Canon 24-70L F2.8 or 24-105L F4 IS ??

[30D or XTI]

Hi Pros,

I really want to take advantage of the Canon double rebate this time, for sure getting the 30D with the prime 18-55 for wide angle purpose.

Now, to take advange of the double rebate, I need to buy a lense or a flash. My million dollars question is... Better get the 24-70L F2.8 or 24-105L F4 IS since they both almost the same price ?? Did anyone of you have experiences on both of these lenses ?? I need this zoom ranch for indoor parties, myself I think I favore the 24-105L F4 more because of the IS equiped, good for DSLR beginner, atleast less blur pictures turn out. Then, it's a F4. Will it be a bright lense for indoor without flash ? Of course the 24-70L F2.8 is much brighter lense, but I don't get the IS.

Here is what J&R says in their website regarding this lense. Would you agree or disagree, please give me some advise.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

The L-series is Canon’s flagship Professional Lens range, designed to include outstanding image performance, ultimate operability and weather resistance. The EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM offers a lightweight alternative to the renowned EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM. offers the highest possible Optical quality with no change in Aperture over the full focal range of the lens. This allows photographers to set Exposure at the widest aperture and Zoom all the way through to 105mm without having to vary the shutter speed.
Image Stabilizer (IS) dramatically reduces image blur caused by camera shake. Gyro sensors detect unwanted vibrations, triggering the corresponding movement of a correcting lens group perpendicular to the optical axis. This alters the light path, returning the image to its correct position on the sensor or film plane. The 3 stop advantage means that photographers normally shooting a 105mm lens handheld at 1/125 sec can obtain a shake free result with a shutter speed as low as 1/15 sec, for vastly extended options in low light conditions.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike.

[pagnamenta]

Depends on what you are shooting. As you said indoor parties, you are going to need the faster lens. I had to make the same choice about 3 months ago and went with the 24-105 IS. I do a lot of outdoor photography so the IS was good, but I could really use the extra f-stop indoors. I say go with the 24-70 f2.8. At this small zoom range, you won't need the IS that much.

[cwphoto]

24-105 plus a cheap fast non-zoom (say 50 f/1.8).

[DonSchap]

If you get the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_24105_4_is/index.htm), you are going to NEED the 580EX flash. There ya go... DOUBLE REBATE! Case solved. ;)

16580

[30D or XTI]

If you get the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM (http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_24105_4_is/index.htm), you are going to NEED the 580EX flash. There ya go... DOUBLE REBATE! Case solved. ;)

16580


Don,

I realize that I may need to fire the flash on certain light conditions.... What about the build in flash ? Not reach far enough or ........ Why do you think I need the 580EX ?? Please advise.

Mike.

[DonSchap]

The 580EX has the ability to light up the room, so to speak... as it adapts and follows the telephoto conditions you set upon it, unlike the pop-up flash which can come up kind short beyond ten feet.

As you zoom out... the 580EX flash narrows and strengthens for distance... as you drawback the flash widens, accordingly. It's a really nifty touch of professionalism and maintains a UNIFORM amount of light for about 33 feet.

Minolta started this kind of adaptive flash with a motorized telescoping snout lens on its external flash unit (AF 4000), back in 1985. It has been improved by eliminating the telescoping mechanical part of the flash, but works in the same way... it automatically tracks with the zoom setting of the lens.

The pop-up may be effective for the kit lens (18-55mm), but beyond that (70mm+)... it has issues. Also, with the larger lens (24-105mm f/4L) on the front of the camera, the lens will cast a shadow as the close in, pop-up flash pops over it.

Here's a small example of lens shadow... it gets more pronounced the closer you get... and the bigger the lens on your camera. Come on, everybody... "I'm being followed by a lens shadow, lens shadow, lens shadow..." (My apologies to Cat Stevens)

16582
16583

Check one out at the store, BEFORE you buy... for the real-feel.

[30D or XTI]

The 580EX has the ability to light up the room, so to speak... as it adapts and follows the telephoto conditions you set upon it, unlike the pop-up flash which can come up kind short beyond ten feet.

As you zoom out... the 580EX flash narrows and strengthens for distance... as you drawback the flash widens, accordingly. It's a really nifty touch of professionalism and maintains a UNIFORM amount of light for about 33 feet.

Minolta started this kind of adaptive flash with a motorized telescoping snout lens on its external flash unit (AF 4000), back in 1985. It has been improved by eliminating the telescoping mechanical part of the flash, but works in the same way... it automatically tracks with the zoom setting of the lens.

The pop-up may be effective for the kit lens (18-55mm), but beyond that (70mm+)... it has issues. Also, with the larger lens (24-105mm f/4L) on the front of the camera, the lens will cast a shadow as the close in, pop-up flash pops over it.

Check one out at the store, BEFORE you buy... for the real-feel.

Don,

Thank you very much for the details, your experience & explainations are very juicy. What about the 24-70L F2.8 ? Is it that bright of a lense for indoor? Do I need to use flash often or I may get away with some darker pictures then brighten them up later with the software ?? I hate to use flash, to me it seems so difficult to control the balance of light. Bythe way, I rather use the money of the 580EX for the 80mm F1.8

Mike.

[DonSchap]

You are a light manager, if you will. The camera (EOS 30D) has a spot metering capability, that allows you to determine the correct light for an image. No matter what lens you use, the meter will tell you true - enough light for the exposure? or NOT!

The better the lens, the less light you need... but, you still need some! :eek:

f/2.8 lenses allow for better indoor shots than f/4s. Experience has shown us that. A 70-200mm f/1.2 would be incredible... incredibly HEAVY! It would make for a fantastic indoor lens... mounted on a tank for support.

Back to reality... whew! :rolleyes:

The main reason most of my lenses are f/2.8 are because... I also do not like to use flash. Even so, I am often challenged with the available lighting. Metering a subject reveals a shot that will require seconds... at f/2.8 ISO-200. You can adjust your ISO setting higher... and obviously reduce that time, but the image quality tends to suffer as you do so. So the choice is either noise or a longer exposure.

Spending a lot of money for a lens that provides f/2.8 also strikes me in the place I don't want it to... my wallet. I selected TAmROn lensing to offset these high costs. The images I get with their lenses are on par with the level of shooting I have chosen to do (hobby). I don't sell my work, so making that kind of investment in glass seems a little "over the top."

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of photographers who swear by the TAmROn brand and rightly so. I feel it returns excellent work for the money... and I'm sticking with it.

Since the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM does not come with IS... I suggest you check out the TAmROn SP AF28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD as an alternative. If you need short focal length, you might pick up a TAmROn SP AF17-50mm f/2.8 XR DiII LD along with it, since you are looking to spend near $1000 on one Canon lens.

This will give you plenty of spread in your focal lengths... and the ability to hop to a full frame camera with the 28-75mm, if you so desire.

Anyway, I digress...

[Sleepytrout]

I have very limited photography experience, so take this with a grain of salt.

I was in the same quandry as you a few months ago, over the same lenses. I went with the 24-105L f/4. I am very happy with this lens, but indoors it does have its limitations and I sometimes wish for the f/2.8. I don't have a mountable flash...yet, and I appreciate Don's suggestions. I will have to investigate it to get that more pro look. I've noticed the same problems with lens shadow....especially with the hood on the lens. Outdoors I have no problem or complaint at all. It performs wonderfully.

I would say go for the 24-70L 2.8. If you go to the 70-200L later on you won't have overlap....if that matters to you. The 24-70L will definitely give you more light.

It's a hard choice, but I think you'll be happy either way you go. I used the reviews from the link below before purchasing.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Default.aspx

[RichNY]

Personally I think the best choice would be a 17-55 IS. You'll be able to shoot much wider (effective 11.2mm wider @1.6 crop).

For an everyday walk around lens the 17-55 offers a much more useful focal range than the 24-70mm. It also offers image stabilization and can be purchased for $999 at Beach or B&H (no rebates though).

I was face with the same decision and bought my 17-55 IS last week and am very pleased with it.

[DonSchap]

For that kind of scratch... I'd want to be, also, Rich. :eek:

[Bluedog]

One thing to keep in mind is that neither one of these lens is going to be a stellar indoor low light performer. The 24-105 f/4L will allow for a 2 stop gain using the Image Stabilization over the f/2.8 _ or bump up the ISO 1 stop.

I often think people get caught up in a lens being f/2.8 and they forget its only a one stop gain over f/4. Yea it'll be brighter and bring in more light but nowhere near what a f/1.4 ~ f/1.8 will.

[unix04]

One thing to keep in mind is that neither one of these lens is going to be a stellar indoor low light performer. The 24-105 f/4L will allow for a 2 stop gain using the Image Stabilization over the f/2.8 _ or bump up the ISO 1 stop.

I often think people get caught up in a lens being f/2.8 and they forget its only a one stop gain over f/4. Yea it'll be brighter and bring in more light but nowhere near what a f/1.4 ~ f/1.8 will.

true...but when people are moving, the extra stop may be the difference between going to the trash bin, or the photo album.

on that note, i find lately that i want to go for a set of primes for indoor (and some outdoor assuming i have control over where i can shoot from) and zooms for normal outdoor use. i feel i may end up with a set of primes plus a couple of f/4 L lenses in the future. (or 3rd party 2.8 zooms)

[30D or XTI]

What about mounitng the 24-105L F4 over a full frame 5D ?? Will it get a better effect ?? Brighter than the 30D ?? Since the 5D has a full frame 35mm sensor versus the 23+mm sensor that the 30D has. Wouldn't it collect more lights base on the bigger sensor ?? Just wondering.

[DonSchap]

Actually, the smaller sensor has a better time with light... as the tendency is for light to kind of fade as it gets to the edges of the frame. With the effective crop of a APS-C sensor, you miss all the edge fighting and get a clean image right to the sensor. So, in effect, your thinking is exactly... reversed.

You do have a smaller number of pixels to describe the image... but, not so much that it would be noticable.

Oh well... crop on, crop off. :)

[30D or XTI]

Actually, the smaller sensor has a better time with light... as the tendency is for light to kind of fade as it gets to the edges of the frame. With the effective crop of a APS-C sensor, you miss all the edge fighting and get a clean image right to the sensor. So, in effect, your thinking is exactly... reversed.

You do have a smaller number of pixels to describe the image... but, not so much that it would be noticable.

Oh well... crop on, crop off. :)

Hello again Don,

Got it !! You are saying the full frame can handle the pixels better. Not the light. But why the full frame so expensive and demand for the L series type lenses ?? What is the real benefit by owning one ?

[DonSchap]

One aspect of the Full Frame camera is the fact that it makes use of the actual focal length stated on the lens. When you put a 24mm lens on the front of a FF sensor... it's 24mm! Not (1.3x) 31.2mm or (1.6x) 38.4mm! You actually get what it says it is.

Also, when you do crop... you do have more pixels to choose from in the crop than you would with an APS-C sensor.

I'm not saying you have less light at the edges of the FF sensor, but you could... depending on the lens you use. "L" lenses are supposed to be excellent for offering uniform light across the sensor. They are designed that way.

When you have an APS-C sensor... the outer 20-30% of the full frame edge is eliminated. The sensor never sees it.

Perhaps this diagram will explain a little more clearly:

16595


Full frames also can encounter more of the light fall off that I alluded to, earlier, as this next diagram details:

16596

The blue lines represent the corners of a full 35mm frame, the red lines represent the corners of an APS-C frame.Wide open you can see that the corners of the full frame vignette by maybe 3 stops compared to the center (blue circle). This is a significant and quite visible amount of vignetting, but it's typical for a fast normal lens. At the corners of the APS-C frame, vignetting is only about 1.25 stops (red circle), which is a lot better. Stopped down to f5.6 the full frame vignetting drops to about 0.75 stops (blue diamond) and APS-C vignetting drops to about 0.65 stops. Stopped down further, the full frame vignetting will approach the theoretical cos4 limit of 0.5 stops (blue square) and the APS-C vignetting will approach about 0.15 stops (red square). (my thanks to Bob Adkins Photography for these diagrams and descriptions)

A more detailed explanation can be found at: Canon EOS 5D vs. Canon EOS 20D - Full Frame vs. APS-C Sensors (http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/digital/full_frame_vs_aps-c.html) It is definitely worth the read.

Remember: Information is only useful if you KNOW about it.

[Mark_48]

Is the speed and accuracy of AF somewhat dependent on the wide open aperature of a lens. The f/2.8 lenses I own seem to achieve AF quicker, more consistently, and with less hunting in low light than ones that are f/4.0.

Mark...

[DonSchap]

Immediately TWICE as much light to the sensor for decision-making. Seems like good enough detail to be noticed. ;)

[BonjiB]

Get the canon 24-70 f/2.8L if you have the cash. It's one of the sharpest and highest quality zooms out there. It will eventually replace my tamron 17-50 when i go full frame (years to come most likely.)

[adam75south]

i've went through this decision over and over inside my head....

i'd probably go with the 24-70. not so much for low light movement freezing capabilities, but for the more versatile DOF. either one will require flash to get professional results indoors though. using natural light isn't always the best way to go. you will get some harsh..and weird shadows. and at f/4 you can forget about freezing movement....then again, the 2.8 isn't great at it either...just a little better.

look, either way it is a win/win and great decision to have to make!

24-105
Pros: 105mm, IS
Cons: f/4, REQUIRES flash for indoors

24-70
Pros: DOF, is USEABLE indoors without flash
Cons: no IS, only 70mm

BUUUUUUUUUUT

if it were me and i had that budget, i'd get:
tamron 28-75($380)
ef 50mm f/1.4($315)
430ex flash($240)
total: $935(all prices from b&h)

and you still got some money left over...either upgrade to the 580EX flash or get a nice diffuser for the flash...or BOTH!

[abhi_morey]

guys is the f2.8 engough for indoor shots without flash ? bcuz i constantly end up going f1.8 on my 50mm even at ISO 1600 to get the correct exposure

[Bluedog]

24-105
Pros: 105mm, IS
Cons: f/4, REQUIRES flash for indoors

No necessarily true as that can depend on a lot of variables and at the same time f/2.8 can be restricting indoors under low lighting. If its a static subject the IS will supersede the f/2.8 by 2 stops.

[cdifoto]

When all else fails, Eeny Meeny Miney Mo.

[adam75south]

No necessarily true as that can depend on a lot of variables and at the same time f/2.8 can be restricting indoors under low lighting. If its a static subject the IS will supersede the f/2.8 by 2 stops.


i had a feeling someone would point that out.

i didn't want to be too repetitive......but

24-105
Pros: 105mm, IS
Cons: f/4, REQUIRES flash for indoors if freezing movement.

[DonSchap]

Look,

I have a TAmROn SP AF28-105mm f/2.8 LD that takes most excellent images and weighs quite a bit (32 oz). To be honest, this lens delivers a nice shot, but is a little tough to tote after awhile. It kind of "marries" these two lens together, without the IS, of course. It has nearly the same the focal length as the first and delivers the uniform light from one end to the other as the other.

The Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS USM is 23.6 oz... f/4s are usually always lighter. Image Stabilization in this light a package in nothing to sneeze at, either.

The Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L USM is 33 oz... more than the TAmROn, so be prepared for some uncomfortable moments, in the long run.

You may not consider weight to be an issue... but, after an hour or so... believe me, YOU WILL.

[noyjimi]

Go for the 24-105 (and flash later on).

[sunnythepsychocat]

I don't know how much you know about the photography. If you have shooting with 35mm film and digital cameras for a long time lik Don or other sesenior members have, then I would say go for 24-70mm/f2.8, and you will be happy.
If you are just started out on photography like I am, then I would suggest you to go with 24-105mm/f4 IS. For the day outdoor photos, I feel f4 is enough. I have not once had a desire for larger aperture so far. And, it is lighter than 70-200mm/f2.8, which I feel it is a more versatile lens for outdoor shooting.
However, it is a different story under low light situations. I sometimes found myself at mercy of the lens even with 580EX flash when I zoomed all way out. Since I have 400D, which does not offer spot metering, so even with partial metering, more than once I found my photos were sometimes undrerexposed by 1 stop after +1 flash compensation adjustment with f4, 1/400, and ISO 400. But with proper lighting, I can get good exposed photos with f 6.3, 1/250, ISO 400 and +2/3 flash compensation at 105mm Agian, it could be I metered wrong or my combination was not ideal for the situations. I am convinced that A-DEP is useless under low light situations.
Due to lens and camera limitation, I try to understand why did my photos come out wrong and I start to look for ways to improve over time.

[unix04]

i had a feeling someone would point that out.

i didn't want to be too repetitive......but

24-105
Pros: 105mm, IS
Cons: f/4, REQUIRES flash for indoors if freezing movement.

well, if you want to add conditions...
pros: 105mm, IS when handheld :D

[adam75south]

well, if you want to add conditions...
pros: 105mm, IS when handheld :D

haha i like your style