Best Travel Lens for Canon EF/RF Cameras?

Рет қаралды 16,239

Todd Dominey

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 14

@Vincent-gt3gx 4 жыл бұрын

I would use the 24 mm to 105 mm F4

@Dngrov257 7 ай бұрын

Agreed. 70MM is not long enough to be an all around travel lens. The IQ on the 24-105 maybe a little less than the 24-70, but it is worth the trade-off to get the extra reach. Also, the 24-105 has IS, which reduces the advantage of f2.8. Also, you can get sufficient background at f4 at 105MM for a nice informal portrait.

@bitpuff 6 ай бұрын

RF 24-105 f/4L is all you really need. Best compromise between focal length versatility, image quality, and overall size and weight. Grab a RF 16 2.8 for those rare occasions where you want an ultrawide; it weighs almost nothing. Grab another 50 1.8 for very low light or shallow DOF images. A 24-70 2.8 is a great lens for wedding photographers but way too heavy for a travel lens.

@ORION12346789 3 ай бұрын

Couldn't agree more. Personally I would use 35 1.8 instead of the 50 as this focal length it more convenient indoor.

@dominey 5 жыл бұрын

Something I forgot to mention in this video. Canon DOES sell a 24-70mm lens with Image Stabilization, but that lens has a maximum aperture of f/4, and its image quality isn't as good. It is cheaper though, so for some people it might be a decent alternative to the f/2.8 version; especially since it has the exact same focal length range.

@SamA-kl6pi 5 жыл бұрын

Todd Dominey the Rf lens has IS

@TheSilverGlow Жыл бұрын

I disagree. The problem with your advise is that you want 1 lens to cover all images on a trip, and sure you can get "all" the images but many images will be compromised because 24mm is not wide enough for many interiors, architecture, 70mm not reaching enough for landscapes and cityscapes, and f2.8 not fast enough for the best portraits and subject separation. I get it, you want to keep weight down, and lens changes down, but the 24-70L f2.8 limits what you can shoot. Moreover, the RF or EF 24-105L's have IS, and the 24-70L f2.8's do not! The best travel lens is the RF or EF 24-105L F4 (mark II for the EF). This is because for travel you need reach so 105 > 70. This lens mated with a fast prime like a 35mm f1.4 or f1.8 or f2, and a 16mm f2.8 prime (super small) for super wide shots will allow you to take far better images and better image quality than the 24-70L f2.8...to be clear, the 24-70L f2.8 is a great lens, and better than the 24-105L f4 however, in the real world and for travel images, you will not see any quality differences. I've traveled all over the world with just the 24-70L f2.8 and it caused me to miss a lot of shots, or if I got the shot, quality was compromised. So brining the (1) 24-105L f4, (2) 16mm f2.8 (super small), and (3) a 35mm F1.4 or f1.8 or f2 prime would provide you less compromised images, better portraits, better interiors, and better land/city scapes for the reach. And here is the kicker: Its a super light kit, and lens changes will not be half as frequent as you might imagine. I would add to bring filters, like polarizers for landscapes, and ND filters to keep the shutter speed lower so HSS flashing is not needed as much, and the ND filters will allow your shutter speed not to exceed the speed limit of your camera...the variable ND filters these days are not expensive on Amazon. Lastly, for environmental portraits, bring a flash, and a tungsten filter (they come with most flash purchases) for indoor portraits so that your shots don't have a sickly yellowish cast.

@chacmool2581 5 жыл бұрын

Agree. The EF 24-70/2.8II is a great lens, and great for travel. But...but... the RF 24-70/2.8 IS is likely now to be King of the Hill.

@dominey 5 жыл бұрын

Abu Mahendra I wouldn’t doubt it, but that lens is (last time I checked) much more expensive than the EF version. Hoping prices come down to earth by the time Canon releases a new higher-end EOS R mirrorless.