5dmark2 - dont know which one to get: 24-105 mm f4 or 24-70 mm f2.8
Option no.1 5d body + Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM in the box
Option no. 2 5d just body + Canon EF 24-70 mm 2.8L USM
I use it mostly for traveling - this summer i go to west coast of US, later this year to Mexico, Thailand. Now you know that i dont use it in the studio or for sports shots that much. :)
Please help with some suggestions, maybe even some other lenses?
I bought the 24-105mm kit and sold the lens to buy the 24-70mm. You end up saving a bit of cash that way.
However, you may find the 24-105 a better choice for your travelling. The focal range and IS make it a great walkaround lens. I got the 24-70mm cause I am shooting weddings and will encounter low light situations more often.
There are rumours of a new 24-70mm f2.8 IS coming out in September (see www.canonrumours.com) but there has been no confirmation and this rumour has been on and off for a long time now.
As for other lenses, it depends on how much cash you have and how much you want to carry around while your travelling.
Hope this helps a bit mate.
Every opinion is helping me to create a big picture about what i need :). I know that 100mm focal range is kind of important while traveling and also with the full frame camera 100mm is still not a lot - 70mm is even worse , but i am not sure about f4 and 2.8. I like blurry background that you get with the second lens... I will probably buy the whole kit, i will take it for a spin on my next trip and if i decide that i don't like that lens i can still try to sell it and buy the other one.
The main idea of this discussion is to find out what do you guys think about 24-70mm f2.8 in compare to f4 (all my current lenses are f4 or higher).
Thanks a lot,
coverage if you want to shoot low light get a standard f/1.4 [should I mention the f/1.2's ??]
since I passed on film and the f/2's I had it's opened new horizons
hope that clears the way a bit
So you'll be getting more light with the same amount of sharpness.
Also, a faster lens will focus faster and have a brighter viewfinder, especially in low light, since it focuses at the widest aperture and steps down to the desired aperture only when exposing.
The 24-105 is remarkably sharp, even wide open, while the 24-70 gives a (slightly) softer and "dreamier" image at the same apertures. On a 21 megapixel camera, you might feel you're not getting every detail you could out of the image with the 24-70.
While it's true as a rule of thumb that a lens with a wider maximum aperture will allow the camera to focus faster, I would say that it's not the case for these specific lenses, the 24-105 is the faster of the two. You might get a slight bit more accurate focus with the 24-70 in tough situations, since the center focus point of the 5D2 is extra sensitive with 2.8 or faster lenses, but I haven't seen this in practice.
As a kit with the camera, the 24-105 is simply a great value proposition. If I where you, I would get it now and wait for the rumored replacement for the 24-70, and either get that when it comes (and get IS and probably a sharper image), or get the old lens at a reduced price, maybe even second hand (it's built like a tank so there shouldn't be any problems with a well used one).
Background blur is a function of aperture, focal length, subject distance and even sensor size. At longer focal lengths you will still get really nice background blur at f4, especially if your subject is close. Looking through some of my images I have great background blur even at f7.1 and 56mm.
The 24-70mm is apparently the sharpest zoom ever made by canon, however even the steadiest hand is going to introduce some degree of camera shake so the 24-105mm with IS is going to produce sharper images when not on a tripod.
I agree with Jannesjoberg though, I know I mentioned the rumours but I personally wouldn't wait for a new lens/gadget unless I knew it was definitely going to be released.
if you still need to choose between the 24-105 and the 24-70, there is no question in my mind that you should go for the 24-70/2.8L, f/4 is just simply too slow. I shoot professionally and the 24-70 is by far the most versatile lens I own. Even when you travel you will probably have to shoot some shots indoor, like inside a church or something like that, and obviously flash will probably not be an option, the extra speed will help a lot.
Also, the quality of bokeh has to do with how round the aperture is, so the higher number of blades the better. Both of these lenses have 8 curved blades.
some might argue that with the IS the f/4L gives you about the same shutter speeds as the 24-70/2.8L, I'm not so sure about that. And at that point, the ability to have much shallower depth of field will give the 24-70/2.8L a huge advantage. I'm against misused/abuse of shallow DoF images, but it's nice to know you have the option to if that's what you want for some reasons (like when that's what your client wants).
The 24-70 excels at architecture and absolute optical performance. If you shoot a lot of moving subjects in low light, then the 2.8 will give you an extra stop to freeze motion, whereas no amount of IS can help you there. This lens is favored by photojournalists and pro's alike for this, plus slightly faster AF (the 5D2 has cross sensors that work at f/2.8 or faster)
The 24-105 excels at being all-around solid performer, with extra focal length, lighter size/weight and IS. With static subjects in low light, IS is a huge plus, and really gives you 2-4 stops of useful shooting. I think this is one of the best travel lenses out there.
With the 5D2's high ISO capability, I feel like the 2.8 advantage starts to go away bc you can just notch up the ISO one more stop. Anything beyond 6400 in low light and you will begin to have focusing problems that only faster glass will help with.
Hard to go wrong with either lens, but you will get some cost savings going with the kit (24-105). If you don't like it, you could always sell the lens and go for the 24-70, which as others have mentioned, is rumored for a redesign this fall.