This lens vs. the 24-70 or 24-105. Which would you recommend?
518358
They are different. Those are different, they are not prime lenses. 135 is faster lens, the other are not so much. However the others are more versatile as far as focus. Depends on what you want to do, and how you're gonna use them. If you are gonna be shooting long distance portraits in low light, 135. The other options are more versatile as far as zoom, but you'll need a little more light. I loved the 135, we use it a lot for portraits in weddings.
518359
Question doesn't say anything about usage of lens. 135 has the fastest focusing probably from all Canon EF lenses, it's sharp and produce shallow DOF. But it's fixed. The other two 24-70 and 24-104 are zooms = more versatile lenses. 24-70 is f2.8 what's advantage for focusing in a dark and produce shallower DOF than 24-105. 24-105 has extended range and IS. So if you need universal lens and you shoot a lot in dark conditions - 24-70 f2.8 If you travel a lot or you need longer end than 70mm and focusing speed isn't critical to you - 24-105 f4 If you need longer lens with fast focusing for concerts, headshoots, or you live in darker world - 135 f2 If your concern is technical quality you can't miss with any of them. Marian
784054
I personally would go with the 18-105mm. It is more "flexible." Hope this helps.
933395
the biggest advantage is obviously the ability to go wide during weddings etc without missing shots or having to switch lenses. The 24mm is crisp throughout vs the softer edges in the older lens. I've also heard of some quality issues on the older lenses as well. The 35-70 won't auto focus with all cameras, depending on what you carry. 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.
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?
2278162
The 24 is a good all around but I think the 20mm 1.7 would be superior for low light interior shots.
1061954
17-40 should do very well. It's wide enough, though you need to decide if 40 mm is enough for you on the long end. If you don't need that wide a lens, the 24-105 is a good alternative though on crop sensor 7D, the wide end is equivalent to almost 38mm. Just consider all these factors before final decision. You could ask for more advise at our photography forum:http://photographyclubofindia.com/boards/index.php
824632
Hello scott I just bought it , 'cause i can`t afford the 24-70 too. The lense has an excellente construction, and it really sharp. The only thing I can tell you, is that is a HEAVY sense, I don't know if the 24-70 is lighter, but if you are gonna use it for several hours, have this in mind. I hope I could halp you, sorry my english.
342704
No lens question can be answered accurately without knowing the intended subjects and lighting conditions. But if one needs a mid zoom on a D7000 and do not need wide angle, the 24-70 is the best of the lot. It is not wide on a crop sensor so you will need a wider lens for interior architecture, landscape, street etc. If your main subject is portraiture, general walking around, product, environmental lifestyle portraits, short telephoto etc, it is very good lens. I prefer it on the D7000 to my 17-55 2.8 which is DX only.. I use my 24-70 daily on a D800 and D7000 with excellent pro results for group portraiture, events, glamour etc. If you have plans on adding full frame to your collection, this lens can serve both the short telephoto and normal mid zoom functions on the DX or FX respectively. On FX it has a field of view that makes it a good architecture and landscape lens. If your primary purpose is portraiture, consider the 85 1.8G as an excellent lens for 1/4th the price however.
1345652
The 24-70 f2.8 is a better lens for sure, and much more expensive. But this lens is VERY good, and will do a fine job for weddings.
8522
Hardy,Thanks for the info about getting better lenses. I just "bit the bullet" and bought the 24-105mm L lens. I have heard this same wise advice from other photographers, and I am looking forward to getting sharper photos with the new lens, and I will try to get only L lenses from now on. In the end, you truly get what you pay for.
1958585
The 24-105 lens is the lens that is on my camera about 80% of the time. For everyday, walk around use, I think it is a great lens.
759243
Get the 24-70 for indoor/low light use over the 24-105. IS ONLY helps with camera shake NOT moving subjects. For moving subjects, the extra stop from the 2.8 trumps 4.0 + IS every time, all the time. So with reference to what DavInAZ wrote above, the IS does not make the 24-105 better in low light than the faster 2.8. An extra stop will always be an extra stop. An easy way to think about it is, if you are moving go with the IS, if the subject is moving go with the faster lens. Obviously, if you can have both (as with the 70-200 f2.8L IS), then you are golden.
1252945
For the 24-105, you shouldn't have problems with vignetting if you've got a single filter (no stacking thereof) and are shooting with with your aperture closed down a bit. Good Luck!
448719
i dont have the 24 85mm to truly give you a comparison. but according to a few reviews and test i saw the 24 85mm has a slightly better sharpness wile the 24 to 120 has more focal length. so it depends on what you are going to be shooting and what you want to pay for your lens.and fyi if you go for a 24 to 120mm i dont reccomend this version of it as its one of nikons worst modern lenses . get the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR its the revised version and supost to be a better lens. or if you really want focal length the 28mm to 300mm hope this helps
1464246
Sounds like you are after a good "walking around lens". For me the best one is the 24 - 120 F4.0. It is generally wide enough and has just enough reach to get 90% of the shots. It is my lens for about 80% of my shots. After this one, I would go with the 24-70 F2.8.
357728
It's the only lens I use for my 800. With occasional hiccups trying to focus through car window glass. It's sharp enough for my varied uses. I was sold on the lens by tests performed and published on the blog Photography Life and you'll also find info on the 24-70, but the 2.8 will give you a softer background.