Suggestions for a 24-70mm Canon substitute?

twiggs wrote:

Well, this is the lady (yes, i'm a she) who asked the first question and i thank you all for the debate around all these lenses. For me was particularly difficult sometimes to stay on top of every detail all of you mentioned, because some of you really go to the detail on reviews.

However it's good to know what others think about these lenses, and it gets easier for me to think and define my priorities and situations I will be shooting. I'm not at all a conventional wedding photographer, my clients come to me because of the way I see them and portray them, and this has to do with the way I compose, the way I use light and the way I edit the pictures afterwards.

Choosing a lens that is good in low light situations is perfect, however as some of you said, I will always feel the need of shooting with a flash, so inside a church for example, the low light is not something I will deal with a faster lens, but with my flash.

One of you suggested that I get another MarkII body because it's demanding for a wedding photographer. Well, though I agree with that (it'd be perfect if I had two bodies and also safer for me, if one decides not to work), if I'm asking for a cheaper substitute of the Canon 24-70mmL II, it means that I may not have $2000 for another body. I also indicated that I'm still growing my business as a photographer, so things need to take their place slowly, because I won't spend my credit cards buying lenses if I cannot be sure about the amount of money coming in next year. I agree that a professional photographer HAS TO HAVE this or that equipment, but I also believe that to grow yourself as a professional you also need to think through your financial decisions.

After reading everything that you suggested and recommended, I'm convinced that a 24-70mm will be good for me for its flexibility in certain occasions that are more under pressure. For other situations I can simply use my 50mm 1.4. So I think the 24-70mm lens will be a good choice, even if I buy a Tamron now and hopefully if the business grows in a positive way, I'll be able to afford the now new 24-70mmL II that will be (hopefully) cheaper then.

I already own a Canon 50mm 1.4 which I love, however I can see its flaws sometimes. I also have a Tamron 70-300mm and to be honest I only use it on weddings/other events, because on a daily basis, I don't need all that zoom, because my way of shooting is pretty natural and people expect me to be close to them (and a 50mm allows me a comfortable distance).

Also thank you for the links you shared, because it's always interesting to read what others have to say and to see actual pictures!

Thank you!

No problem, one thing that I do want to point out is that you might be highly disappointed with this Tamron lens that you're buying. I just sold my Tamron as I was highly disappointed with the quality of their lens and it was rated highly.

You also have to keep in mind that a lot of weddings don't allow flash and this is where fast primes come into place especially during ceremony where most weddings strictly prohibit flash.

On a full frame body you can probably shoot whole weddings with just the 50mm lens by the way, there are professionals that shoot and have shot with just one lens.

So another viable option would be using only the 50mm and the Tamron zoom that you currently have.

I recently got the Tamron, and it's an incredible lens - better in most respects than the canon 24-70 mk1, which I owned for quite some time before selling it to fund primes.
My current combo is the Tamron 24-70, along with a Sigma 50/1.4 (for low light or shallow DOF, or simply when the field of view allows it's use). So if you do get a second body (highly recommended) the 50/1.4 which you already have makes a nice combo paired up with the 24-70, which gives you instant adaptability in terms of framing (useful for weddings or any other kind of photojournalism).

Some sites with information, reviews:

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1311/cat/31

http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=402&sort=7&cat=37&page=1

http://www.photozone.de/canon-eos/517-sigma1770f284osapsc

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=sigma+17-70mm&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ta

qianp2k wrote:

Wishful thinking at $1200 price Everyone will be glad too. But no way as even 24-105L official price (not street price) is around that figure, lol. Check how much Nikon 24-70/2.8 G? It's $1900 at promotion, so why Canon has reason to reduce the price as it's better than Nikon version in every aspect except at 70mm Nikon is a bit sharper at edges/corners

 

 

I saw Nikon 24-70 for 1688 with purchase of D600.

 

Nikon was selling 24-70 for $1600 before its price went up to current near $1900.