Exchange 24-85 plus 20 for 28-70 L

[fxdonny]

I guess the title says it all. I now have a 24-85mm consumer zoom

lens and a prime 20mm lens. I was offered by someone to buy his 28-

70mm L lens. That means I will have to sell my existing 24-85 and 20

to finance for it. Though I don't use my 20mm frequent enough, it

would be good to have it when I need it. 24-85 is now my main lens

and I'm quite happy with it, but I've heard a lot of good things

about the 28-70 L.

 

My question is: Is it worth it to get the extra quality of an L lens

and sacrifice my 20mm? Financial wise I will have to do it. Don't ask

me to keep my 20mm while buying the 28-70 L or even suggesting 24-70

L. Also, renting one to try it is also not an option, considering the

price of rental in the area. If you're in my shoes with similar

budget, what will you do?

 

Thank you in advance

[gerry_szarek]

First of all you could just buy a 50F1.4 and a 80mm for better quality. The 28~70L vs 24~70L see this review in Luminouslandscape.com

 

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/24-70-review.shtml

 

and a review in photo net, which raves about the lens

 

http://www.photo.net/canon/donb/28-70

 

Michael doesn't rave about it, however I am sure it's pretty good compared to your consumer lens wide open.

 

Best of luck.

GS

[fxdonny]

Gerry, thank you for your response. I do have a 50mm 1.8 and doesn't feel the need to upgrade to 50 1.4. Also I forgot to add that I shoot film only up to now. Like many other people, I need the zoom for event photography.. Therefore, instead of 85mm prime, I opted for the zoom.

[mike_kim]

F D, ask yourself three questions 1) how often do you shoot it at wide open, 2) how often you need 20mm and 3) will you be buying a digital SLR with cropping factor anytime soon?

 

1) If you close down 24-85mm sufficiently say f8.0, differences are negligable between 24-85mm and 28-70mm 2.8L. Unless you really need that extra speed of f2.8 or large aparture at 70mm to isolate the subject, I would say stick with what you got. 2) and 3) If you have need for 20mm and/or has (or will purchase) digital SLR with cropping factor, you will miss your 20mm prime. 28-70mm may be too wide for digital SLRs (such as 10D). BTW, I have used and using the lenses you mentioned plus 24-70mm 2.8L, and I would recommend 28-70mm 2.8L only if you need that extra stop or two plus a maximum convinience. However some advantages of 28-70mm 2.8L are it will let you shoot Fuji Velvia handheld (at ISO 40) for acceptable results and very convinient for group portrait/weddings.

[PuppyDigs]

The EF 28-70 2.8L USM is really heavy and big and gave me a sore shoulder after a couple hours. The EF 24-85 3.5-4.5 USM is really small and light. I sold my EF 28-70 2.8L USM a couple years ago because I couldn't stand to carry it around all day. Something to think about.

[fxdonny]

Thank you all for your responses

 

I thought about it and after all, I realized that I'm not a pro with unlimited budget. For now, I decided to keep my existing set up, at least, until I have quite some extra money to spend..

 

Mike was right, it would be hard to let my 20mm go. I realize the advantages of 28-70mm 2.8, which is why puts me into a dilema. However, since I don't need it urgently, I think I could wait..

 

Once again, thank you all..

[jim_larson1]

F D: I agree with you.

 

If you are happy with your 24-85, then you are happy with the 24-85. :)

 

If you need more convincing: Many people recommend the 24-85 as a decent prosumer lens. It is not in the same category as the cheapo 28-80/90 kit zooms.

 

Sure the 28-70/2.8L is better. A Porsche is also better than a Mustang. So what?