# 24-105L and wedding samples



## George Farmer (2 Mar 2011)

I'm very excited!    

Tomorrow I get a new lens - the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS.  

I borrowed one last summer to shoot a wedding, and it's the only lens I used all day!  The image stabilisation is really useful.  Some shots were 1/10th sec shutter speed, at various focal lengths, and still pin sharp.

I can't wait to own one and get to use it for aquarium photography too!  

Here are some samples from the wedding.  When I leave the RAF, I think I will pursue wedding photography more seriously.  I really enjoy the whole process, from meeting the clients through to editing and producing the album, and it helps to pay for nice lenses!


----------



## Stu Worrall (2 Mar 2011)

really nice photos george.  Did you look at the 24-70 f2.8 when you were considering lenses?  I went for that over the f4 due to the extra stop of light (handy for dark churches!)


----------



## mlgt (2 Mar 2011)

Some great shots. I tried the sigma 24-70 and found that the sharpness was a little better when reviewed in editing.

The lens was under £500, but because I wanted a macro lens I ended up getting a Tokina lens. Worked out a better bargain due to its guarentee.

Im heading abroad in a few months so if you still after the lens I can grab it while in asia.


----------



## George Farmer (2 Mar 2011)

stuworrall said:
			
		

> really nice photos george.  Did you look at the 24-70 f2.8 when you were considering lenses?  I went for that over the f4 due to the extra stop of light (handy for dark churches!)


Thanks, Stu.

It was a tough call mate but the main issue is that I'm getting a great deal on this lens - £600, virtually new, and from a friend.

The IS is handy for low lighting.  Maybe not as good as the bigger aperture, I guess.



			
				mlgt said:
			
		

> Some great shots. I tried the sigma 24-70 and found that the sharpness was a little better when reviewed in editing.
> 
> The lens was under £500, but because I wanted a macro lens I ended up getting a Tokina lens. Worked out a better bargain due to its guarentee.
> 
> Im heading abroad in a few months so if you still after the lens I can grab it while in asia.


Thanks, Rik.

I've heard good things about the Sigma but there's always a risk of getting a bad copy - I have experienced one myself before I got the 17-70.  To be honest, I'm not too fussed on "pixel peeping" sharpness testing.  In reality, when the photos are printed, you rarely tell any difference with higher-end lenses.  More noticeable, and more important IMO, is how they handle things like chromatic aberration, contrast, colour etc.  I think most L-series Canon have the edge over most Sigmas there, but at a price, of course.

Thanks for the offer mate.  I may well take you up on it for another lens if I have the spare £££...


----------



## Tom (2 Mar 2011)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> The IS is handy for low lighting.  Maybe not as good as the bigger aperture, I guess.



This was my dilemma when I got my 24-70 2.8. That's a good price you're getting though. I'm actually finding my autofocus to be less than 100% when shooting closeups, and this is important when shooting F2.8! I haven't had the chance to shoot high quality outdoors or general shots yet, but at f3.2 up, manual focusing close up I am very happy with the quality. 

Tom


----------



## Stu Worrall (2 Mar 2011)

thats a good price for the 24-105l george so I can see why youre going down that route   Im hankering for a 50L or 85L at the moment but will need a few weddings behind me before I can get one (Got 7 booked so far this year   )


----------



## mlgt (2 Mar 2011)

mlgt said:
			
		

> Some great shots. I tried the sigma 24-70 and found that the sharpness was a little better when reviewed in editing.
> 
> The lens was under £500, but because I wanted a macro lens I ended up getting a Tokina lens. Worked out a better bargain due to its guarentee.
> 
> Im heading abroad in a few months so if you still after the lens I can grab it while in asia.





> Thanks, Rik.
> 
> I've heard good things about the Sigma but there's always a risk of getting a bad copy - I have experienced one myself before I got the 17-70.  To be honest, I'm not too fussed on "pixel peeping" sharpness testing.  In reality, when the photos are printed, you rarely tell any difference with higher-end lenses.  More noticeable, and more important IMO, is how they handle things like chromatic aberration, contrast, colour etc.  I think most L-series Canon have the edge over most Sigmas there, but at a price, of course.
> 
> Thanks for the offer mate.  I may well take you up on it for another lens if I have the spare £££...



No problem. Heading to Singapore in May for some fish show out there. 

I understand and heard a few stories about bad copy, but out of most of my friends they all agree the sigma is value for money when compared to canon, but the comment you make about pixel peeling is bang on. 

I will try out the tokina range as well as they are (I feel) under rated and love using my macro lens. Will give you a heads up when I am out there and you can give me some lens models for me to check out the prices 

@ Stu - 7 weddings is good work my friend. My wife has 1 booked so far, but planning to do more on the flowers for future instead as its easier work and less stressful


----------



## George Farmer (2 Mar 2011)

stuworrall said:
			
		

> thats a good price for the 24-105l george so I can see why youre going down that route   Im hankering for a 50L or 85L at the moment but will need a few weddings behind me before I can get one (Got 7 booked so far this year   )


Ooo....  I'd kill for the 85mm f/1.2!  Think I might upgrade the 50D before that though.  

7 weddings is brilliant!  I have 3 - including my boss's daughter - no pressure!  :?  I've also made it clear to the wife that any future earnings from weddings can go on camera gear!  We'll see...  



			
				mlgt said:
			
		

> Will give you a heads up when I am out there and you can give me some lens models for me to check out the prices


Thanks mate!  Much appreciated.


----------



## mlgt (2 Mar 2011)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> stuworrall said:
> 
> 
> 
> > thats a good price for the 24-105l george so I can see why youre going down that route   Im hankering for a 50L or 85L at the moment but will need a few weddings behind me before I can get one (Got 7 booked so far this year   )


Ooo....  I'd kill for the 85mm f/1.2!  Think I might upgrade the 50D before that though.  

7 weddings is brilliant!  I have 3 - including my boss's daughter - no pressure!  :?  I've also made it clear to the wife that any future earnings from weddings can go on camera gear!  We'll see...  

I checked the price of that lens and it was super fast focussing. If I can do my sums it came up to around £1.2k.

Since I had already spent £1k for the 60D and various lens and tripod for my wife I didnt fancy spending more. Although I do think we will go for a small focal lens like the 24-70 or around that range when we head over there. 

But what a difference the 2 different types make. 1 is USM and the other is version II which costs 10 times the amount of the same length lens. Wow


----------



## Stu Worrall (2 Mar 2011)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> stuworrall said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Cheers George, no pressure whatsoever with the boss then!  Ive got to get another 5d this year to replace my backup so will see how the L lenses go.  Ive got the 50mm F1.4 and 85mm F1.8 as a stop gap as im really getting into primes at the moment.



			
				mlgt said:
			
		

> @ Stu - 7 weddings is good work my friend. My wife has 1 booked so far, but planning to do more on the flowers for future instead as its easier work and less stressful


Cheers Rik, Im not sure about the flowers being less stressfull.  My mates wife does flowers for weddings and she always has him running around like a madmad on the wedding days


----------



## mlgt (2 Mar 2011)

Well wedding days can be stressful depending on size because the flowers need to be done last minute.
We did wedding flowers a few weeks ago and I was helping, but yes I can see it is stressful.


----------



## Dan Crawford (2 Mar 2011)

Look what just turned up at my desk.....



You're gonna love it mate, I've had it for about 4 minutes and i'm in love!


----------



## John Starkey (2 Mar 2011)

You two guys are gonna love that lens,its my main walk about lens,its good for so many different things its a cracker,i saw your wedding images on flickr,excellent stuff george,

Why do us blokes never grow up   ,we love toys at any age   .

John.


----------



## George Farmer (2 Mar 2011)

Nice one, Dan!  Great minds and all that...    Nice bokeh, by the way - 60mm macro?

Cheers, John!  Got your text too...  Will give you a bell soon mate.


----------



## John Starkey (2 Mar 2011)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Nice one, Dan!  Great minds and all that...    Nice bokeh, by the way - 60mm macro?
> 
> Cheers, John!  Got your text too...  Will give you a bell soon mate.



Ok George cool   .


----------



## Dan Crawford (2 Mar 2011)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Nice bokeh, by the way - 60mm macro?


yep, f2.8  

Just looked at your Flickr, some lovely stuff on there mate, and only gonna get better!

I love this!!! http://www.flickr.com/photos/georgefarm ... /lightbox/


----------



## Stu Worrall (2 Mar 2011)

nice one dan, super swish


----------



## George Farmer (2 Mar 2011)

Dan Crawford said:
			
		

> George Farmer said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks mate!  That's framed next to the sofa.   Janine's favourite.


----------



## mlgt (2 Mar 2011)

Blimey. I will set up a flickr account for my wife now so she can also showcase her photography skills 

I'll leave my aquatic photography for here instead lol


----------



## plantbrain (2 Mar 2011)

The 24-105 is one of my main lens.
I had a 100-400IS USM, big, heavy, hardly ever used it, good for sports, critter pics, not much else.
Sold it.

The 16-35mm and the 17-40mm are really good lens for aquariums, the extra wide is well worth the $ given what you do.
The 100mm macro 1:1 is the other lens. Pricy too.

I have 24-105, the 100, the 16-35mm.
Really all I really would ever need.
haha!! The 17-40 is well worth the $, if you do not need the faster speed.


----------



## George Farmer (2 Mar 2011)

Thanks, Tom.

I'm sticking with a cropped sensor (50D now, 7D potentially) so will probably get the EF-S 10-22mm Canon, or 10-20mm Sigma to cover UWA.

The Canon 100mm macro was the first lens I bought.  Love it.

I like fast primes too.  The nifty fifty is a great value portrait lens.  I'm thinking of upgrading to the 1.4, as the bokeh is awful on the 1.8.


----------



## mlgt (3 Mar 2011)

George Farmer said:
			
		

> Thanks, Tom.
> 
> I'm sticking with a cropped sensor (50D now, 7D potentially) so will probably get the EF-S 10-22mm Canon, or 10-20mm Sigma to cover UWA.



For your info George. We looked at the 7D before deciding on the 60D. The price was around £875 for the body. I remember I shopped around and it was cheaper if I offered cash for around £850. It was a really good price but the reason why we chose the 60D is partially because the viewfinder is adjustable which is perfect for my wife and also the the cost difference.

With the savings we were able to get a flashlight, B&W filters, bag, spare batteries, memory cards and 2 lens for around £1k. For the UK I wouldnt be able to buy all this at all, so I saved at least £300-£400 quid in Hong Kong. 

My wife really liked the 7D but for what it was worth she is still learning and unlike you guys not doing the full frame image editing etc.


----------

