24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
so Im looking at buying one of these two lenses with the main purpose being to do wedding photography. I have multiple lenses to use. My question, however, is, if you could only use one of these two lenses to shoot a wedding which would it be? (obviously not using a full frame body)
obviously the f2.8 is a major advantage for the 17-55 and the longer focal length is a major advantage to the 24-105. most other aspects seem rather similar (image quality, price, etc) So i guess it comes down to which of these is more important to have, a faster lens or a longer focal length for things like candid shots.
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
It depends on if you can use flash or not. If you can
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
@MikeG2012, Thant is an excellent point of view! Not many people realize how important light is when taking photo
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
My only concern would be, what kind of field curvature do you get from the f/2.8 17-55 ?
The 24-105 would give you a little more flexibility, especially for individual or couple portrait shots.
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
I use the 24-105 for weddings but on a 5D. The high ISO performance with the IS allows me to get some great shots when I can not use flash. I am not comfortable with the high ISO performance of any of the APS-C bodys with the possible exception of the 7D. I have used my 24-105 on my XTi and find it sometimes not wide enough. If I were using an APS-C body i would go with the 17-55.
Mark
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkerr
My only concern would be, what kind of field curvature do you get from the f/2.8 17-55 ?
What do you mean by field curvature?
Do you mean the formal definition,when a lens projects a curved image on the film/sensor plane, instead of a flat image? If so,both lenses exhibit very low field curvature (the 24-70mm is affected by this issue to a greater degree).
Alternatively, do you mean thecolloquialdefinition, which is more formally known as distortion? Barrel distortion (straight lines bulge outward) commonly affects wide angle lenses (especially the wide end of zooms) and pincushion distortion (straight lines pinch inward) commonly affects the longer end of zooms. If that's what you mean, both the 17-55mm and the 24-105mm on a 1.6x body show some barrel distortion at the wide end, and the degree is similar (1.8% for the 24-105mm, 2% for the 17-55mm). That's noticeable, but nothing like the 24-105mm on FF (4.3% barrel distortion at 24mm; the L lens benefits from the 'sweet spot' effect when used on a crop body).
<div>
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvitalephotography
Im looking at buying one of these two lenses with the main purpose being to do wedding photography.I have multiple lenses to use. My question, however, is, if you could only use one of these two lenses to shoot a wedding which would it be?
My answer to that would be the 17-55mm. IMO, it's the best general purpose zoom lens for a crop body.
But I think it's a bit unfair to consider the issue in isolation. Which other lenses do you have? For example, if the longest lens in your kit is 50mm, and you have a fast, wide prime, then you may benefit from the extra focal length of the 24-105mm and be willing to take the hit on aperture. Conversely, if you have nothing wider than 28mm (or your only lens wider is the 18-55mm kit lens), then you'll definitely need the wide end of the 17-55mm. Do you also have a second body? There's not always time enough to change a lens, and having a backup is critical in case of equipment failure.
On a broader issue, you state in your profile, "I am starting to explore the idea of wedding photography, with the hopes of becoming a semi-professional photographer." Hopefully, you're not planning to mount a new 17-55mm on your camera and head off to shoot a wedding. [;)]
Check out Roger's (lensrentals.com) acronym-filled article on the subject - a bit tongue-in-cheek but he makes several good points.
</div>
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
thanks for all the advice. looks like it unanimous for the 17-55. So I will be looking to buy one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by neuroanatomist
Hopefully, you're not planning to mount a new 17-55mm on your camera and head off to shoot a wedding
I realize I need multiple lenses and bodies and flashes for this. I just knew I needed one of these two lenses for the majority of the photography but wasn't sure which one I should get.
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
And lots of experience ;)
Personally I went with the 24-70 2.8, which I know wasn
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvitalephotography
So i guess it comes down to which of these is more important to have, a faster lens or a longer focal length for things like candid shots.
Another vital factor is wide angle. The 24-105 doesn't give you an option to take any wide angle shots. Plus autofocus -- the f/2.8 will allow you to use the high precision f/2.8 autofocus sensor, which is six times more accurate than the ones that the 24-105 f/4 will let you use.
Personally, I'd go for the 17-55 (I mostly shoot weddings with primes).
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvitalephotography
looks like it unanimous for the 17-55
You can not go wrong with the 17-55 on a crop body. Unless you have a prime you are using, it will be your most used indoor lens.
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
that 17-55 is only going to work well for wildlife if they are super close to you...I would say just stay with the lens you got for wildlife. unless everything you plan on photographing is within a few feet. But I guess that can be the case with some wildlife there.
As far me, i just ordered my 17-55 today, thanks for everyones opinions
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsm363
I'm trying to make this exact decision but for a different purpose. I have a Canon 7D along with the new 70-200 f/2.8 II lens.
I'm going to the Galapagos Islands on a cruise and love taking nature shots of the wildlife (brand new to all of this within the last year but really enjoying it). I'd rather not change lenses in the field so the 24-105 gives the biggest range but I'm worried about the f/4 since a lot of wildlife activity seems to happen in the morning with low light. Any suggestions? I guess I'm leaning towards the 17-55 but it's an EF-S lens and I may upgrade to the 5D mark III if it comes out in a few years. Thanks.
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>
You might just find that your current 70-200 lens will be more useful when it comes to wildlife. I have a 28-135mm, that I once upon a time was used for wildlife. But, as already mentioned, unless you are really close that is not near enough. I have a 100-400mm that I use for wildlife all the time now, and rarely shoot at less than 400mm, sometimes that doesn't seem like it's enough.
As far as any concern that f/4 might not be large enough aperture. Even at the beginning of happy hour I don't use a wide open aperture. Don't be afraid to use a higher ISO!
A lot of wildlife photographers I know use a 100-400mm zoom or similar, or at least a 400mm prime, and many of them use tel-extenders also.
Re: 24-105 f4 or 17-55 f2.8 for weddings
Quote:
Originally Posted by tkerr
I have a 100-400mm that I use for wildlife all the time now, and rarely shoot at less than 400mm, sometimes that doesn't seem like it's enough.
thats what I use for wildlife currently. With wildlife it seems like you can never have to much focal length.
