Planning to switch from D800 to 5DIII Locked

Started Aug 2, 2013 | Discussions thread
This thread is locked.
David Hull
David Hull Veteran Member • Posts: 6,021
Re: 24-105L is the way to go for OP; maybe add 50 1.8

bronxbombers4 wrote:

David Hull wrote:

Timbukto wrote:

David Hull wrote:

chironNYC wrote:

bronxbombers4 wrote:

I'd wait on the 24-70 f/4 IS kits coming soon. Or get a tamron 24-70 VC or splurge and get 24-70 II anything but the 24-105.

I think you are way overstating the case against the 24-105L lens. When mounted on the 5d3 (as opposed to the 1dsmk3, for example) the 24-105 performs extremely well coming in with about the same DXOmark score as the new Canon 24-70L f/4 or the venerated Canon 35L 1.4. So what's not to like?

Given that the OP is stretching his funds, I think the 24-105 is an outstanding choice. It is very unlikely that he will ever be able to see a noticeable difference in image quality in pictures that he is actually looking at as pictures (instead of test shots of fabric swatches), but he will have a versatile and moderately fast constant aperture zoom lens that will help him to capture a lot of real images that he wants to get and that he otherwise might miss.

If he wanted to add low light capability that would be nice for portraits and available light, he could do it very cheaply with a Canon 50 1.8.

Yea... that lens gets a bad rap for some reason, mostly by people who don't own it, I suspect -- I guess that makes sense, why would you own something you don't like. When I got teh 24-70 II, I thought I might sell the 24-105, but I still use it a lot.

-- hide signature --

I've seen more than one copy of the 24-105L and can see why some like or dislike it. IMO a *good* copy of the 24-105L has very little to complain about and at 24mm it can out-do or be very competitive with a 17-40L at 24mm.

I also do not think that given an excellent copy of the 24-105L why I would ever get a more expensive 24-70 f4 IS unless I truly want its macro capabilities or slightly better 24mm (but an excellent copy of the 24-105L is very good at 50mm which the 24-70 f4 IS is not so much...and for its limited range thats a bit dissapointing).

Yea... maybe I got a good one but I don't really have too much to complain about with mine.

-- hide signature --

I suspect some small percentage of this lens, maybe 10-20% might be much better than most other copies. I tried three and was not impressed. It's a funny lens in that no other lens so regularly appears on BOTH most hated and favorite lens lists. Some of it may also be down to what people shoot with it, focusing on corner to corner landscape stuff on high density FF or maybe more portrait stuff. And how how attuned some people's eye/brain systems are to fine details. And, in some cases, whether people have ever had access to try better to get any reference points. And some may well be down to some smaller group of people getting much better copies than most of the rest, I think there could be something to this. I didn't used to think so, but I am starting to wonder more and more these days.

Some may not be as critical either. Most of my work seems to be events and portrait stuff lately so, to some extent I am not concerned if the corners are tack sharp.

One observation I have made over the years is that "sharp" is far more important to photographers than clients.  For most of what we do, most of these lenses will work just fine.

-- hide signature --
 David Hull's gear list:David Hull's gear list
Canon EOS 50D Canon EOS 5D Mark III
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Yxa
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow