You're confusing the daylights out of me. Canon released an 85/1.2 II back in the mid-2000s, and you even acknowledge that it exists.
If you need fast AF, get the 85/1.8. That's why it exists in the lineup.
On the 24-x topic, I started with a 24-105 (on 1.3x crop, actually). I followed with a 70-200/2.8IS, then a 16-35/2.8 II. Once I rented a 24-70/2.8 (old model), I was instantly sold and picked up one shortly thereafter. The 24-105 became a hand-me-down to my wife (bumping out her 28-135), and it has become extremely rare that I reach for the 24-105 except as a remote camera lens or to be able to have one camera set up for "BYOL" studio flash and another for natural light. Now that I've added a 24-70/2.8 II, I'd reach for the old 24-70 before I'd reach for the 24-105 in almost all cases. However, I do think my whole perspective is based on having a 70-200 or other long option; the 24-105 was a great first lens, no doubt.





If I went with the 24-70 would I still want my 24-105 f4 for landscapes? I need to see if I shoot a lot @ 70+ for my landscape photos to determine that.
Reply With Quote