zoom advice for a 5d ii

pokergroupie

do i want a 24-70 f2.8 or do i want a 24-105 f 4 lens with my 5d mark ii?... best for studio work ? Best for weddings?

5uspect

Do you want extra reach or better low light performance?
I'd say for weddings and protraits f2.8 is the better option.

pokergroupie

Thanks for the input. It is so hard to decide because everyone has their own opinion .... why cant money grow on trees so i can get both!

5uspect

lol, you would be better off with the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 on a second body if you're gonna go mad!

Personally I would nearly always go with the faster lens. You can step a bit closer to your subject most of the time but you can rarely control the light outisde a studio.

CabanSail

pokergroupie wrote: »

do i want a 24-70 f2.8 or do i want a 24-105 f 4 lens with my 5d mark ii?... best for studio work ? Best for weddings?

Not being rude here, but do you really think you are ready to be shooting weddings if you are asking for advice like this?

PaulieC

to carry on from the previous post, why in God's names would you have such an expensive body if you're not sure whats lenses to use?

5uspect

A little harsh guys, you don't know the full situation.
Also Google throws up lots of debates between these two lenses, it's not that clear cut.

ike

Too true, we all got to start somewhere, no harm to get the questions answered and opinions out there first.

Personally I'd go for the 24-70 f2.8 as well, its going to be my next purchase hopefully sooner rather than later

PaulieC

ike wrote: »

Too true, we all got to start somewhere

I was probably a bit harsh alright, but my point is that someone who shells out for a 5DMKii should surely know the advantages and disadvantages of each of these lenses, no?
I would love to be able to 'start somewhere' with a body like that....

Borderfox

24-70L

5uspect

cambo_gueno wrote: »

I was probably a bit harsh alright, but my point is that someone who shells out for a 5DMKii should surely know the advantages and disadvantages of each of these lenses, no?
I would love to be able to 'start somewhere' with a body like that....

We'll never know unless the OP tells us. He may have picked it up cheap, somewhere or just gotten lucky through a contact. Either way now he's here looking for help which is to be commended.

mikeanywhere

Borderfox wrote: »

24-70L

+1

kjt

mikeanywhere wrote: »

+1

+3.14

trooney

kjt wrote: »

+3.14

Jaysus Kyle, you always want your slice of pi...

kjt

trooney wrote: »

Jaysus Kyle, you always want your slice of pi...

Chocolate Pie

trooney

kjt wrote: »

Chocolate Pie

Irrational Pi

Fionn

the guy in this web site makes some valid points between the two lens

Digital Picture.com

gloobag

I have the 24-70 and I would definitely consider it my 'go to' lens. I've also used the 24-105, and while it's also of very high quality, I still would choose the 24-70 over it every time.

If you're thinking of buying the 24-70 , be aware that there's a 'Mark II' version of the lens being released soon which has IS integrated.

I'd still go with the non-IS myself. The new one will probably cost a lot more when it's released.

VisionaryP

24-70 without a shadow of a doubt. And don't wait for IS, you won't ever need it. If you've got camera shake at 24-70 range, your name is Michael J Fox.

Borderfox

IS would be handy on this, but overall I am very happy with the quality of the 24-70L for everything from a pet portrait to a Wedding

Bosshogg

(typo in the heading - togs work weekends, I'm having a small tipple so typos allowed ok?)

105mm = more

You said "wedding" "5D mkII".

The +1 stop advantage is easily countered on a good cam like the 5D mkII so it's not really a selling point for your work ideas. (-1 for the 2.8)

Giving that you suggest you're working with everyday people and not models shooting at 2.8 isn't a great idea - again at weddings drink is involved and thus messing about and so shooting with such a tight dof is not something I would recommend. People will hop in from behind and bob about etc so focal point will move. (-2 for the 2.8)

Giving that you suggest you're working with everyday people and you said weddings. Then the 24-105mm is a beautifully thought out range. From 4-5feet away you can get full length shots all the way in to cropped faces without having to put the camera uncomfortably into peoples faces. The 105 is a stunningly versitle for working with people.

The 5D is a full size sensor so the extra reach is appreciated to fill the sensor. A 70mm can seem to leave you wanting. Also the overlap in the 105 saves a lot of messing about going from the 24-70 to the 70-200. You'll be amazed to find how many shots you'll have in the 80-100mm range once it's available to you.

The 105 has IS - After using it for about 2 years as my main lens I don't know if it helps or hinders me. I know I couldn't care less if it wasn't there but since it is I usually leave it on.

Unless you're a complete luddite then all of your important work does at least one lap through Photoshop before printing. In which case the Bokeh argument doesn't hold much ground again.

My vote to your question is 5 or 6 points FOR the 105mm.


When would I use the 24-70?.. Paparazzi indoor venue when I'll be working in the high ISOs. Fast and Wide will be more important than zoom range. (cropping always an option later)

I hope that helps your consideration about what to buy next.


And as previoulsy mentioned... If you're shooting weddings please consider if you're in any way qualified beyond a few dear friends telling you that you took a few good pictures. It's the Bride's special day. What will you do if your gear breaks on the day? What will you do for lighting? Do you know how to direct people and help them pose for shots. How will you process your work? I could go on for ages about it but I don't want to labour the point (anymore).
This is someone's special day don't ruin it... I digress. :mad: