hi guys! saw this topic in a foreign-based forum. just wanted to see what the members and users here have to say :)

is the 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM still king of the hill in the zoom category, or has it been replaced by the 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM?

what do you think guys??

John

depends on your needs. if youre a landscape photog using a 1.6x cam then i wouldnt call it king.

I agree with christopher. But I think it was named "king of the hill" more for overall general photography since its so versatile?

you can also try the tamron 28-75 2.8, i love my copy.

It's the king of the hill depending on your skill, your intended purpose and what you expect from it.

The 24-70 2.8 L is like a formula 1 car.
In the right hands like michael schumacher in his ferrari, the car just flies.
Similarly under in an experienced photographer's hands, the results are simply breath taking.

Give me a ferrari to drive i'll probably crash it in my first turn, let alone get to the supermarket. The first time i used a 70-200 2.8 L w/o IS, i ended up with so many blurred photos.

If you're willing to get the absolutely best picture possible, willing to invest a lot of time to hone your skills and technique, including the burden to carry the weight, properly set your shots up, including tripod, light meters and whatever else it takes to get the results. Go for the 24-70. WIhtout enough skill, you will be dissapointed and end up with a lot of missed focus, and blurred pics.

Me, with my limited skills, i want great pictures NOW.
Basically, i just want to get clear pictures every single time, in whatever mode i put my camera in, i want an all around, go anywhere lens that covers a large range of focal lengths. For my purpose the 24-105L is the King of the Hill, so that's what i got.

sir enjoy, musta na classmate? classmate kita sa manny librodo workshop eh. hehehe.

I agree with Enjoy, "we make our own hills, we are our own Kings."

All I know is I only use this lens if I can't bring anything else.

didn't really mean to put the 24-70mm on a pedestal by labeling it king of the hill.. like what i said i got this topic from a foreign-based forum and they were really arguing about what the best all-around lens is for canon (i guess it would be a helpful and relevant topic because like me, a considerable amount of individuals a hard time choosing between the two fantastic lenses) oh well as usual we all have our own interpretations but just try to see that phrase in the context of what would better the other as the best L lens in the standard zoom category. let's just stick to that and not be so philosophical about the king of the hill phrase. :)

so again it's just a question of what would you prefer and your feedback regarding the 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM and 24-105mm f/4 IS USM and let's stick to that. :)

John

My opinion only...

I still prefer a lens with big aperture compared to a lens with more focal range for the simple reason that you can't make a lens with smaller aperture behave like a bigger one. Focal range (or lack of it) at least can be addressed by changing positions.

These 2 lenses are so often compared (which I think is wrong) because they are priced similarly when in reality, these 2 lenses are totally different in purpose.

The 24-105 is a walkaround. The 24-70 is a standard zoom.
The 24-105 isn't a fast lens. The 24-70 is the fastest ZOOM lens (only primes beat it)

If you don't have a full frame camera. I think the 24-105 is overpriced for a walkaround. If I wanted a single lens solution on a DSLR, there are better values out there like the 18-200 VR from Nikon. It's such a better value that I would rather buy a D50 + 18-200VR and still have the budget for a SB600 flash ALL for the price of a single 24-105 F4L.

whoa! you get to have those fine lenses at the price of a 24-105mm L?? oh well..

yes i went for a bigger aperture instead of reach. i must admit that the tele end of the 24-70 is quite "bitin" like what you said, it's ok naman to come up close (which i'd rather do). but thn again, there are simply times when you die for that extra reach.

i'm quite happy with the 24-70mm L.. it's ultra fast and sharp as well!
what do the other users think? share your views!

happy rainy day!

John

if youre ok trying third party lenses give the tamron a try youd be surprised.

its still the king. i don't think there is a better one out there.

It's the king of the hill depending on your skill, your intended purpose and what you expect from it.

X X X

If you're willing to get the absolutely best picture possible, willing to invest a lot of time to hone your skills and technique, including the burden to carry the weight, properly set your shots up, including tripod, light meters and whatever else it takes to get the results. Go for the 24-70. WIhtout enough skill, you will be dissapointed and end up with a lot of missed focus, and blurred pics.

X X X.

just got one a few days ago, and yup i ended up with a lot of those. but i'll tame my beasts sooner or later :)

just dont do a lot of center focus - recomposition. that tends to result to backfocused shots.

i have the sigma 24-70mm f/2.8, its sharp but without the HSM and stiff zoom ring.

24-70 is it. read several websites (and even magazines too) proclaiming it better than the 24-105. it's like comparing performance vs. flexibility. a lot of times you get torn.

had 1 bought last year along w/ the 70-200 IS. perfect combo. :)

I could shoot 1/10th sec. at 105mm setting on my 350d with the 24-105 with acceptable result, sure that wont stop action , But if it were the 24-70, it would be faster but with lesser Depth of field, so meron din nawala kng 2.8 ka, at gusto mo ng DOF.

Before I bought the 24-105, kinosider ko rin ang 24-70, pero mas mahal eh, tsaka mas malaki at mabigat, wala rin ng IS. So para sakin ang 24-105 ang king of the hill, just between the 2 lens.

When can we have an 18-200 F/2.8L?..a question for Canon from Canon user...

i think this will be the king of the hill if ever...

had 1 bought last year along w/ the 70-200 IS. perfect combo. :)[/quote]

DITTO.For my shooting style,I really do feel that the Canon 24-70 F2.8L and 70-200 F2.8L lenses are the perfect combo.Amongst the lenses that I have,these are the two that I use most of the time.

PS.I know that some people find the 24-70 F2.8L heavy.For me,I don't find it heavy at all.In fact,for me,the weight is just right.As for the 70-200 F2.8L IS,well,that's a different story.I do feel it's weight while tagging it along all day but when I start shooting and the rush or adrenaline comes in,I don't feel the weight anymore.

Before I switched to the other side the 24-70mm L lens is my main lens. I had a lot of nice pictures taken by that lens and never regretted owning that against the 24-105mm f4 L lens. Then again it depends on what you need I guess. During that time before... the 24-70mm f2.8 L lens was perfect for me. :)

As long as it gives me the results I want, it will always be the King of the Hill of my camera bag :D

I've already had the AF unit of my 24-70L replaced. The Canon technician told me that it simply gave out due to wear and tear. :D

just dont do a lot of center focus - recomposition. that tends to result to backfocused shots.
Hi! Kindly explain for us newbies. Thanks.

@ Lino

Focus-recompose is using the center AF point to focus on your subject and then shifting the camera to move the focused subject off center.

I often use focus-recompose but I don't get any back focused shots. I tend to use Single Servo when using this technique. Using AI Focus is almost a sure way to guarantee a back focused shot.

I press the shutter halfway and the center focus light blinks once. I then press the AE lock and recompose before pressing the shutter all the way down. The metering is center weighted and the AF focus is Single shot. This is what you taught us Jo. Tama ba ako?

24-105mm f/4 IS L is the new king for me, it is a lens I feel that all 24-70L owners made a wish list then Canon built it. Image Stabilized, 71-105mm extra zoom range, lighter, smaller, (except the f/4, compromise).

This is the site that helped lots of first time buyers on choosing one over the other...

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/28-105.shtml


(http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/24vs28.shtml)

The "King of the hill" VS. "The Beast" Who has an opinion?

whatever works for me best.

all "king of the hill" vs "the beast" shootout is useless, in my opinion, if the one asking hasn't tried the lens first...

it all boils down to your preference.

24-70 still works for me because of its larger aperture.

Yup :D That's pretty much the same way I do it.

I press the shutter halfway and the center focus light blinks once. I then press the AE lock and recompose before pressing the shutter all the way down. The metering is center weighted and the AF focus is Single shot. This is what you taught us Jo. Tama ba ako?

I used to agree on it that 24-70mm is the king of the hill, but not anymore, there's a NEW KING OF THE HILL 24-105 mm f2.8 IS L USM. its so cool guys, you have to see it for yourself im planning tosell my 24-70, so i can get my new King.

I used to agree on it that 24-70mm is the king of the hill, but not anymore, there's a NEW KING OF THE HILL 24-105 mm f2.8 IS L USM. its so cool guys, you have to see it for yourself im planning tosell my 24-70, so i can get my new King.
Marcos, I think you're referring to the 24-105 f/4 IS L USM.

Are you sure that the lens you are referring to has a maximum aperture of f/2.8 and not f/4?

Personally, I tend to avoid zoom lenses that exceed a 3x optical range.

I used to agree on it that 24-70mm is the king of the hill, but not anymore, there's a NEW KING OF THE HILL 24-105 mm f2.8 IS L USM. its so cool guys, you have to see it for yourself im planning tosell my 24-70, so i can get my new King.