 28-105) as a walkabout lens, and found the range rather useful. Now that I've gone digital with a 1.6-crop body, my most-used lens is the 17-40, which works out to roughly 27-64 in full-frame equivalent, and it's nowhere near long enough on the long end to be a good one-lens solution (so I pair it with a longer lens when I have to pack a relatively small, light kit). 70 isn't much longer than 64 and wouldn't be long enough for me, either.</p>

[michael_ziegler2]

I have used the 24-105 with my 5D exclusively on 3 recent european trips. As a single lens solution, this is it. I do experience some light fall off depending on the opening and focal length, but as has been said above that is easily fixed in PS.

I highly recomment this combination. With the high ISO potential of the 5D, low light situations do not present a problem at f/4. Don't forget the IS on the 24-70 is not there.

[pmind]

My everyday setup with the 5D is a 50mm f/1.4 mounted and a 24-105mm in the bag. I often wish for a bit more on the long end (maybe 135), so 70 just won't cut it for me. However, when the sun goes down, the 50 goes on.

[brent andersen]

There's a simple solution for me, the 24-105L. It's smaller and lighter than the 24-70L, my copy is just as sharp or sharper, and it has IS. I sometimes wish that Canon would come out with, say. a 28-200L lens, although IQ would likely suffer. I use the 18-200VR Nikon and it is very handy. If you need f/2.8 I would recommend the Tamron 28-75mm.

[brent andersen]

There's a simple solution for me, the 24-105L. It's smaller and lighter than the 24-70L, my copy is just as sharp or sharper, and it has IS. I sometimes wish that Canon would come out with, say, a 28-200L lens, although IQ would likely suffer. I use the 18-200VR Nikon and it is very handy. If you need f/2.8 I would recommend the Tamron 28-75mm.

[mendel_leisk]

First off, I'd second the 50mm f1.4, well worth bringing. I wouldn't want it as a single lens solution, but it's great for low light and candids. When you really don't want to bring a heavy piece of gear it's the ticket. The main down side I find is I really miss being able to zoom wider.

 

I've just gotten around to doing a test of my 24-70 and 24-105, both at their max apertures, around 50mm, on my 5D. I tripod mounted and shot a test chart, trying to get as square to the target as possible. No mirror lock, but remote release. My test are with my 2 copies, which can be crap shoot, I don't know how representative they are.

 

At the center the lens are roughly equal. Out towards the edges the 24-105 sharpness falls off much more. It's uneven, worst on the left side. Could be I wan't quite perp to the target, but the 24-70 was positioned at the same angle, and at f2.8.

 

The 24-70 has minor light fall-off in the corners, whereas the 24-105 has moderate.

 

The color of the 24-70 seems almost ruddy, compared to the 24-105. I think the 24-105 is the more neutral.

 

The 24-105 has more distortion toward the corners, and chromatic abberation.

[gdanmitchell]

Both the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 24-105 f/4 IS are generally regarded as excellent lenses.

They do, however, have somewhat different personalities.

 

I use the 24-105 as my primary lens on a 5D and it serves me very well. Its optical quality

is quite fine in terms of sharpness and color rendition. The extra length at the long end is

welcome. For my purposes, f/4 is almost always sufficient. The image stabilization feature

is useful for hand held shots. The size and weight are quite reasonable for a lens covering

this focal length range.

 

The lens does exhibit a bit more corner fall-off ("vignetting") at wide apertures than the

24-70, especially at the 24mm end. It also exhibits a bit more pincushion/barrel

distortion.

 

That said, these aren't major issues for me. (You'll have to decide if they are for you - and

if the shorter throw and large size/weight of the 24-70 are worth the difference.) In my

work I don't shoot at f/4 all that often, and when I do - either in low light or to decrease

the DOF - the corner fall-off generally becomes less significant if it is noticeable at all. If it

is an issue, it is easy to adjust for it in post-processing. With most subjects the

pincushion/barrel distortion is not going to be noticeable. When it is and if it matters I

correct this in post processing as well.

 

Dan

[mendel_leisk]

One more note, my 24-105 seems to auto-focus quicker. No big deal, tho.

[hjoseph7]

"I will be using this lens as a primary lens for travelling in the upcoming months."

 

I don't know where you plan to travel or what type of shape you are in, but the 24-70mm is a very heavy and bulky lens. Try carrying one in 90+ degree muggy heat for a couple of hours and you will see what I mean. I'm not sure about the 24-105mm F4 since I don't own one.

 

If you are talking about a true walk-around lens, then you are talking about a lens that is very light small/discrete, somewhat rugged and does not scream HELLO I'M A $1500 LENS !

[ted_sorensen1]

I think the 24-105 f/4 L IS is a great choice. As a single lens setup I would choose it. Optionally, I would supplement it with a prime or two, but the 24-105 would still do 80% of the work.