EF24-105F/4L Anyone reccomend this one?

Started Apr 28, 2006 | Discussions thread
JohnJ80 Senior Member • Posts: 1,894
Re: I guess I will go with...

Well, that would work too and be a pretty great combination. The gap between 40 or 55 and 70 really is not all that big of a deal.

I don't have any experience with the 17-55 - and I'm anxious to see what your opinion of it is, but the 70-200 (any of them) is a terrific lens.

The 24-105 is really a great lens for the 5D, which is what it was designed for. I had one before I got a 5D and now that I have the body, it is really a nice pairing.


jeff9329 wrote:

Your comments on the 24-105 just refreshed what I already knew,
its just really not that wide or all that long, a good and very
compact lens though.

I didn't want to have to get into the giant lens like the 70-200
(being a compact kinda guy) but you really just have to in order to
get that focal length (and why are they white? break out the black
spray paint!).

So I am modifying your advise and doing this:
EF-S 17-55 for super wide zoom (should be available in a week or two)
EF 70-200 F/4 for zoom/tele lens

Thanks for your help.

JohnJ80 wrote:

I have a 24-105 and have used it on my XT. It's a very nice lens,
no doubt and it produces great images. It has got a decent long
end on a 1.6x camera and the wide is ok....

I also own a 17-40, a sigma 18-50 f/2.8 and highly recommend both
of those, even though you said that you felt the 17-40 was too
short. Personally, I'd rather have the 17-40.

What I would do if I were you is this:

Get a 17-40 and a 70-200 f/4.

-- hide signature --

'Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please.' -
Mark Twain

(equip in profile)

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow