November 26, 2016 at 10:13AM


17-50 f2.8 vs 24-105

I shoot a lot of events and want to upgrade my kit lens from the 70d (which I'm using). What do u think is better the tamron/sigma/tamron 17-50 or the canon 24-105. I don't have a problem getting the canon 10-18 later as a wide angle.


You can probably get 3x prime lenses for the price of one zoom. They are generally sharper, have less distortion and usually larger F-stops. I know zooms are super convenient, but none of the ones I've tested in the sub-$5,000 category stand up to even a $300 prime (in fact, the best lens I have cost me about $50 used). I know it sounds like a hassle having to change lenses on a shoot, but it's how the pros do it and you'll probably spend 95% of your time with 28mm any way.

November 26, 2016 at 12:21PM


Really depends on what you are filming. If you are shooting narrative or commercial projects, definitely go with primes, but if you are shooting documentary/ENG stuff, pick that 24-105. You won't regret it. It will save you time when getting the shot is the priority versus rushing to change lenses and abusing them in the process/having little control over what focal length you may need. The f4 minimum on it kinda blows, but again, if its for doc/news projects, they tend to be forgiving with a little noise.

That said, I've got some really lovely images out of the Sigma 17-50, just be aware that after awhile they tend to have an issue where a piece inside breaks and jams the lens at a certain focal length. This happened to me and mine is currently stuck at 17mm :( Sigma apparently has great customer service though so when I have the time I'll be sending it in. Just hang on to all your packaging and warranty info...

I use both the Sigma 17-50 and Canon 24-105 on a GH4 and have been really happy with the results. I use them with the metabones speedbooster and that extra stop also helps. Good luck!

November 28, 2016 at 7:12PM

John Haas

I have the canon 17-50 2.8 and I love it, great all around lense for aps-c, also knowing that you have a 3x digital zoom with no loss of quality with the 70d (by croping in the sensor) it gives you enough zoom range to be covered 90% of the time. I have a 70-200 that I almost never use thanks to that. The 24-105 is great with a full frame camera but I find it too narrow on an apsc sensor.

November 29, 2016 at 4:55PM


The 24-105 is an incredible lens if you have some higher ISO levels to work with. Otherwise, this might be a little slow if you can't sometimes bump above 1250, for example - which I had issues with when I shot on DSLR's. I shoot on a C100 now, so the 24-105 is a match made in heaven. It's sometimes not quite wide enough or long enough, but that's what we get with interchangeable lens shooting (unless you wanna go with a kit lens, but those are quite slow and soft). Like others have said, if you're doing run and gun, documentary, live event shooting, then the 24-105 is what you want. It is true, what Avds said, about the crop sensor. Sigma also has a 17-70mm that might be attractive if you are consistently finding yourself in need of a wider field of view.

December 5, 2016 at 11:07AM

Ben McGinley
Producer / Shooter / Editor

Your Comment