Am I an aperture whore?
Author
Discussion

miniman

Original Poster:

30,143 posts

292 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
I find myself thinking seriously about picking up a 24-105 f/4 L as a general purpose lens, but then discounting it because it doesn't go down to f/2.8. But the 24-70 f/2.8 L isn't really long enough and is loads of cash, and I've already got a Sigma 24-70 2.8.

Is this mental behaviour? Suspect the 24-105 is actually a superb lens in all but the dullest conditions, and if I really want mega DOF then I've got a 50mm 1.8, a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8.

GetCarter

31,296 posts

309 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
Yes.

Simpo Two

92,955 posts

295 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
Well, you could seperate need from want by thinking how many times you've tried to get a shot and failed because you didn't have sufficient aperture?

(BTW I think you mean minimal not mega)

miniman

Original Poster:

30,143 posts

292 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
(BTW I think you mean minimal not mega)
Yes you're right. I think I was looking for "mega tiny" or perhaps "hugely minimal" hehe

stigmundfreud

22,454 posts

240 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
if you want short dof get the f4 and then buy a 2x close up filter from jessops for 2 quid = job done

miniman

Original Poster:

30,143 posts

292 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
Not sure I'd really want to stick £2 worth of cheap filter on the end of hundreds of pounds worth of L glass...

Andy M

3,755 posts

289 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
The Canon 24-70L is a fantastic lens smile

stigmundfreud

22,454 posts

240 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
miniman said:
Not sure I'd really want to stick £2 worth of cheap filter on the end of hundreds of pounds worth of L glass...
pah you would never know!

Simpo Two

92,955 posts

295 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
stigmundfreud said:
if you want short dof
OK OK, I give up!

ThatPhilBrettGuy

11,810 posts

270 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
Isn't the 24-105mm image stabilized? If you believe it really can do 3 stops worth (possible for static shots) it should be f1.4 as far as light is concerned. Not going to give you small DoF but as others have said there are solutions.

It's much lighter than the 24-70mm as well.

DIW35

4,205 posts

230 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
Given that most lenses are best a few stops off their widest, how often does anyone use their lenses wide open?

Simpo Two

92,955 posts

295 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
ThatPhilBrettGuy said:
Isn't the 24-105mm image stabilized? If you believe it really can do 3 stops worth (possible for static shots) it should be f1.4 as far as light is concerned. Not going to give you small DoF but as others have said there are solutions.
Note also that the VR/IS substitute for larger aperture won't give you faster shutter speeds, so if you want to, say, freeze a person walking, you won't.

DIW35 said:
Given that most lenses are best a few stops off their widest, how often does anyone use their lenses wide open?
In churches, frequently. The D200 is OK up to ISO800 and at f2.8 in a dim church I can get about 1/60th. Fine for the 17-55 handlheld but when using the 70-200 I either use a tripod or brace against something. I also have a 50mm 1.4 but at 1.4 the DOF is so shallow that I don't trust it 'in combat'.

RobDickinson

31,343 posts

284 months

Monday 26th May 2008
quotequote all
DIW35 said:
Given that most lenses are best a few stops off their widest, how often does anyone use their lenses wide open?
Typicaly? When you need to. When theres not enough light (even with bumping the ISO) or you realy want that naoprrow DoF.


24-105 is a decent lens, 1 stop slower than the f2.8, but you get 3 stops on the IS, so unless you want the narrower DoF (and better Bokeh) or need that stop of speed the 24-105 is fine.


BTW the 24-105 has a shallower DoF at 105mm/f4 than the 24-70f2.8 at 70/f2.8.

_dobbo_

14,619 posts

278 months

Tuesday 27th May 2008
quotequote all
DIW35 said:
Given that most lenses are best a few stops off their widest, how often does anyone use their lenses wide open?
Pretty much all the time I use f/2.8. mmmmmmmmm bokeh

smile

jon-

16,534 posts

246 months

Tuesday 27th May 2008
quotequote all
RobDickinson said:
BTW the 24-105 has a shallower DoF at 105mm/f4 than the 24-70f2.8 at 70/f2.8.
Important point to remember. The 24-105 is bokehtastic at 105 f4

Jenx

11,579 posts

272 months

Tuesday 27th May 2008
quotequote all
miniman said:
Am I an aperture we?
Aren't we all?

urban_alchemist

608 posts

236 months

Tuesday 27th May 2008
quotequote all
I have two f1.4 lenses and one f1.0... so I'll just shut up then :-)

stigmundfreud

22,454 posts

240 months

Tuesday 27th May 2008
quotequote all
urban_alchemist said:
I have two f1.4 lenses and one f1.0... so I'll just shut up then :-)
I have several f22 lenses I even own a Tamron

CVP

2,799 posts

305 months

Tuesday 27th May 2008
quotequote all
Yes.

HTH smile

Seriously 24-105 sounds just about right for an every day walk about lens. As it's an L you should be able to use it wide open if you need to.

As my every day lens I use the Nikon 24-85 and sometimes for street / general work when you are travelling light I wish I had a little more reach at the far end of the zoom rather than having to change lenses.

Chris

350Wedge

2,364 posts

303 months

Tuesday 27th May 2008
quotequote all
miniman said:
Am I an aperture we?
Guilty as charged....hehe

Sorry could'nt resist posting this... New 1.4x converter arrived today so obviously had to attach it to this....