Old 01-19-2013, 02:52 PM   #26
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin B. View Post
Thanks for all the great advice. I have a question about the 24-105 that so many have recommended. While I have no doubt it's an incredible lens, 24mm just doesn’t seem very wide on a crop sensor body. Anybody else using it on a crop? Have you ever found that you wished it were wider?
I use it about 90% of the time on my crop 60D when shooting trains. The other 10% is when I use my 17-40 or 100-400. Heck, I've wished my 17-40 was wider and my 100-400 longer.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 04:54 PM   #27
Mr. Pick
Senior Member
 
Mr. Pick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin B. View Post
Thanks for all the great advice. I have a question about the 24-105 that so many have recommended. While I have no doubt it's an incredible lens, 24mm just doesn’t seem very wide on a crop sensor body. Anybody else using it on a crop? Have you ever found that you wished it were wider?
Let your own experience be your guide. Take a look back through your pictures, here and elsewhere, and see how many were taken wider than 24. I appear to be in a minority here, but 24 is not wide enough for me to be my main lens on my 60D. That's why I opted for the 15-85. But in reality, your own shooting history should be able to tell you what you need.
Mr. Pick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 06:59 PM   #28
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin B. View Post
Thanks for all the great advice. I have a question about the 24-105 that so many have recommended. While I have no doubt it's an incredible lens, 24mm just doesnít seem very wide on a crop sensor body. Anybody else using it on a crop? Have you ever found that you wished it were wider?
I don't use the 24-105, but I have spend enough years with crop sensor cameras to know that 24 isn't very wide and I would be wishing it were wider every time I used it! It depends on what/how you like to shoot of course. Even now I find the 17 end limiting (so I have a 10-22 also); the 15-85 has always seemed to be a nice range for my tastes on a crop sensor body. But I don't need to spend more $$ on lenses at the moment. Were I to do a bit trip, say over to Europe, and felt limited in equipment/space, I would certainly pick up that lens and leave the current collection at home.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 07:06 PM   #29
Dennis A. Livesey
Senior Member
 
Dennis A. Livesey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,985
Default

I suggest the way to solve the issue of "what lens" is by getting lenses that cover all usable millimeters for that format. Then the issue is moot. Of course that is an ideal and limited by the painful reality of budget.

In the APS-C format I would want 10-300mm. In Full Frame I would want 16-400mm.

Having acquired the taste for the color and sharpness of Canon's best glass, I would prefer those of course.

I have currently this line up: 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, 17-40mm f/4, 70-200mm f/4 IS, and 300mm f/4.5.(Nikkor) on a APS-C camera. That 41-69 mm gap I would mentally like to fill very much but in practice has not been truly arduous. In a pinch, I have used the Canon 50mm f/1.8 to bridge the 41-69mm gap. But that broke for the second and last time.

I would like to use a 24-70mm f/2.8, instead of the 17-40mm. I would then be covering all usefull millimeters. All these lenses are very, very sharp, and fast (enough) for what I do.

Personally, while I would tolerate the 24mm on a Full-Frame, it would be intolerable on a APS-C. That was the situation when I went from a film Canon to the Canon 20D and the 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 I had drove me crazy. For wider than 24, I had to make do with a Canon 15mm Semi-Fish Eye. It was tricky to work with but it got me through until I could afford my refurbished 17-40mm.
__________________
Dennis

I Foam Therefore I Am.

My pix on RailPics:

I am on Flickr as well:

"Dennis is such a God, he could do that with a camera obscura and some homemade acetate." Holloran Grade

"To me it looks drawn in in Paintshop. It looks like a puddle of orange on the sky." SFO777

Last edited by Dennis A. Livesey; 01-19-2013 at 08:31 PM.
Dennis A. Livesey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 12:33 AM   #30
khalucha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 425
Default

You could always rent your final choices for a day or 2 and decide from there.
__________________
Kevin
Phoenix, Arizona

Webshot Photos

flickr stuff
khalucha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 07:40 AM   #31
sd9
Senior Member
 
sd9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin B. View Post
Thanks for all the great advice. I have a question about the 24-105 that so many have recommended. While I have no doubt it's an incredible lens, 24mm just doesnít seem very wide on a crop sensor body. Anybody else using it on a crop? Have you ever found that you wished it were wider?
Here's a link for what it's worth that will help in the confusion
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography...nd_lenses.html
sd9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:46 PM   #32
milwman
I shoot what I like
 
milwman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cedar Fall's, Iowa
Posts: 2,474
Send a message via Yahoo to milwman
Default

I have the EOS F4 24-105 L IS Great lens for 95% of the shooting one will do, Keep the wide zoom to fill in if need be. Truth is filling the wide without trespassing is hard to do! 24 = 38.5 mm maybe not wide but if your 20 to 50 feet away it is!
__________________
Richard Scott Marsh I go by Scott long story

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22299476@N05/
milwman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:53 PM   #33
Dennis A. Livesey
Senior Member
 
Dennis A. Livesey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,985
Default

I hate the term "crop camera." It always suggests you are losing something, that it is not as "good" as something else.

It was first used to explain the difference to 35mm film shooters as to what the smaller imager on their new digital would do. However, it caught the marketing imagination and in it's wake we have an awkward, confusing, negative connotation of a perfectly legitimate format.

Just learn look of the wide, normal and tele millimeter of each format. Don't do the confusing, unnecessary mental math of "crop camera."

BTW, the link to the site about formats looks good. I catch a read later.
__________________
Dennis

I Foam Therefore I Am.

My pix on RailPics:

I am on Flickr as well:

"Dennis is such a God, he could do that with a camera obscura and some homemade acetate." Holloran Grade

"To me it looks drawn in in Paintshop. It looks like a puddle of orange on the sky." SFO777
Dennis A. Livesey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 05:02 PM   #34
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
I don't use the 24-105, but I have spend enough years with crop sensor cameras to know that 24 isn't very wide and I would be wishing it were wider every time I used it! It depends on what/how you like to shoot of course. Even now I find the 17 end limiting (so I have a 10-22 also); the 15-85 has always seemed to be a nice range for my tastes on a crop sensor body. But I don't need to spend more $$ on lenses at the moment.
Hypothetically, if you already have the 10-22, why wouldn't the 24-105 be a better combo option for you than the 15-85? You wouldn't be overlapping AND you'd gain 20mm on the long end (not to mention have a better quality piece of glass). Or, do you already have a 70-200?

Last edited by JimThias; 01-20-2013 at 05:12 PM.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 05:08 PM   #35
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey View Post
I hate the term "crop camera." It always suggests you are losing something, that it is not as "good" as something else.

It was first used to explain the difference to 35mm film shooters as to what the smaller imager on their new digital would do. However, it caught the marketing imagination and in it's wake we have an awkward, confusing, negative connotation of a perfectly legitimate format.

Just learn look of the wide, normal and tele millimeter of each format. Don't do the confusing, unnecessary mental math of "crop camera."
I don't find "crop sensor" confusing or misleading at all. The way it was explained to me by the salesman at the camera store when I bought my first DSLR made perfect sense. He simply drew a picture of an image showing the difference between full frame and crop sensor. To this day that is how I envision it.

(taken from a google image search)



Each colored box represents a different "crop factor" as if you had cropped the full frame image. When that "cropped sensor" image is viewed fully (to match the size of the full frame image), it appears to be a crop of the comparative full frame image. (I feel like I'm being redundant. )

Last edited by JimThias; 01-20-2013 at 05:11 PM.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2013, 12:32 AM   #36
Dennis A. Livesey
Senior Member
 
Dennis A. Livesey's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,985
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
I don't find "crop sensor" confusing or misleading at all. The way it was explained to me by the salesman at the camera store when I bought my first DSLR made perfect sense. He simply drew a picture of an image showing the difference between full frame and crop sensor. To this day that is how I envision it.
Jim

If I may say as a fan of your posts these now several years and thus responding in a convivial spirit, that:

You are a very intelligent man, and are easily able to understand concepts that elude many people.

On the other hand, you are frequently baffled by what everyone else understands without any effort.
__________________
Dennis

I Foam Therefore I Am.

My pix on RailPics:

I am on Flickr as well:

"Dennis is such a God, he could do that with a camera obscura and some homemade acetate." Holloran Grade

"To me it looks drawn in in Paintshop. It looks like a puddle of orange on the sky." SFO777
Dennis A. Livesey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2013, 02:43 AM   #37
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JimThias View Post
Hypothetically, if you already have the 10-22, why wouldn't the 24-105 be a better combo option for you than the 15-85? You wouldn't be overlapping AND you'd gain 20mm on the long end (not to mention have a better quality piece of glass). Or, do you already have a 70-200?
The 10-22 24-105 is an excellent two-lens combo, no doubt. Starting from scratch, I might consider it. I do a three-lens combo (10-22, 17-55, 70-200) and prefer to have the overlap in a range where I would otherwise want to frequently change lenses, as I don't much need to go beyond 200. Were I a tele guy, then 10-22 24-105 00-400 might be an excellent three-lens alternative. I trade off length for overlap (and f/2.8 for indoor family stuff over the f/4 of the 24-105).

I would mainly consider the 15-85 for some sort of a trip where I felt constrained to one lens, although I can see its utility in my lineup, to close the 55-70 gap and to reduce lens switching on the wide end even further. But without the former need the latter doesn't add much, and I lose the 2.8 for the indoor stuff. So I haven't done it.

My main point in this thread is that I find the 24-105 to be a poor selection for a single-lens solution on a crop sensor.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2013, 03:42 AM   #38
khalucha
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Posts: 425
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
My main point in this thread is that I find the 24-105 to be a poor selection for a single-lens solution on a crop sensor.
What would you use for a single lens then? 18-135 or 18-200 or something from one of the other manufactures out there?
__________________
Kevin
Phoenix, Arizona

Webshot Photos

flickr stuff
khalucha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2013, 04:33 AM   #39
JRMDC
Senior Member
 
JRMDC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 11,202
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by khalucha View Post
What would you use for a single lens then? 18-135 or 18-200 or something from one of the other manufactures out there?
I was quite happy with my Sigma 17-70, since upgraded.

Joe did not have such a happy experience.

I don't know that I ever had a single lens solution, however, other than back in film days with a 28-105. I can't remember anymore but I think that most or all of my time with the Sigma I also had a 70-200. But for, say, business trips, I would usually do just the 17-70 (I would now add the 55-250 which is inexpensive and has IS, and small so good in the pocket).

Today, depending on where I thought I might have an opportunity, if doing a business or other trip where I might have occasion for a bit of trackside time, so I can't dedicate a lot of luggage space to gear, I might put the 10-22 and 55-250 into my carryon for max capability in a small size. But if I think it will be a daytime thing only or only a bit of trackside time, I would now lean toward the P/S (Canon S95).

I've never used a super-zoom type lens.
__________________
My RP pix are here.
My Flickr pix are here.

My commentaries on rail pictures are in my blog.

RP Photo Albums:
Cabooses
Engine Details
Farm and Train
Plumes!
Railroad Details
Signal Details
Switchstand Shots
JRMDC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-21-2013, 04:36 AM   #40
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JRMDC View Post
The 10-22 24-105 is an excellent two-lens combo, no doubt. Starting from scratch, I might consider it. I do a three-lens combo (10-22, 17-55, 70-200) and prefer to have the overlap in a range where I would otherwise want to frequently change lenses, as I don't much need to go beyond 200.

Ok, that makes sense. I didn't realize you had a 70-200.

Quote:
My main point in this thread is that I find the 24-105 to be a poor selection for a single-lens solution on a crop sensor.
Well, as someone who has been using the 24-105 on a crop sensor body about 90% of the time for train photos over the past four years, I'll respectfully disagree.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 12:27 PM   #41
Kevin B.
Member
 
Kevin B.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 44
Default

Thanks for the input. I have decided to go with the 15-85mm. The reviews that I have read rate this lens very high. And I found it in-stock at a local Best Buy on a major sale for 638 bucks (MSRP is 800). That sealed the deal. Now Iím off to try this baby out!!
Kevin B. is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2013, 03:24 PM   #42
Mr. Pick
Senior Member
 
Mr. Pick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin B. View Post
Thanks for the input. I have decided to go with the 15-85mm. The reviews that I have read rate this lens very high. And I found it in-stock at a local Best Buy on a major sale for 638 bucks (MSRP is 800). That sealed the deal. Now Iím off to try this baby out!!
Hope you enjoy it! Sounds like a good deal on it. And if you stray over toward middle TN sometime, give a holler.
Mr. Pick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 12:46 AM   #43
JimThias
Senior Member
 
JimThias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
Posts: 9,800
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis A. Livesey View Post
Jim

If I may say as a fan of your posts these now several years and thus responding in a convivial spirit, that:

You are a very intelligent man, and are easily able to understand concepts that elude many people.

On the other hand, you are frequently baffled by what everyone else understands without any effort.


I just enjoy these topics.
JimThias is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.