24-70 or 24-105 So difficult to choose, I want to shoot weddings, sports, and formal portriats. The later I can easily pull off with the 24-105, but can the 24-105 handle the other situations I know the 24-70 will be able to handle. I am going to be selling my 17-40/70-200 to buy this lens. I currently shoot mainly landscape, and I'm missing this ranges with my current camera. I've decided on buying one of these, I just cannot make up my mind as to which. Anyone have any ideas or suggestions? 24-70 or 24-105 So difficult to choose, I want to shoot weddings, sports, and formal portriats. The later I can easily pull off with the 24-105, but can the 24-105 handle the other situations I... » Read More 24-70 or 24-105 So difficult to choose, I want to shoot weddings, sports, and formal portriats. The later I can easily pull off with the 24-105, but can the 24-105 handle the other situations I know the 24-70 will be able to handle. I am going to be selling my 17-40/70-200 to buy this lens. I currently shoot mainly landscape, and I'm missing this ranges with my current camera. I've decided on buying one of these, I just cannot make up my mind as to which. Anyone have any ideas or suggestions? « Show Less
2004639
I've tried both and I like the 24-70 far better. It is a sharper, faster lens.
2004640
Which one did you finish up with? I'm interested because you said that you shoot mainly lanscapes, so why would you part with the 17-40mm? If your option had been for the 16-35mm f2.8L, I could have understood the reason, but a 24mm lens on any new camera (assuming it's not a film body, 5D or 1Ds) is only going to give you 31mm (1D) or 38mm (the rest). Not much good for landscape work.BTW, the 24-70mm eats the 24-105mm alive when it comes to contrast and sharpness, IS or not!
2004641
hi. Do you plan to shoot more weddings or landscapes...? i think it could be the answer of your question. I think about buying this lens too. i am a wedding photographer, and wedding conditions are always dark light situations. So i need the 2.8 aperture. If you are more a nature photographer, so the 2.8 is not so needed. During wedding the IS can't help too much, because the people that you take are dancing, the low speed will be impossible to use, even with IS on.I hope it will hlep you.
1509565
I have shot 3 weddings with this lens and I haven't had a problem with it, it's been great. I have used the 70-200 and its just a bit faster that the 80-200 but I can't really tell the difference.
1337629
Image quality between the 24-70 and 28-75 is leaps and bounds. The 24-70 is just as sharp as Canons 24-70 version. Not to mention having VC. Definitely worth it if you have the money. I owned the 28-75 and it was a great lens for what is was but the 24-70 is such a step up in my opinion. Cheers
1192437
I haven't used either of the lenses mentioned here but I thought I'd point out something that hasn't been mentioned yet. You say the 12-24 has an aperture range of f4-f5.6, and the 11-16 has a range of f2.8-f22. Actually- in the 12-24, the numbers you mention are the maximum aperture settings. At 12mm it opens up to f4 max, and at 24mm it opens up to f5.6 max. At any zoom range it would stop down to probably f22. So the 12-24 is not limited to only f4-f5.6 as this post suggests. The 11-17 lens has a constant maximum aperture of f2.8 through its whole zoom range, and also stops down to f22. So both of these two lenses have a normal range of apertures, but the 11-17 opens up to a bigger f2.8. Just thought I'd point that out if anyone was misled...
1192317
I really like the 18-140. I also have the 55-300. At the time I was researching to purchase a new lens the 18-140 appeared to be the better choice. I went to the Nikon site and did a comparison between the 18-140, 18-200, and 18-300. The 18-140 was new, with the newer technology, lighter, and cheaper. For me, 18-140 focus quickly and it has the range I use most. I usually keep the 55-300 with me, so I'm covered in most situations.
1787339
Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Camerasmy cameras have been the rebel xti, the 30d, and the 5d classic. my second lens purchased was the 24-105. it stays on my 5d. i take it off for the 50 1.4, the 85 1.8, and the 70-200 2.8 is. sharp, u betcha, almost cant tell it from the primes, although i know that my 2 best lenses are my primes. i have had the 24-70 on my camera many times. my partner prefers it and he's very good. i have a shot of the city in porch light at 1/6 sec that is unbelievable. i am a full believer in is, and the 24-105 is the best walk around particularly for full frame that i have met. Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Camerasmy cameras have been the rebel xti, the 30d, and the 5d classic. my second lens purchased was the 24-105. it stays on my 5d. i take it off for the 50 1.4, the 85 1.8, and the 70-200 2.8 is. sharp, u betcha, almost cant tell it from the primes, although i know that my 2 best lenses are my primes. i have had the 24-70 on my camera many times. my partner prefers it and he's very good. i have a shot of the city in porch light at 1/6 sec that is unbelievable. i am a full... » Read More Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Camerasmy cameras have been the rebel xti, the 30d, and the 5d classic. my second lens purchased was the 24-105. it stays on my 5d. i take it off for the 50 1.4, the 85 1.8, and the 70-200 2.8 is. sharp, u betcha, almost cant tell it from the primes, although i know that my 2 best lenses are my primes. i have had the 24-70 on my camera many times. my partner prefers it and he's very good. i have a shot of the city in porch light at 1/6 sec that is unbelievable. i am a full believer in is, and the 24-105 is the best walk around particularly for full frame that i have met. « Show Less
1272574
To future amateurs with this question i would recommend the 17-50 over the 28-75 especially when your camera has a cropped sensor. It becomes a 28-80mm which makes it an appropriate wide angle to take landscape shots and portraits at 50mm(80mm equivalent). 28-75mm becomes more of a telephoto lens on a cropped dslr and i would only recommend getting it on a full frame (but then again if you can afford a full frame and use it professionally, you would probably go with the cannon 28-75L)
597331
Why would one choose the 15-85 over the 24-105? Despite the relative ratio differences it seems as though the 24-105 is so much more of lens for not much more money. Any thoughts?
2118673
I guess it depends on which nikon body you have. 1 the sigma 24-70 is a full frame lens & the sigma 17-70 is a crop lens. If you have a full frame body (FF) the crop (dx) lens won't work. If you have a dx body you can shoot with either lens. The 24-70 is a constant f/2.8 where the 17-70 is a variable f/2.8-4.0 lens. The 24-70 is almost twice the cost. Both lenses will do portraits, weddings & events, if you want the background (bokeh) to be fuzzy, out of focus on most shots, a fixed f/2.8 is better & you need less light. If you don't need the background fuzzy most of the time and you have more light to shoot then go with the variable f/2.8-4.0. Money may be a factor as well. Your camera body may not allow for AF adjustments, if not, the 17-70 is newer and you can also get the new sigma docking station. It will let you fine tune/adjust the AF of the newer lens, so you get very sharp focused shots. I hope this helps.
848894
The 24-70 is generally $300-400 more than the 17-55. There is no IS in the 24-70, and it weighs 2.1 lbs almost a pound more than the 17-55. Construction build is way better w/ the 24-70 and has a wee bit longer zoom. Those are probably the only advantages it has over the 17-55. IQ look almost identical from both lenses. I would go with 17-55 mainly for the IS and lower price.
811134
while i have never had the 70-200, i've had other canon lenses, including the red strip 24-105 4L, and other tamron lenses...from my experience this 24-70 will be as sharp or sharper than them all...tho, like all lenses, you should not shoot at full open 2.8 for best sharpness...i shoot at 3.2, and with the image stab i is no problem...and fully open to 24mm the outer portion may be less sharp, but that holds for all wide angle zooms...this is as good as the best, it is among the best.
465321
Depends on your current and future needs. I have the 17-40 and am happy with it. I also have a full frame camera and that was why I brought this lens.The 17-40 will act as a 27-64 on the 70D while the 10-22 is a EF-S lens which will not work if you ever want to upgrade to full frame.
523657
I have been using the 24-70 2.8 for a while now on my 7D and I find that the range is not optimal for outdoors. I can get some great shots at 70 mm, but at 24 mm the shots just are not wide enough - close but not there. Upgrading (or downgrading) to the 17-55 2.8 IS USM this week. I think it will be a way better lens for a cropped sensor camera. It will allow me to get some landscape shots that I was just not able to achieve with the 24-70.Side note: tried the 24-70 2.8 on my friend's 5D MII and it was awesome - It would be my lens of choice if I had a full frame camera.
910058
Photofun123-I am in a similar situation. What did you decide on and what do you think of it? I will be getting a 50d and only one lens. My main subject will be my toddler. I am considering 24-70 and 24-105. Thanks.
1958589
I wouldn't buy the 24-105 mm lens. The 70D has a smaller APS-C sensor (compared to full frame) which translates into a 1.6x crop factor of the lens' focal length. Put simple, you will lose the wide angle capability of the lens and instead have the equivalent of a ca. 36-160 mm lens. The 24-105 has certainly better quality, but to fully appreciate it you should buy the EOS 6D body (ca. $1500) or another Canon body with a full frame sensor.
357722
I own both...in terms of image quality, there's no comparison - the 24-70 is in another league. It's a full stop faster (brighter viewfinder, better depth of field control, faster focusing, etc) and it gives you that "pop" you get from the best professional grade lenses. On the down-side, the 24-70 is a much narrower zoom range, so you might find yourself needing to carry two lenses whereas just the 24-120 would cover you otherwise. It's a personal thing I guess, but if I could only have one or the other, I'd take the 24-70 without a moment's thought.
357729
To my understanding it is usually believed that 2470 is a better version than this one in the same focal length range.But there are other things to consider. How important is it for you to have the extra versatility, that is, the focal length of 70 to 120? How much do you care about the lost of aperture range? (And that depends on what you plan to shoot most often.) How important is the price difference to you? And weight differs, too.Actually, I envy the newest 750 model so much! lol. It certainly deserves good lenses.