Short zoom lenses

[Nathaniel]

I find that I am requested more and more to take photographs without flash,inside churches,concerts and similar, esp now that I can use the high ISO tolerance of my 6D. That being said my thoughs are wandering from the Canon 50mm f1.4 or Sigma 50mm f1.4 to a short zoom like the sigma 24-70mm f2.8. This would give me the leeway to zoom in and out without walking around with a fixed prime like the 50mm lens to get the image I want. I have not yet committed to buying anything as I must be sure that what I buy will be something I will use; I am not one to buy something just because it "might" come in useful some day. If I find I don't use any equipment for a period of time I'd rather sell it rather than keep in my camera bag or wardrobe. I must of course mention that image quality is a premium- a "must"!

I would appreciate the thoughts of members on this matter.

Many thanks

Nathaniel

[DrJon]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Will add quite a bit of weight though... BTW have you considered the Sigma 18-35 f1.8 for the 60D (28-56 equiv)?

[Mightyquin]

Re: Short zoom lenses

A fast wide to short tele zoom is definitely convenient but large and heavy on FF.

You could consider a couple of fast primes as an alternative. I'd consider whether you need to change focal length quickly and often, or if you usually have time to change your position and/or make lens changes.

[Mightyquin]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Just noticed you have the 24-105 f4 - with the IS and high ISO isn't that enough? You'll only gain one stop with a faster zoom.

[colin C]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Just noticed you have the 24-105 f4 - with the IS and high ISO isn't that enough? You'll only gain one stop with a faster zoom.

My thoughts exactly.

Although I have the 24 - 70mm and it is one of my favourite lenses, you wouldn't like the extra weight - 950g against 630g on your 24 - 105mm. Also, if I already had a 24 - 105mm in my bag, I very much doubt I would be looking to trade it for a 24 - 70mm. Much as I consider the 24 - 70mm to be better, it's not by a big enough margin to lose money on.

If faced with a situation where the client requested that you refrained from using flash, I would ask if they wanted good quality photographs, or just snaps? If good quality photographs, I would mention that contrary to popular belief, flash light doesn't blind people and suck the colours out of paintings and stained glass, but it is necessary to adequately light the subject without the client going to the expense of hiring in flood lights.

If that is not acceptable, then the client is most welcome to use their iPhone to take any snaps required.

[Riggers]

Re: Short zoom lenses

The Canon EF-S 17-55 2.8 is not too heavy and very good IQ and a used one can be picked up for a qood price. This gets you a fast and great quality Canon short zoom so appears to tick all of your boxes but the rub is that it's EF-S so will only work on your 60D and not your 6D. Since the 6D handles noise and low light much better than the 60D this kind of rules this out as a sensible option for you - so forget all of that rambling lol.

For FF my preference would be the Canon 24-70 2.8 followed by the 24-105 but as Colin says that presents weight issues and the 24-70 is very pricey too.

[Nathaniel]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Thanks folks for getting back so quickly. I have no intention of trading my 24-105L which is my favourite lens. I was looking for a lens with something like the 50mm f1.8 or f1.4 i.e in the zoom lines. I have been using,so far the nifty fifty (f1.8) lens quite successfully but I have been forced to move around, ever so quietly to get some acceptable images. I agree that flash light isn't blinding as often thought but it tends to disturb the performance. I only wondering whether I could have taken a better picture for example from the one I have posted here- taken with the 6D +f1.8 (50mm) and without flash.

[colin C]

Re: Short zoom lenses

At those distances, I am not sure you would have got any benefit from flash. If anything, you would have ended up with a darker background, so under the circumstances, you have done the best you could.

Just a few minor tweaks in post editing would have concentrated attention on the subject and I have taken the liberty of adding my version of your shot.

[Coryman]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Nathaniel, I have a Canon 50mm 1.4 surplus to my requirements, having picked up a 50mm 1.2 at a very silly price.

It have been on the camera just once and just. I have not advertised it because I actually want it to go to someone that will use, and get the best out of it and. It will be at a very good price to the right person rather than sole on eBay or the like to someone just after something cheep.

PM me if you are interested.

Ian

[Nathaniel]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Thanks Colin. Your edit certainly looks much better.

[colin C]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Only a hint, just toned down a few distractions.

[Cyberman]

Re: Short zoom lenses

At those distances, I am not sure you would have got any benefit from flash. If anything, you would have ended up with a darker background, so under the circumstances, you have done the best you could.

Just a few minor tweaks in post editing would have concentrated attention on the subject and I have taken the liberty of adding my version of your shot.

The changes were subtle, but good. A bit of cropping and removing some distracting visuals from what I can see.
At first I felt like I was looking at a spot the difference.

But being serious, it's those small subtle changes I need to learn to make to my images.
Posted a few images here and had similar feedback, and as soon as people make the comment it seems obvious.
Hopefully in time and with more advice I will start making the changes automatically.

[Nathaniel]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Thats the difference between an "expert" and a hobby photographer like me! I have noted the subtle changes made by Colin.

[colin C]

Re: Short zoom lenses

as soon as people make the comment it seems obvious.

You soon learn to "see" those things. Sometime we are so caught up in our shot that we miss the obvious and often it is useful to show the shot to a non photographer for their comment. Mrs C can be pretty good at spotting the obvious ......... and everything else besides!

I was very pleased to add a little Photoshop polish to Nat's shot, but it only took a couple of minutes. With a larger file and a little more time I would have taken out a few more cables, stand legs and the red cable reel - which I only desaturated the colour on. Desaturation can be a pretty useful tool to stop a colourful object from distracting, such as hi-viz jackets.

[colin C]

Re: Short zoom lenses

Thats the difference between an "expert" and a hobby photographer like me!

Perhaps you should look back at some of the early shots you posted here and hobby may have applied then, but certainly not now. The Harpist shot would have taxed many of us, certainly without flash. It is a delightful shot taken in difficult conditions.

Post editing is the next stage in your photographic evolution. Even just a little cropping would have improved the composition and removed some of the distractions and a little cloning would have done the rest. Nothing clever like selections and layers, and even that isn't really clever ........... just drawing around a line and pressing a couple of buttons.