Age-old debate: EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM or EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

[Keith B]

Well if nothing else, the 5DII will help make you be a<span style="text-decoration: line-through;"]bettermore aware photographer. Like I mentioned, over exposing shots. Metering perfectly is too risky. If you have to bring exposure up you will get banding in the shadow areas (I keep hoping firmware will fix this). For example I use to just shoot and judge my shot by LCD (I know, I know) and if it wasn't perfect I'd fix in post. Now I live by the histogram, thusly making me a<span style="text-decoration: line-through;"]bettermore aware photographer.


Fighting with autofocus in low light situations, I have become more attune with manual focusing. The ST-E2 is very helpful with autofocus even when not shooting with off camera flashes. The shutter lag has helped me get better at my timing of shots. I haven't figured out the reflections of the mirror on my images during long exposures thing yet.


I look at it like this, I am paying a penalty for being poor and wanting full frame.


I don't know if the 1Ds mkIII has the same banding issues as the 5D mkII.I haven't heard of this being the case. Maybe the dual digics keep this from happening since the sensors are similar (I don't know).I think when 1Ds4 is announced I will try to pick up a mk3 cheap(er).


If they can fix the banding with firmware I would be pretty content with the 5D mkII. I just don't think they can or they would have.

[Daniel Browning]

I don't know if the 1Ds mkIII has the same banding issues as the 5D mkII.I haven't heard of this being the case. Maybe the dual digics keep this from happening since the sensors are similar (I don't know).I think when 1Ds4 is announced I will try to pick up a mk3 cheap(er).

The 1Ds3 has much less pattern noise than the 5D2, but still a lot more than the D3X. It's not because of the DIGIC: the pattern noise is added to the signal before it ever gets to the DIGIC. (It may be caused by differences in power conditioning, ADC quality, shielding, variable gain amplifier quality, etc. I don't know except that it happens before DIGIC.)

[Mark Elberson]

Thanks for the insight Keith. I am also "poor and wanting full frame" :-) I think my current savings puts me at abouthalf way to a 5DII so even a used 1Ds Mark III will be out of the question (when the Mark IV is released). You can pick up a used 1Ds Mark II for about $2k. Do you think it's too far behind the 5DII to compare?

[Keith B]

No problem Mark.


I had a photog at a magazine I worked at supply me with images from 1Ds mk2 and images she shot at 640 ISO were horrible, very noisy so I don't want to go that route.


I am venting a little bit about the banding right now because it just recently bit me in the butt. I was shooting a portrait on black seamless at 100 ISO with strobes and was going for a moody shadowy look so I ignored the histogram and let it run off the left side. So when looking at the images in Aperture the exposure was close I only bumped it .06 of a stop but I brought the shadow levels up 15 percent and the black seamless looked really bad due to the checkered banding pattern.


I was able to fix it PS but I just got pretty annoyed, I'm a terrible purist. I got my start in this business as PS guy fixing other photographers work and I would have talked so much crap if someone submitting an image like that to me.





Thanks Daniel, for the info. I guess that means firmware isn't going to fix the problem then.

[Colin]

I'd vote for a fast prime. 2.8 is okay indoors, but 1.4 kicks bum!

[Chris White]

I want to thank everyone for the thoughtful and helpful advice. After careful consideration, I decided to order a EF 24-70mm. I do realize that it is more overlap than complementry to my existing lens line up, but after re-reading Bryan's review, I had to go with his good advice in the end:


"The Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens will work just as well in your home as it does in the church or other indoor venue.
Capturing the memories of family life is, in my opinion, one of the most important photography pursuits.
You can sell the lens later, but those precious family moments will never be back."


I would like to use it for my daughter's First Communion this spring, similar to shooting a wedding, you are in church and flash use is frowned upon. I will get a little extra reach -- less crop (my 70-200 is too long for most shots in church) and still shoot f/2.8.


And given the constant increase in Canon glass, it may be a better investment than my retirement account. []


I just feel that I want to try it myself and if I choose not to keep it, I can sell it and it will balance out to basically a rental with a large deposit.


Thank you again,


Chris

[Jon Ruyle]

I know I'm probably being silly, but being someone who is currently saving upfor a 5D Mark II, your comments make me nervous [img]/emoticons/emotion-18.gif[/img]

Just to provide an alternate point of view, Mark, I own a 5DII and have been very satisfied with it. My previous camera was a 1DIIN and for me, the advantages of full frame far outweigh the advantages of 1 ness. Of course the 1DIII was a major step up from the 1DIIN so I'm not comparing oranges to oranges here, but I have no desire to own a 1DIII or 1DIV. (Well, not much )


The only thing that is frustrating is that Nikon has proved one can make an inexpensive full frame camera without some of the 5DII shortcomings. (At least, I've never heard anyone say anything bad about the D700, maybe if I read Nikon user groups I would []).


Yes, the 5DII has pattern noise. Yes, its af is not as good as the 1DIII or the D700. Yes, video has some quirks. Yes, etc. But I believe there are plenty of people out there who are happy with their 5DII's and would not trade it for a D700, let alone any non-full frame body out there.


It just comes down to knowing what you want, I suppose.

[Keith B]

I know I'm probably being silly, but being someone who is currently saving upfor a 5D Mark II, your comments make me nervous [img]/emoticons/emotion-18.gif[/img]

Just to provide an alternate point of view, Mark, I own a 5DII and have been very satisfied with it. My previous camera was a 1DIIN and for me, the advantages of full frame far outweigh the advantages of 1 ness. Of course the 1DIII was a major step up from the 1DIIN so I'm not comparing oranges to oranges here, but I have no desire to own a 1DIII or 1DIV. (Well, not much )


The only thing that is frustrating is that Nikon has proved one can make an inexpensive full frame camera without some of the 5DII shortcomings. (At least, I've never heard anyone say anything bad about the D700, maybe if I read Nikon user groups I would [img]/emoticons/emotion-1.gif[/img]).


Yes, the 5DII has pattern noise. Yes, its af is not as good as the 1DIII or the D700. Yes, video has some quirks. Yes, etc. But I believe there are plenty of people out there who are happy with their 5DII's and would not trade it for a D700, let alone any non-full frame body out there.


It just comes down to knowing what you want, I suppose.

Yeah I'm feeling a little bad about slamming the 5DmkII before. Like I said I was just steaming because I had just recently noticed the banding issues on the 5DII's images. That isn't bad to be unhappy with just a few shots after 1 year and 30,000 shots.The camera is awesome for about 90% of what I shoot.


I've never heard anything good or bad about the D700. I think Nikon owners are so overwhelmed to have full frame they are in a reality distortion field. Where as Canon users, we used to the company being at the forefront, and we tend to be more critical of the little things.

[Mark Elberson]

Thanks Jon and Keith for helping to set my mind at ease!

[Keith B]

I don't know if this means anything for you but, I just got my 35 1.4 the other day and just shot some random low, low light shots with it today. I'm not a technical guy but I swear the outer focus points (which aren't even 2.8 sensors) function a hundred times better on the 1.4 than on my 2.8 lenses.