Printable View
Hi, in have a 400D body and an 18-55mm lens and a 100mm f.28 macro lens..
im buying a new lens but not sure what to get.. i was thinking either the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM or Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0 L IS USM (any other lens recomendations would be appriciated)(willing to spend $1000-1100)
i shoot inscets/reptiles/people/ sometimes scenery
i want a good everyday lens which has wide angle and decent zoom
thanks
usf
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but on a 1.6 crop factored body like the 400D, 24mm is not very wide. Those lenses have good reach, but I don't know if they'd be wide enough for what you want to do?
24mm on a 400D will give a FOV similar to a 38mm lens on a full frame camera. Not really wide enough for landscapes[:(]
If you can live with the kit lens for a while along with one of the two lenses you mentioned, you can always save up and get a wide angle lens and a general walk-around lens.
I have a Canon EF 17-40mm F4L which should give you about equivalent of 27-64mm on your 400D camera. It is a very sharp lens and the price is right. It will give you a wider angleon your camera compared to the 24-xx zooms you mentioned. I have used it on both my 20D and 5D with great results. Hope this helps.
i see so which one is better? 24-70 or 24-105
24-70 is faster i know but the 105 has more reach!
Decisions, decisions, decisions! If I had to pick one, I'd take the 24-105. Its 1 stop slower but the extra reach is very useful. The 2.8 wouldmainly be of use in low light or for shallower DOF. With people, reptiles , insects and scenery this might not be a deciding factor??? Depends very much on your photographic style. I do quite a lot of nature photography and find I am always trying to maximise DOF, so the 2.8 wouldn't be worth sacrificing the 70-105 range for. Maybe you need to rent both lenses and see which one 'does the business' for you!
<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"]<span style="font-size: small;"]I have the XTi which I think is the same thing as the 400D. I have the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0 L IS USM and love it. I do weddings and portraits with it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] I also shoot my daughter on her horse running barrels so the 105mm reach with the 1.6x is great.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] I do not care for really wide angle lenses much.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] The 24mm is just fine for most all.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] The only time I needed a little wider angle was shooting a bride in a small dressing room.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] As for landscapes I have found some of the most dramatic landscape I have seen are with a medium telephoto.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"] I have since upgraded to a 5D and love it.
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 10pt;" class="MsoNormal"]<span style="font-size: 12pt; line-height: 115%; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';"]<o:p></o:p>
Here's my experience for what it's worth. I started with a Digital Rebel with the 18-55 3.5-5.6. Under marginal lighting conditions, it wasn't a great lens so I picked up the 17-40mm F4 L. Although it had a shorter zoom range, it was still equivalent to 27mm-64mm FF. That 17-40mm was an awesome walkaround / general purpose lens for the Digital Rebel. No problems shooting under marginal lighting conditions, I got great hand held shots down to 1/6 sec that awed a lot of friends.
Afterwards, I also picked up the 24-105mm F4 L but I ended it using it more on my new 5D than Digital Rebel. I always thought that the 17-40mm F4 L took nicer pictures than the 24-105 on the Rebel for my style of photography. It just seemed pictures were crisper, sharper, and more consistent throughout from the center to corners. As for how they compare on FF, I haven't shot the 17-40 very much to make a good comparison. For the 5D, the 24-105 is a great general purpose lens.
If you want wide and want to use your lens for landscape photos, the 17-40 mm gets my vote. That what I used it for on the Digital Rebel and it was fantastic.
If I were you and was not planning to upgrade to FF in the near future I'd be looking into crop lenses with a more useful focal range. Something along the lines of a Tamron 17-50 or an EF-S 17-55IS would do the trick. Considering your budget, you may also want to look into a Tamron 17-50 AND either a Tokina 11-16/2.8 or a Sigma 10-20 for landscape work.
<div>
I havent posted here before, Great place
I willsecond the previous post, the Tamron 17-50 f2,8 for a budget minded or a EFS 17-55 IS f2.8 if you want a top notch lens on a crop body.
My feeling with 24-X is that 24mm is too narrow for a crop lens, I learned the hard way when I got a Tamron 28-75 f2.8, great lens, but in too narrow
I thought that I could get away with 28mm on my XSI but I was wrong.
Group shots, family gatherings etcusuallyhover around 18 to 20mm on a crop body , just my 2 cents
Cheers everyone
</div>
The 24-70 is a great lense. I used it on a 30D before I bougth a 1d mkIII, were it is even better due to the sensor size.
I also have the 16-35 2.8 II. When using both cameras I ended up using the 24-70 on the 1d and the 16-35 on the 30d.
I've heard a lot of people mention that 24mm is too narrow on a crop sensor. I see it, and then i don't. I do a lot of landscape work with my 17-85mm, and find i don't use it at 17mm as often as people make it out to be. I tend to zoom in to 20, 24, and 35 most of the time. May be my shooting style, may be that 17 isn't always needed for landscape. Some one did mention that 24 isn't wide enough for group shots, and i agree with that. But you'll have ur 18-55mm around for just those occasions. In my opinion, the two lenses you have chosen are great ( i plan on picking up a 24-70mm soon ) and you really need to determine whether you want the extra reach of the 24-105mm or the low light abilities of the 24-70. If you don't need the low light (and possibly plan on picking up a flash), grab the 24-105mm for the extra reach, b/c so many people swear by it.
-brad
Hi usf, the 24-70 and 24-105 are excellent lenses! I have and use the 24-105 frequently with great results. I have not used the 24-70, but go to any photography site and you'll read the praises of this lens as well as the 24-105. IQ for both lenses is top notch. They both focus fast and accurate. The 24-70 has 1-stop advantage at f/2.8. However, the 24-105 has a much more useful FL range and IS. Myself and anyone else who has purchased one of these lenses has been at this descision point. Personally, the FL range and IS are more valuable to me as general use walk around lens than the 2.8 aperature provided by the 24-70. I use fast primes for my low light or less DOF needs. You should also consider what other lenses you are possibly interested in buying in the future. This way you can have a more complete and planned kit for YOUR needs. For example, a lot of people will do the 24-70/70-200 combo or, as I have, the 10-22/24-105/100-400 combo.