HELP! (lens related)
- Started
- Last post
- 16 Responses
- HijoDMaite
I have $500 to spend on a lens.
Trying to decide between two used lenses, both good sellers and both in perfect shape.
Canon 24-105mm f/4.0L IS - $500
or
Canon 70-200mm f/4.0L non IS - $500Both are offered to me for the same price.
As of right now my main purpose is Portraits, Surf Photography (from pier) and Zoo (i got a year pass for xmas)
both good glass but which will I love more. Is a midrange zoom a waste of time on my cropped 70D?
Will I miss IS while shooting handheld with the 70-200?
first world problems I tell you...
- lvl_130
i would go with the 24-105 with IS...but that's just me. I have the 70-300 (tamron 4.0 mind you) and i never use it. the 70 is just not wide enough in most cases for me.
- inteliboy0
24-105
though if shooting surf, maybe you need the 200mm...
- i can get a sharp 70-300mm with IS from Canon to shoot surf until i can afford a nice 70-200mmHijoDMaite
- colin_s0
70-200. kinda screws you with portraiture if you're doing street photo, but for surf and zoo photos you'll likely be shooting from a distance where at least 70 is necessary and 200 is likely needed more than the 24 would benefit you on portraiture, especially considering close-in portraits that would be in the range of 24-50 usually need a depth of field tighter than 4 by at least 50%.
- pango0
same thought as intelibooyee
24-105mm ƒ4L IS
good review. Has IS. Many people use it for Portrait.70-200mm ƒ4
not 2.8 and no IS... at 200m hand held, IS does make a difference. actually... i wouldn't hand held at 200m at all.
but Surf Photos.... wouldn't want to get your camera wet.....
- mekk0
I'd go for the 70-200, portrait just looks so much better.
How exactly do you do your surf shots? From the beach? From a boat? How about spending the money on two gopro black hero super magic camera to put on board and rider?
- how is 70-200 so much better? looking at the sample you posted. you can hardly tell the difference.pango
- + 70D has 1.6 factor. 70mx1.6 = 112m. Can't really tell the difference compare to 200m as well : \pango
- 200mm i much wider and makes a more beautiful nose imhomekk
- i shoot from the pier. 200mm is def close enoughHijoDMaite
- monNom0
Consider an off-brand to get a bit faster and eliminate the need for IS
http://www.keh.com/camera/Canon-…Sounds like you'll want the reach of the 70-200 for your primary subjects. Get a monopod for the zoo.
- autoflavour0
definitely would try and get faster.
4.0 is ok.. but as soon as it gets a little dark you are screwed- yup this is why i am not getting 70-200 4.0 i don't want to regret not having 2.8HijoDMaite
- vaxorcist0
The Canon 70-200 F4 is a great lens if you can hand-hold steadily, use higher ISO's or bounce flash. it focusses very fast, it is NOT an all-purpose lens, but for portraiture where you control the setting, i.e. you can light things, or use bounce flash, it can give very flattering results.
If you just want a lens to shoot randomly and usually get great photos that's a long zoom, the 70-200 F2.8 IS can save you, but the F4 non-IS L lens is very sharp if you're careful.
- j_lawson0
I have the 24-105 and would highly recommend it, it's a really useful lens (I shoot mainly portraits). You are only going to get very tightly cropped portraits on the 70-200 but it would probably be much more useful for the surf. I think it depends on which you want to do more of, portraits or surf
- albums0
At those prices, why not both?
I'd go with the 70-200 for the mixed use of portrait and surf action shots if only one is an option. It's a great, multi-use lens.
- because i only have 500 right now and i need another lens asapHijoDMaite
- pango0
ya get both!
- lvl_130
Man, hijodmaite is one ungrateful son of a bitch. Look at all this info he has garnered and yet he continues to remain unseen. Dick ;D
- HijoDMaite0
Yeah I know sorry busy day. Thanks for the info yall. I am going to go with the 24-105 because I know what a great lens it is and it has IS I eould rather eventually get a 2.8 on the longer lens even if I have to wait till I have the money for it. I want the better bokeh for that lens.
- JamesBoynton0
Take the 24 - 105, the 70-200 will be useless without IS. I have used it and at 200 was pretty restricted.
- HijoDMaite0
So I now have the 24-105mm f/4.0L which I absolutely love. I wanted to ask for any of you who own the lens. What do you guys think about removing the UV filter while shooting?
I'm going to leave it while shooting on the Pier or Jetty do to salt water spray or sand but would you agree that you can lose sharpness, lose contrast, have autofocus issues and cause flare in photos?
Should I remove it completely while doing portraits or shooting street?
I got a UV filter and a circular polarizer for it with the purchase. I also have the hood which is enough protection from bumps.
Thanks!