06-30-2010, 10:53 PM
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.
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.