canon 20-100 f4 IS L lens.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by bluewire, Mar 2, 2007.

  1. bluewire macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area, California
    #1
    Man alive I am drooling for this lens. Does anyone around here have one and can give me a brief user report on how they like it? I came into some extra cash and I am seriously considering this lens and also (to a lesser extent) the 24-70 f/2.8 (would like the longer 35mm of focal length)

    Also, if anyone wants to sell me their used 24-105mm, I'd love to buy it from you for 100 bucks :)
     
  2. Lovesong macrumors 65816

    Lovesong

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Location:
    Stuck beween a rock and a hard place
    #2
    Ummm...what? You mean the 24-105 f/4, right? And you are comparing it with the 24-70 f/2.8, right? Uhhh... $100? You mean $1000, right?
    I don't know, I'm thinking you really have no clue what you're talking about.
    If you want info on on lenses, including reviews, check out Fred Miranda's website (just google it). Then ask coherent and well-worded questions. Sorry, but that was just silly.
     
  3. bluewire thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area, California
    #3
    I was being facetious. I know its a 1000 dollar lens. Both are in fact (essentially). And yes I meant 24-105, my bad. :)
     
  4. Lovesong macrumors 65816

    Lovesong

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2006
    Location:
    Stuck beween a rock and a hard place
    #4
    Well, in that case, check out the FM forums and reviews. The 24-105 is nice in that it has longer reach, and IS. Fast glass, however is still fast glass. After deliberating on the question, I ended up getting the 24-70. It is sharp as a tack, and reviews show it as having a nicer bokeh (though that's what that extra stop would do). The downside of it is that it is heavy, but that's good glass for you. If you want a sample of a picture I took with my 5d last night just go to the Picture of the day thread (p.197), and look.
    Another thing to remember is that on a 400D, you'll have a 1.6 crop, which will make the 24-70 a 38-105, and the 24-105 a 38-168. Just food for thought.
     
  5. Grimace macrumors 68040

    Grimace

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    with Hamburglar.
    #5
    I tried both and ended up with the 24-70 f/2.8L. Fantastic quality. There are a ton of 70-200mm and 70-300mm lenses to choose from, which would compliment the 24-70.
     
  6. bluewire thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area, California
    #6
    Thats a good point Grimace. Thanks for the word.
     
  7. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #7
    I just upgraded from the 28-135mm to the 24-105 last week. The new lens is a bit sharper and has quite a bit better color and contrast. I did extensive research looking at reviews and user reports of the 24-70 and 28-105 before I bought a lens, and most people seemed to think the 24-70 was a little better, but I wanted another lens that i could leave on my camera 90% of time, and 70mm isn't enough magnification for me.
     
  8. bluewire thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area, California
    #8

    Thanks. You wouldn't want to sell your 24-70 to me for a few shiny nickels would you? They are REALLY shiny.

    i do know about the crop factor - my plan is eventually to get a 10-22mm to book end my main lens (the 24-105 or 24-70) on the wide side and get a bigger zoomer. But I've got to look out for the general multi-purpose lens first.

    In looking at the two lenses, the trade off for me is whether or not the fast glass supercedes my desire to have the IS for "holdability." Its a tough question to debate for me as I do have a lot of desire for indoor sports work (where the fast glass helps but won't really be long enough in focal length...will have to get some floor seats to some bball games hah...which might cost me a lens in and of itself)...and I do have a lot of desire to be able to use the IS creatively too

    Anyways, thanks for the word.
     
  9. bluewire thread starter macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area, California
    #9
    Hey Chasz, quick question...what kind of crop factor is on your cam? full, 1.3x or 1.6x?
     
  10. jlcharles macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Location:
    Wenonah, NJ
    #10
    The IS won't help you with the motion blur in sports. The 2.8 will help you get a shorter shutter for indoor sports whereas the 4 won't. I'm renting the 24-70 again next weekend for a tournament I'm covering along with the 70-200 f/2.8 and I really wish I could afford them.
     
  11. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #11
    1.6x
     
  12. huntca macrumors newbie

    huntca

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    #12
    What kind of shooting are you wanting to do with this lens?
     

Share This Page