time to upgrade kit lens

[powerhousefan]

i've done a ton of research on what to replace my kit lens with and here are the choices:

canon 24-105mm f4L

OR

canon 24-70 f2.8L

i'm leaning towards 105 but wanted to get feedback from pros. what i like about 105 - IS, not as heavy, slightly cheaper & more zoom.

there are also rumors that the 70 is being updated in 2010 to have IS, so i'm guess the old ones won't be worth as much, should one try to sell it later.

the one big factor i like about the 70 is it's lower f-stop which helps in low light situations.

anyway, i'm including a poll so people can react. please provide your feedback as i need to purchase something in the next week or so, before my next trip. lastly, if you think there is something better, let me know.

my total budget on this lens is $1500.

[spearfish25]

You didn't mention which body you're using. If you're using a compact sensor (ie, not full frame) and it sounds like you are if you're upgrading from a kit lens, 24mm may not be wide enough for you. Many lenses designed for this zoom range and the cropped sensor shoot for about 17mm on the low end. You'll get by with 24mm, but you'll probably feel a bit constricted at times.

A few key points on choosing between your two options listed:

1) Image stabilization (IS) in the sub-100mm zoom range is pretty worthless. You'll pay extra to have a slightly-useful-at-best feature. IS really comes into play at longer focal lengths where camera/lens shake is a problem. Even without IS, you can shoot a 24mm image at 1/15s shutter speed and not see image blur if you have decent hands.

2) Along those lines, the extra stop you get from a f/2.8 will more than compensate for the lack of IS. It's important to note that IS only helps with camera shake, not with stopping action. The extra stop with a f/2.8 will get you a valuable increase in shutter speed which helps with both camera shake AND stopping motion.

3) The f/2.8 will have better bokeh (blurriness behind your main subject) when shot at f/2.8 than an f/4 shot at f/4. This gives more depth and a more professional look to your photos.

4) The 'wide open' performance of an f/2.8 lens (shooting at f/2.8) will typically give sharper, more contrasty results than if you shoot wide open with the f/4 lens. Stopping down the f/2.8 lens to f/4 only improves the results further.

So, I'd go with the 24-70 f/2.8 any day of the week. It's an ideal lens if you have the 70-200 f/2.8 to go with it.

[synth19]

I agree with spearfish 100%. Have you tried out both lens? I have a 24-70 you can check out in person. If there is a camera shop near you, check it out with your body. It's a great lens, unfortunately not as versatile on a crop. It just isn't wide enough to be an "all around." I don't use mine as much as I hoped, but I know it will get much more action once I go full frame. The three "best combo" lens on a crop IMO are 24-70L, 70-200 2.8 IS L, and 10-22. When I go FF, I'll eventually replace the 10-22,but I don't have any other lens on my wish list after I picked up an 85mm 1.2.

[powerhousefan]

you guys are 2 days late. i just ordered the 24-105 lens. i'll see if it's returnable. the problem is i'm leaving for vacation in 9 days and now would need to pay for expedited shipping.

good feedback!

[spearfish25]

See what you think of it when you get it. If you don't have the 70-200 or a similar longer lens (70-300 variable aperture is cheaper and more consumer oriented), you might not be happy having only a 24-70. So if you're not shopping for a mid-range telephoto or have one already, you may actually prefer the 24-105. The 24-70 would be really limiting if that's all you were walking around with.

Both lenses are nice...they just serve different purposes and fit in the lens lineup differently depending on what you already have.