A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 18th 06, 07:47 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Peter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.

Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have decided
to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

I rarely take photos below 24mm on the 20D as most of my shots are people
shots. So, any objections?

BTW, will be used in combination with my 70-200 2.8IS and 50mm 1.4 prime.
An extra stop of light would be nice, but 24-70 is a bit bulky, and the
17-55 is over-priced and is restricted to the type of body used. Also, I
like in-camera cropping, so longer focal lengths can be an advantage to me.


  #2  
Old July 18th 06, 07:56 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
This old Bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.


"Peter" wrote in message
...
Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have
decided to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

I rarely take photos below 24mm on the 20D as most of my shots are people
shots. So, any objections?


You mean, a 38mm to 168mm, right? As long as you don't want something in
the background showing where they are, you should be fine.


  #3  
Old July 18th 06, 08:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
John McWilliams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,945
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.

This old Bob wrote:
"Peter" wrote in message
...
Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have
decided to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

I rarely take photos below 24mm on the 20D as most of my shots are people
shots. So, any objections?


You mean, a 38mm to 168mm, right? As long as you don't want something in
the background showing where they are, you should be fine.


Well, not really! It's a 24-105, and yes, on the 20D the figs you quote
are useful. But it'll be its stated figs. in all respects on a ff camera.

It's a fine lens; I use it a lot.

--
john mcwilliams
  #4  
Old July 18th 06, 08:40 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Bill Hilton
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 244
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.

Peter wrote:
Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have decided
to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

So, any objections?



Good choice, you won't regret it ...

  #5  
Old July 18th 06, 08:53 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Peter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.

Cheers Bill. Good to hear it from a long time poster.



"Bill Hilton" wrote in message
ps.com...
Peter wrote:
Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have
decided
to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

So, any objections?



Good choice, you won't regret it ...



  #6  
Old July 18th 06, 09:00 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Peter
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 13
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.

Yup, my figures were based on my previous shots on the 20D. Rarely I shoot
lower than 24mm, however I am also considering a 10-22 for certain shots I
just can't get with the 24-105. As I said, wide angle shots are rare for
me, however I do like certain wide angle shots as they can be great for
certain photos.


"This old Bob" wrote in message
...

You mean, a 38mm to 168mm, right? As long as you don't want something in
the background showing where they are, you should be fine.



  #7  
Old July 19th 06, 02:16 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Kinon O'cann
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.

I've been using one on a 5D, and it's s wonderful lens. Kind of heavy, but
not too bad. Very sharp, great color and contrast, and superb build quality.
Zooming ring is a little heavy, but not too heavy (compared to other zooms,
like the 70-200 f4 L). Go for it, you won't regret it.

"Peter" wrote in message
...
Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have
decided to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

I rarely take photos below 24mm on the 20D as most of my shots are people
shots. So, any objections?

BTW, will be used in combination with my 70-200 2.8IS and 50mm 1.4 prime.
An extra stop of light would be nice, but 24-70 is a bit bulky, and the
17-55 is over-priced and is restricted to the type of body used. Also, I
like in-camera cropping, so longer focal lengths can be an advantage to
me.



  #8  
Old July 19th 06, 05:53 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
W (winhag)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.

Popular photography mag didn't seem to crazy about the 24-105 lens

Peter wrote:
Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have decided
to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

I rarely take photos below 24mm on the 20D as most of my shots are people
shots. So, any objections?

BTW, will be used in combination with my 70-200 2.8IS and 50mm 1.4 prime.
An extra stop of light would be nice, but 24-70 is a bit bulky, and the
17-55 is over-priced and is restricted to the type of body used. Also, I
like in-camera cropping, so longer focal lengths can be an advantage to me.


  #9  
Old July 19th 06, 09:24 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Julie Meikle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 5
Default Well, Canon 24-105 it is. I Think.


"Peter" wrote in message
...
Well, after deciding between the 17-55, 24-70 and the 24-105, I have
decided to go for the 24-105 for my 20D.

I rarely take photos below 24mm on the 20D as most of my shots are people
shots. So, any objections?

BTW, will be used in combination with my 70-200 2.8IS and 50mm 1.4 prime.
An extra stop of light would be nice, but 24-70 is a bit bulky, and the
17-55 is over-priced and is restricted to the type of body used. Also, I
like in-camera cropping, so longer focal lengths can be an advantage to
me.

Good choice I think. It is a lovely lens.

I also have the 10-22 as I do landscape stuff too and they complement each
other well. The 24-105 really is great, good colour, sharpness and, although
L lens weight , that feels reassuringly robust. Quality!


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Using Canon 70-200L F2.8 with X2 Converter Bill Hilton Digital Photography 7 October 24th 05 11:27 PM
Using Canon 70-200L F2.8 with X2 Converter Bill Hilton 35mm Photo Equipment 7 October 24th 05 11:27 PM
FS: Canon Eos Elan II System---MINT! Jeff K 35mm Equipment for Sale 0 May 2nd 04 09:54 PM
FA Canon EOS bodies, "L" Lenses, access... J&C 35mm Equipment for Sale 0 December 20th 03 04:28 AM
TRADE canon for canon gene 35mm Equipment for Sale 0 November 1st 03 06:26 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.