Luminous Landscape Forum
Equipment & Techniques => Cameras, Lenses and Shooting gear => Topic started by: sanfairyanne on January 23, 2016, 01:40:47 pm
-
I have a friend who's interested in buying my old Canon 5d2, however, he's not keen on shelling out for a 24-105mm f4 L lens. I don't know anything about the cheaper Canon lenses so I wondered if someone could suggest an equivalent which would still work with the full frame format of the 5d2.
Many thanks in advance.
-
Canon does have its own cheaper version of 24-105:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1081813-REG/canon_9521b002_ef_24_105mm_f_3_5_5_6_is.html/mode
-
Thanks very much.
-
I use the Canon 5D mk III, and have a roomful of Canon L lenses, from the 500mm f4.0 to the 16-35 2.8. One day I go tired of lugging a trunk-full of equipment and tried the Tamron 28-300 with optical stabilization. I found it quite satisfactory for everyday walkaround shooting, with adequate sharpness, contrast, etc for the majority of shots. Of course, for specific shoots where the highest quality is considered, I also bring whichever lenses I anticipate needing. However, the quality of the Tamron quite often is very close to what I get from the other lenses, except for speed.
-
Or depending on how much your friend wants to spend, there is this one. 28-135.
Has image stabilization and performs well.
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/149629-USA/Canon_2562A002AA_EF_28_135mm_f_3_5_5_6_IS.html
-More cameras than brains... Sadly it didn't take very many.
-
Craigslist may not be an option where you are, but I just checked here in the Metro Boston area and the Canon 24 - 105 goes for $500 - $575.00. And the Tamron 28 - 300 just sold on Fred Miranda for $395.00.
Merrill
-
I use the Canon 5D mk III, and have a roomful of Canon L lenses, from the 500mm f4.0 to the 16-35 2.8. One day I go tired of lugging a trunk-full of equipment and tried the Tamron 28-300 with optical stabilization. I found it quite satisfactory for everyday walkaround shooting, with adequate sharpness, contrast, etc for the majority of shots. Of course, for specific shoots where the highest quality is considered, I also bring whichever lenses I anticipate needing. However, the quality of the Tamron quite often is very close to what I get from the other lenses, except for speed.
Yes, it works -- to an extent.
But when an Opportunity presented itself and all I had was Tamron, I always regretted not having something better. For instance, check out this shot (http://forum.luminous-landscape.com/index.php?topic=107357.msg885103#msg885103). So I went back to 24-105/4 after a while.
Interestingly, I went through a very similar route after I essentially switched to Sony a6000 due to size/weight/AF(yes!) considerations. First, I used to use 18-200 LE as a walkaround lens, but last year realized I'd be better off with Zeiss 16-70/4 as, even when I do need reach, crops from it often look better than uncropped shots from 18-200. It just gives you 24Mp of good pixels.