Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 24, 2012, 05:59

MicrostockGroup

MicrostockGroup » Forum » Photography Equipment » Cameras / Lenses » New Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM delivered last night

Microstockgroup Sponsors

« previous next »

Pages: [1]

Topic: New Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM delivered last night

(Read 1651 times)

melastmohican

« on: September 24, 2009, 13:04 »

#link

Now shall I sell my current main lens, Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM lens? I got them when I was using EOS 20D and it's great lens. After switching to 5Dmk2 it seems to be a little to wide for my taste. Now these two lens focal lengths overlap and I already carry 4 lens in my backpack.


	Ignore \| Logged

« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2009, 13:45 »

#link

Quote from: melastmohican on September 24, 2009, 13:04

Now shall I sell my current main lens, Canon EF 17-40mm f/4 L USM lens?

I think it depends greatly on what you shoot.

I just recently bought the 17-40 to add to my arsenal, as I found the 24-105 to be too narrow at times. Besides that, the 17-40 seems a bit sharper, with less distortion, than the 24-105, up to about 35.

But only you can decide how many lenses are too many, and which ones you really need.


	Ignore \| Logged

Dook

« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2009, 14:40 »

#link

Do not sell it. There are times when you need environmental shots and extreme wide angle really comes handy. And if you shoot landscapes 17-40 is a great lens.


	Ignore \| Logged

melastmohican

« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2009, 15:51 »

#link

Yes, 17-40mm is fantastic for landscapes but not so great as general lens. When I shoot people and forget that I am using 17mm they look funny when they are close to edges of the frame. With small sensor it was more like 30mm so I could not see that ;-)


	Ignore \| Logged

araminta

« Reply #4 on: September 25, 2009, 06:25 »

#link

Each lens its usage.

The difference between 17mm and 24mm is huge: 17-40 is a lens for landscapes and 24-105 a walkaround lens.

Unless you need the money, keep both. And you are not obliged to have them all in your backpack: I have 10 lenses but I don't take more than 3-4 in my bag.


	Ignore \| Logged

j2k

« Reply #5 on: September 25, 2009, 08:05 »

#link

I'd keep both if I could afford it. 24-105 is a great walkaround lens on a full frame body, but 24mm isn't really all that wide, besides the distortion at the wide end is rather atrocious. Really screws up any shots that have horizon in them.

In general I find 24-105 for stock to be average. It sure is convenient but the 21MP really shows it's faults.


	Ignore \| Logged

cclapper

Premium Member

« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2009, 08:26 »

#link

Ooo, I'm envious of the L lens. Someday, when I grow up, I will be able to afford L lenses.

If you can afford it, I say keep it.


	Ignore \| Logged

lisafx

Premium Member

« Reply #7 on: September 25, 2009, 11:55 »

#link

Quote from: cclapper on September 25, 2009, 08:26

If you can afford it, I say keep it.

Definitely. Especially if you have a good copy of the 17-40.

There seems to be pretty wide variation in quality from copy to copy of that lens. Lots of folks at dpreview.com (including me) have complained of soft copies.

If you have a good one hang on to it!


	Ignore \| Logged

melastmohican

« Reply #8 on: September 25, 2009, 12:54 »

#link

I am not sure if I got "good" or "soft" copy. I was thinking that now with 5Dmk2 I should calibrate it anyway with micro adjustments camera gives me.


	Ignore \| Logged

lisafx

Premium Member

« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2009, 13:13 »

#link

Quote from: melastmohican on September 25, 2009, 12:54

I am not sure if I got "good" or "soft" copy. I was thinking that now with 5Dmk2 I should calibrate it anyway with micro adjustments camera gives me.

If it has been your main lens and you are getting sharp pictures you got a good one. If it looks like you took every photo through a soft filter or a dollop of vaseline you got one like mine Wink

FWIW I have been shooting with the 5DII since December 08 and haven't had to have any lenses calibrated to work with it. They all work fine.


	Ignore \| Logged

melastmohican

« Reply #10 on: September 25, 2009, 13:25 »

#link

I see, I always got a feeling it could be slightly sharper. Many people have complains that after switching from smaller sensor they feel this way. After calibration they got it sharp as knife ;-)


	Ignore \| Logged

Pages: [1]

« previous next »

Jump to:

Related Topics
	Subject	Started by	Replies	Views	Last post
	Canon 75-300mm USM Cameras / Lenses	ichiro17	3	1286	June 13, 2006, 15:04 by Greg Boiarsky
	canon lens 28-105mm Cameras / Lenses	Peter	3	1106	September 29, 2007, 19:01 by leaf
	Canon 24-105mm L IS USM on APS-C sensor? (EOS 400D, EOS 50D) Cameras / Lenses	Peter	21	12675	September 23, 2008, 09:19 by Freezingpictures
	Canon 500D/T1i (17-85mm kit) vs. Nikon D90 (18-105mm kit) Cameras / Lenses	pet_chia	8	4984	March 04, 2010, 23:05 by pet_chia
	Canon S90 Used 2200 snaps $239 delivered Microstockgroup Buy and Sell	RacePhoto	0	192	December 21, 2011, 15:11 by RacePhoto

Microstockgroup Sponsors

MicrostockGroup Email Updates

Microstock Poll Results

Site	Earnings Rating
Top Tier - Big 4
Shutterstock	100
iStock	66.4
Fotolia	34.9
Dreamstime	26.7

Middle Tier
DepositPhotos	20.1
123RF	16.1
Canstockphoto	11.2
Bigstockphoto	9.5
Veer	8.7

Low Earners
PantherMedia	6.7
PhotoDune	5.8
isignstock	3.7
Zoonar	3.6
GLStockImages	2.7
Stockfresh	2.2
YayMicro	1.7
FeaturePics	1.4
MostPhotos	1.3
ScanStockPhoto	1.2
Crestock	0.8
Cutcaster	0.6
ClipartOf
Pond5
RevoStock
Clipcanvas
ClipDealer
DrawShop
PhotoSpin
VectorStock
GraphicRiver
Pixmac
PhotoCase
The3dStudio
photaki
SuperHug
PhotoKore
AllYouCanStock
Regimages
ViscoImages
Imagegate
Vivozoom
iRockStock
StockPhotoMedia
ImageVortex

More Poll Results Updated: 2012-05-24

Advertise on Microstockgroup.com | Contact: [email protected]