User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Canon Zooms - F2.8 or F4.0

  1. #1
    Account Closed
    Join Date
    14 Jan 2009
    Location
    Doncaster East
    Posts
    23
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Canon Zooms - F2.8 or F4.0



    I currently own the Canon F4.0 24 - 105 L zoom together with an F4.0 70 - 200 Canon L series.
    As I am mainly taking landscapes and candid (street scenes), I am thinking about changing the 24 - 105 lens for the F2.8 24 - 70 L series.
    Taking into account costs (I'll sell the F4.0 24-105) , I wondering if there are enoughadvantages to buy the F2.8 lens ???

  2. #2
    Moderately Underexposed I @ M's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 2007
    Location
    Marlo, Far East Gippsland
    Posts
    4,911
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Bit hard to answer that one without knowing the sort of quality of images you are producing at the moment with your current gear, how about sharing some that you have taken in the last 2 1/2 years that you have been a member here.
    Andrew
    Nikon, Fuji, Nikkor, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and too many other bits and pieces to list.



  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    30 May 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    2,599
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The advantage of a F/2.8 compared to a f/4 is 1 stop of light
    Canon 7D : Canon EF 70-200mm f:2.8 L IS II USM - Canon EF 24-105 f:4 L IS USM - Canon EF 50mm f:1.8 - Canon EF-s 18-55mm f:3.5-5.6
    Sigma APO 150-500mm f:5-6.3 DG OS HSM
    - Sigma 10-20mm f:3.5 EX DC HSM
    Speedlite 580 EX II - Nissin Di866 II - Yongnuo 460-II x2 - Kenko extension tube set - Canon Extender EF 1.4x II
    Manfroto monopod - SILK 700DX Pro tripod - Remote release - Cokin Z-Pro filter box + Various filters

    Current Social Experiment: CAPRIL - Wearing a cape for the month of April to support Beyond Blue
    Visit me on Flickr

  4. #4
    I am older than I look. peterb666's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Oct 2009
    Location
    Tura Beach, NSW
    Posts
    3,607
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rather than dump a perfectly good lens, why not get the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 and head into UWA territory. It will exend your range with lanscapes.
    Cheers

    PeterB666


    My photo-mojo has gone

    Olympus OM-D E-M5 with Metabones Speed Booster and Nikon 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 - almost as insanely wicked as sin itself... but then again, the Voigtlander 10.5mm f/0.95 is kinda fun.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    08 May 2009
    Location
    Buninyong
    Posts
    1,235
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Two questions. Do your find yourself looking for an extra stop of Shutter speed? How often do you use your 24-105 at longer than 70mm?
    Mic

    Photography is the art of telling stories with light.

    www.michaelgoulding.com

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    19 Aug 2010
    Location
    NSW
    Posts
    628
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    if you require a shallow depth of field, yes
    if you find you need faster shutter speed in low light, yes

    I think the image stabiliser will be better for low light if you do not need to stop action. Then again the camera may need the wider aperture to lock focus.
    You may also consider the size of the 24-70. Its bigger than the lens you currently have. Might affect your decision.
    1DIII, 5DII, 15mm fish, 24mm ts-e, 35L,135L,200L,400L,mpe-65mm
    Film: eos 300, pentax 6x7

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    01 Jan 2010
    Location
    South Coast
    Posts
    19
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've got the f2.8 24-70L - it's a good lens but I'm thinking about changing it for a f4.0 24-105L to fill the gap between the 24-70 and the 100-400.
    Canon 40D : Canon 10-22 f3.5-4.5 : Canon 100 f2.8L Macro : Canon 24-70 f2.8L : Canon 24-105 f4.0L : Canon 100-400 f4.5-5.6L : Speedlite 580EXII : Manfrotto 055XPROB : Manfrotto 808RC4 : Manfrotto 680B : Lowepro Flipside 400AW

  8. #8
    Account Closed
    Threadstarter

    Join Date
    14 Jan 2009
    Location
    Doncaster East
    Posts
    23
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks for your replies...... think I'll stick with what I've got, and maybe save for the Canon 16 - 35

  9. #9
    Ausphotography Veteran
    Join Date
    08 Nov 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    3,303
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The f/4L zooms you have are fantastic lenses; they're just a stop slower than their f/2.8 alternatives.

    If you require more depth of field, the f/2.8 aperture will not be particularly useful. If you want to freeze movement in dim light, f/2.8 helps. You may still need to push your ISO depending on the scene.

    I use my 16-35/2.8L II quite extensively, but rarely wide open, as I shoot a lot of seascapes, landscapes and cityscapes, where I want depth of field. I shoot mostly at f/11 or f/8.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •