New Lens, sample image

rG-tom

rG-tom

rG-tom

Soldato
Joined
27 Nov 2004
Posts
10,340
Location
North Beds
Hey guys,

Show this to a few guys on MSN and it appears it might be something that could be of interest to some of the pixel peepers on here :)

I sold my 24-105 F4L IS last week and replaced it with a 24-70 F2.8L

I had a good copy of the 24-105 but wanted the extra stop of light for numerous reasons, but after reading a fair few reviews it was unanymous that the 24-105 was regarded as the sharper lens, so i was a bit unsure as to if id be happy with the 24-70.

Well, after 5 days of ownership i can DEFINITELY say that it was a good buy. I was going to get a used unit but I got into my store a brand new one that after a bit of testing it was decided that it was a decent copy, so i spent the extra and just got it.

well, here's one full res sample image for you guys :)


Clicky

EXIF should still be embedded, it has not been edited at all bar a VERY fine USM, which hasnt made that much difference in honesty.

The rest of the shots are on my blog, and all the ones on there are totally unedited as per the stipulations of the competition.

Thanks for looking!

Tom.
 
Last edited:
Given that so many weigh up the 24-70 / 24-105 debate, it'd be good to hear your thoughts one where each one has it's strengths / weaknesses.

Oh, and I hate you :p (exercise for the reader to determine if I'm referring to the camera or the lass).
 
growse said:
Given that so many weigh up the 24-70 / 24-105 debate, it'd be good to hear your thoughts one where each one has it's strengths / weaknesses.

Oh, and I hate you :p (exercise for the reader to determine if I'm referring to the camera or the lass).
Click to expand...

the extra length of the 24-105 is definitely an advantage for portrait work. It is also lighter, quite a lot lighter.

Other than that, the 24-70 is better in every way. The focusing, due to the extra light is much quicker, the design of the lens with the reverse zoom (it gets longer as you zoom out, making the hood more effective) etc, less barrel distortion, sharper, the ability to stop down to f2.8 allows for twice the shutter speed (IS is nice but no comparison to a brighter aperture at all) and also obviously more bokeh if you use the f2.8. It is very sharp wide open too, but i have no samples to hand at the moment.

Tom.
 
James07 said:
Why is a 24-70 so different to a 18-55 or a 70-300?
Click to expand...

apart from the price tag? :p (these are over a grand at warehouse thanks to the price hikes!)

it's a Canon L series lens, part of their professional range with a full metal construction (bar the glass obviously :p), weather seals etc. It has FANTASTIC quality optics and is very bright at f2.8

Also, an 18-55 wont fit my camera as it is full frame :p

Tom.
 
rG-tom said:
apart from the price tag? :p (these are over a grand at warehouse thanks to the price hikes!)

it's a Canon L series lens, part of their professional range with a full metal construction (bar the glass obviously :p), weather seals etc. It has FANTASTIC quality optics and is very bright at f2.8

Also, an 18-55 wont fit my camera as it is full frame :p

Tom.
Click to expand...

What camera u got?
 
Very nice lens.

about the photo, I got distracted by her eyes, well the white squre reflected in her pupil. This is hard to prevent, but I believe a circular reflective tent would give better results. Also cool is I have seen a homemade circular florescent tube that gives a nice light ring in pupils while giving good general illumination.

But I have never used a flahs in my life... yet...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom