First Post. Looking for advice on a general purpose zoom.

[DavidEccleston]

I bought a 24-105mm f/4L as an upgrade to the kit lens, and I have mixed feelings about it. I chose the 24-105L because I wanted extra reach. I found the 18-55mm IS never quite long enough, and so I pretty much ignored the general advice of getting the 17-55mm / Tamron 17-50mm for a crop body.



Why I like the 24-105mm:

• Reach.

Why I dislike the 24-105mm:

• People say 24mm isn't wide. They're right. I still use the kit lens a bunch because of this, especially indoors.
• f/4 doesn't allow for low-light, or shallow DOF. I find myself using the 85mm f/1.8, or 50mm f/1.8 in these cases.
• It's not sharp at f/4. I can get sharper shots with the kit lens. Many lenses aren't sharp wide open, but this lens is already f/4, making this even less suitable for low-light or shallow DOF.

Since you have 70mm+ covered. Consider the 17-55mm or Tamron 17-50mm, as they're both f/2.8 and have a wide angle end. The 15-85mm makes a nice choice too, with extra reach on both ends, but not good for low-light / shallow DOF situations. If you went with the 15-85mm, you may want an add-on flash to go along with it, for indoor use.


If you don't need reach, consider the above mentioned 16-35mm lens too. I know nothing about that lens. Depending on what/how you shoot it may be what you want.

[HDNitehawk]

....looking at Rick's photo makes me also think that if you don't already have a circular polarizing filter, you may want one. It can help with colors and bringing out the sky like that...

This paticular picture I didn't have a polarizer on. It turned out well, but one of the things that have bothered me about it is the white areas are close to being blown out. This summer I get to try again [] I am thinking if it is a bright sunny day again either a polarizer, or try some other way to deal with the highlights. I may leave the 500mm home this time and just go landscape.

[PatrickH]

Awesome advice all, I really appreciate it. I will be sure to check out my EXIF data.


The pic of Mammoth is great and, as one of the areas we will travel to, a very good example of what I was looknig for. Was that shot taken at 24mm on the 5d?

[PatrickH]

Yes I have been, but only as a youngster. I

[Fast Glass]

If you are considering a17-XXmm lens you would probably also be interested in the Sigma 8-16mm or Tokina 11-16mm. The Sigma is sharper and wider than the 10-22mm and the Tokina is a about as sharp, slightly longer on the wide end but has f/2.8.


John.

[scalesusa]

With my 40d, I had the 17-55mm as well as the 24-105mm L. both were excellent and the 24-105 would have been perfect it it went to 17mm. So, I switched back and forth, but tended to favor the 24-105 in good outdoor light and the 17-55 for wide or lower light.


I

[HDNitehawk]

The pic of Mammoth is great and, as one of the areas we will travel to, a very good example of what I was looking for. Was that shot taken at 24mm on the 5d?

Yes the 5D II and 24mm. The 24mm was a little to wide I had to crop some off of the sides, you could see the parking lot and boardwalks in it. I found the 24mm to be about as wide as I wanted to go at Yellowstone.


Good luck with your choice and trip.