Beginner New Canon 24-70 f4 or Used f2.8

chrispp

chrispp

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,513
Name
Chris
Edit My Images
Yes
hHi I am torn a little between a new Canon EF 24-70 f4 L or a used f2.8
Both are similar in price etc. I realise the 2.8 is a 'faster' lens but the IS is
possibly a trade off?

Thanks for looking and any advice gratefully appreciated

Chris
 
On a 5d mkiii and a general walk around lens. I have a 24-105 but thought the other 2 options would
be a bit better quality, sharpness etc ?

Thanks for your reply owenb
 
I would always aim for a bigger aperture. If you can get a decent price for the 2.8 it's always going to be better. Plus the less artificial light and use of iso you can get away with the better your pictures are going to be. Just remember glass tends to hold its price as well. As long as you look after it.
 
for a general walkabout I cant see any real advantage over the 24-105 to be honest had you said weddings portraits etc would of wholeheartedly recommended the 2.8 but if you have the 24-105 I would stick with that..... whats the 24-105 missing for you?
 
I would go for 2.8. If you know that there is nothing wrong with used one then there is no benefit for lens whenever its new or old. L lenses are build to last for years and years. After you get used to f2.8 it will be very hard to move to f4 and you will realise how much does that mean have extra f
 
^Demon said:
I would go for 2.8. If you know that there is nothing wrong with used one then there is no benefit for lens whenever its new or old. L lenses are build to last for years and years. After you get used to f2.8 it will be very hard to move to f4 and you will realise how much does that mean have extra f
Click to expand...
I did this with my 70-200 l series I went for the f/4 as I use it in the day mainly as I shoot surf so it's ideal for what I needed it for. I would like a 2.8 but it was a little out of my price range but given the option bigger aperture every time.
 
David86 said:
I did this with my 70-200 l series I went for the f/4 as I use it in the day mainly as I shoot surf so it's ideal for what I needed it for. I would like a 2.8 but it was a little out of my price range but given the option bigger aperture every time.
Click to expand...
I think f4 new and f2.8 more or less the same price for 24-70mk 1 its a bit different for 70-200 that will be a few 100 more for 2.8 version if I'm not wrong.
 
David86 said:
I would always aim for a bigger aperture. If you can get a decent price for the 2.8 it's always going to be better. Plus the less artificial light and use of iso you can get away with the better your pictures are going to be. Just remember glass tends to hold its price as well. As long as you look after it.
Click to expand...
Thought as much I think I'm going for the 2.8

Thanks for your comment, and taking the time to respond Chris
 
owenb said:
for a general walkabout I cant see any real advantage over the 24-105 to be honest had you said weddings portraits etc would of wholeheartedly recommended the 2.8 but if you have the 24-105 I would stick with that..... whats the 24-105 missing for you?
Click to expand...

Like the idea of using the 2.8 for portraits as well,. The 24-105 hasn't caused me any issues just upgrading a few bits at the moment

Thanks for your comment, and taking the time to respond Chris
 
^Demon said:
I think f4 new and f2.8 more or less the same price for 24-70mk 1 its a bit different for 70-200 that will be a few 100 more for 2.8 version if I'm not wrong.
Click to expand...
Yep I think you have all answered my initial thoughts I'll go after a 2.8

Thanks all for your time and comments

Chris
 
Why not stick with the 24-105 for walkabout and get a couple of primes for the same money to do portraits or low light with?

Could you not get a 85mm and 35mm f1.8 for the same money, instead of getting a second zoom that only gives you a bit more than what you already have?
 
JYC said:
Why not stick with the 24-105 for walkabout and get a couple of primes for the same money to do portraits or low light with?

Could you not get a 85mm and 35mm f1.8 for the same money, instead of getting a second zoom that only gives you a bit more than what you already have?
Click to expand...

Ahh that's interesting I never thought about that ? I have been looking a the 50mm prime. I have the 100mm f2.8 so another option is either the 35mm or 50mm

Thanks for throwing that one in

Chris
 
85mm for portraits is the one you want defo....
 
^Demon said:
I think f4 new and f2.8 more or less the same price for 24-70mk 1 its a bit different for 70-200 that will be a few 100 more for 2.8 version if I'm not wrong.
Click to expand...
Lol yeah almost 600 more in some places. Not to mention if you want IS as well.
 
85mm f1.8 and 35mm f2 IS would be much better complementary lenses for your 24-105 than any 'pro' zoom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top