[adifrank]

[quote name='wim' date='27 June 2010 - 04:01 AM' timestamp='1277604073' post='722']

You are ok with your Metz, however, as on page 26 it mentions "Synchronisation Nieder-Volt Zündung" (Synchronization Low Voltage Ignition, on page 52). With Low- Voltage Ignition a low voltage like 10 V is meant. I also don't think the retailer woudl have allowed you to connect your flash to a 5D Mk II if he didn't know it to be a low voltage flash anyway.

[/quote]



Okay. That is good news. I was beginning to think that I'll need to be shopping for a new flash as well. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[adifrank]

Hi all. At first I was sure I'd be going for a prime lens, for many of the reasons mentioned in my original post of this thread. But after giving it a lot of thought I came to the conclusion that even though a prime lens will most probably give me a closer quality of image to what I am accustomed to - it will apparently not replace my Mamiya. In fact, it doesn't even have anything to do with lenses, the film Mamiya 6 and the Canon dSLR are just two different beasts and should be treated as such.



I have no intention of removing my Mamiya from my camera bag and it will undoubtedly be my go-to camera for those sharp, crisp wide portraits, etc that I'm used to, regardless of what lens I'll have on the Canon 5d mII.



So the way I see it is - since I'm getting into a whole new world of digital SLR, I might as well let go of past habits and fixations and go for something that will give me flexibility for experimentation, at least for starters, as I gradually learn my best uses for this type of camera and what I can get out of it. Even if it means not getting a lens that can produce the sharpest image my money can buy.



This ultimately leads me to getting a zoom lens after all. I will go for either the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8L or its younger brother the 24-105mm f/4L.



Googling comparisons of the two, I quickly came to realize that the debate of these two which lens is better comes close to the mac vs pc saga, or other such endless arguments. Never-the-less, I would really like to get your angle on this comparison, having already been involved in my decision process and knowing a bit about me and what I'm looking for (more or less).



So running down the pros and cons I've read about, here is a list of what I know and my angle on each:



* the 24-105mm gives me extra focal length which means extra flexibility for experimenation

True. The extra tele could come in handy, but not a deal breaker for me.



* the 24-70mm gives me an extra stop for low-light situations.

This I can see as being more critical for me as opposed to the extra focal length of the 24-105.



* the 24-105mm size and weight are about 30% less than the 24-70mm.

Wimpy as it may sound, but this is actually pretty important for me. I really hate feeling weighted down by loads of equipment and heavy bags. I like things to be light and easy. I imagine I could handle the extra weight, or just get used to it eventually, but while I didn't have the opportunity to physically hold the 24-105mm, I DID in fact handle the 24-70 at a camera store and was somewhat intimidated by this bulky and heavy barrel of a lens. And... well... I'm a girl. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



* the 24-205mm has image stabilizing.

This is where I'm lost. I have no idea how much effect this might have on my work and how it compares with a lens that has no IS. From what I've understood, it helps in situations where I need to shoot at low speeds, but on the other hand with the 24-70 I have an extra stop I can go to rather than slowing down. Do these two features kind of cancel each other out? Or is my assumption wrong? I also read something about the 24-105 not having IS for panning - no clue to what that is, or what it means. Also, its not clear to me if IS is only for avoiding motion during stills photography? Or does it also work with video - like motion stabilizers in video cameras that reduce the camera shaking?



* the 24-105mm costs about $250 less.

A price difference I can't ignore, yet both lenses are not cheap and I'm gonna be coughing out a significant sum regardless, so I'd say I prefer to just go with which ever lens is better for me, or I'll put it this way: f/2.4 vs f/4 is just a bit more important to me than a $250 difference.





[b]* then there is the argument of image quality.

In an objective sense - it seems that technically the 24-70mm has less distortion than the 24-105 at under 40mm. Also it appears that the 24-70 has nicer bokeh and a bit less vignetting. Although others, while affirming this, say the differences are only at circumstances you rarely run into.

But what kind of got to me the most was rather the subjective (non-technical) points of view. I came across several comments and reviews saying the 24-70 is slightly better than the 24-105, or that they just somehow seem to like it better and I've read reviews saying that one is just as good as the other is and it basically depends on what your needs are, while I have yet to find a person stating he/she thinks the 24-105 is superior to the 24-70, or that they just like it more. It seems there is a whole emotional aspect of the comparison that somehow sides with the 24-70mm lens saying how much they love it and how they can't part with it and so on. I didn't get that feeling at all regarding owners of the 24-105mm lens.

Having said that, the reviews here at PhotoZone of both lenses seem to give the 24-105mm one star more than the 24-70 in the category of price/performance. Hmm...



So I'm curious to know what people here think, those who possibly own either or both of these lenses and can speak from experience.



Sorrrrry for the long post again....



I've decided to buy before the weekend, so this will all end soon. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />



I really appreciate your help guys.

[popo]

Looks like you got pretty much all the factors considered... I've only used the 24-105 and not the 24-70 so can't compare them directly myself. I did like the 24-105 though.



On IS or not, generally IS will get you more of a benefit in low light than just one stop of aperture. It should be noted IS only helps against camera shake from causing blur. If the subject is moving, the longer shutter will increase the chance of that showing motion blur, so a bigger aperture may be more useful in that situation. As a further consideration, obviously the aperture affects the DoF you have at the time.



On IS and panning, depending on the IS generation, the IS may work differently if you want to use stabilisation while panning the camera/lens. Older ones don't support it at all, so need to be turned off while panning. Some have a dedicated switch for the stabilisation mode, either off, one axis, or both axis. For example, in one axis mode, when panning horizontally it will only stabilise vertical movement. Some implementations will detect panning automatically and set itself to do that without needing the user. I'm not sure which version the 25-105 has.

[scottburgess]

[quote name='adifrank' date='26 June 2010 - 11:00 AM' timestamp='1277575241' post='717']





I'm currently not in North America, though I might be moving to New York in a couple of years (...not quite West Coast). I don't doubt the quality of Chromira printers, but the inkjet printer I'm talking about is no ordinary inkjet printer. It is a specialty printer for photography, the staff is photography dedicated and they sit with you patiently going over each and every color-correction and test print-out. They use specialty fine-art paper imported from Germany (don't remember the paper company name... I'll find out and post back on it). It's a different beast when compared to other techniques of printing, but the outcomes are really unique and amazing. This guy opened up his shop about a year ago and photographers are swarming.

[/quote]



Adifrank,



I am quite familiar with the type of printer you're using--West Coast Imaging can print on simlar printers as well, if you choose. For the gallery wraps on canvas that they offer, you'd have to since the Chromira is a true photographic printer. But if you want to do the best gallery prints that money can buy, try the Chromira printer at WCI. That photographers like Robert Glenn Ketchum and Jack Dykinga use this for most of their work should give you an inkling how great the difference is.



I've visited the WCI lab more than once--they have several images they made giant prints of on the best printers available, and on many kinds of paper, always trying to deliver the best possible image on each combination. It is an incredible treat to place the images side-by-side to savor the differences, and I am grateful for the opportunity.



For those unfamiliar with the printing process, I can assure you that it is far more complicated than most in the printing business have mastered, and that the folks at WCI are at the cutting edge of the artistry necessary to produce stellar prints. I tried many of the "best" labs in the U.S., and most don't come even close.



My wife and I both do quite a bit of work in Photoshop (my wife even beat out the top graphic designers in our area with her Photoshop skills in a recent contest), but we seldom do image prep for printing at WCI because we can rely on people like Michael Jones to do it so much better than we can. The master printers at WCI apprentice for years before working on customer images--and the experience shows. That's why I had Michael Jones teach printing prep for my course at SummerArts 2009 ("Digital Nature Photography and the Abstract Image," also with Susan Milestone and Tony Sweet; many thanks to ALL my guest artists! You ROCK!).



Sorry for going on, but I want to be clear that I am not talking about printing on a toy printer at home by comparison here. I've seen what comes out of Epsons, Lightjet 5000s, and their ilk, and I know I get better from the Chromira on most images, and what to look for that might suggest I try a different printer (such as swaths of deep purples, which look great on the Epson). Because they service so many professionals, WCI carries a great range of B&W and color papers (including Hahnemühle Photo Rag, which I believe you alluded to above).



All of this is dependent on image content and the particular artistic impression you're trying to create, of course. WCI can do proof prints for you if you want to make your own comparisons before completing a critical project.

[adifrank]

Well... I'm about $4000 poorer now. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/huh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />



Final decision:



- Canon 5d mark II

- Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L

- plus some other stuff, such as UV multi-coated filter and 16GB memory card.



Thanks for all the help and your patients!! Will most probably be posting at one of the Photozone forums again, while learning to use this new dslr.

But if you want to do the best gallery prints that money can buy, try the Chromira printer at WCI.

Thanks Scott. I'll definitely keep your recommendation in mind!



Peace!

[wim]

[quote name='adifrank' date='03 July 2010 - 02:06 AM' timestamp='1278115568' post='812']

Well... I'm about $4000 poorer now. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/huh.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />



Final decision:



- Canon 5d mark II

- Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L

- plus some other stuff, such as UV multi-coated filter and 16GB memory card.



Thanks for all the help and your patients!! Will most probably be posting at one of the Photozone forums again, while learning to use this new dslr.





Thanks Scott. I'll definitely keep your recommendation in mind!



Peace!

[/quote]

Congratulations wirh regard to your decision and the newly acquired goodies <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />, and condolences to your wallet <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />.



I'm pretty sure you will enjoy the new camera and lens!



Kindest regards, Wim

[Guest]

[quote name='adifrank' date='27 June 2010 - 04:28 AM' timestamp='1277605684' post='723']

Okay. That is good news. I was beginning to think that I'll need to be shopping for a new flash as well. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />

[/quote]





you can turn on your flash, and with a small voltmeter, you can measure across the contacts how much it has.

was easy to see that my old 283 had > 100 Volts.



here is some more info: http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Flashes

[adifrank]

[quote name='photonius' date='03 July 2010 - 10:35 AM' timestamp='1278146154' post='814']

you can turn on your flash, and with a small voltmeter, you can measure across the contacts how much it has.

was easy to see that my old 283 had > 100 Volts.



here is some more info: http://photonius.wikispaces.com/Flashes

[/quote]



Excellent! I followed your link and found exactly my flash model. According to the list it says that YES it is EOS safe. I also know someone who has a voltmeter, so I might go ahead and test it just to be 100% sure.



Thanks photonius <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':o' />

[adifrank]

Hello again. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />



My new camera and lens arrived. I'm now going over the manual and learning.



For those of you who might be familiar with the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L lens - I have a question. When turning the zoom ring (either direction) at area between its widest point (24mm) and the 28mm point - the rotation suddenly becomes a bit tougher, requiring slightly more force to twist the ring. Also there is a small squeaking noise at this area only. Is this normal? Has anyone experienced something like this? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[wim]

[quote name='adifrank' date='07 July 2010 - 01:13 PM' timestamp='1278501215' post='870']

Hello again. <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':blink:' />



My new camera and lens arrived. I'm now going over the manual and learning.



For those of you who might be familiar with the Canon 24-70mm f/2.8 L lens - I have a question. When turning the zoom ring (either direction) at area between its widest point (24mm) and the 28mm point - the rotation suddenly becomes a bit tougher, requiring slightly more force to twist the ring. Also there is a small squeaking noise at this area only. Is this normal? Has anyone experienced something like this? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]

The rotation getting a bit tougher is normal, due to cams and lens elements/groups starting to move in a different direction.



I can't remember ever hearing any squeaking, however. I don't own any 24-70 anymore, so I can't check currently. How loud is the noise? If it is something you can only hear when putting yoru ear to the lens, don't worry about it, just zoom up and down a bit to lubricate the internal parts a bit better.



HTH, kind regards, Wim