Would you consider a trade for a Canon 5DmkII and a 24-105 f4L lens?

This looks like fun, and I have a few somewhat different views of rocks in my hood. These were taken at Sunset Cliffs Nature Park in sunny San Diego.

(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)


(Download)

I may be interested in the 70-200 f2.8. What would be your price for that alone? I'm in San Diego too so shopping would not be an issue.

Thanks,
Bob

Killed it! 100%

I sold my 10/22 here on UHH a few years back, when I got my first full frame Canon, a 5D mkII. I loved the lens and used it frequently on real estate shoots. Alas, it fit only on my crop sensor 20D. I purchased, also here on UHH a great equivalent, Canon's 17-35 f2.8. It's an older lens but works great. I don't believe the 10-18 will fit the full frame Canons either.

This photo is from a trip that I took this summer to Alaska, taken on a hike through the forest in Denali. The lens on my Canon had lost communication with the body on the first day of the trip and I had not yet discovered that I could use it at f4.0 with manual focus. As a result, I was forced to resort to my iPhone 6. The photos from these devices are fine for social media but the sensors are so small they cannot pick up detail, especially at a distance. This is a close-up of the forest floor and I was pretty happy with the result.

(Download)

Thanks for your input.

In the interest of clarity, I thought I would update you all on my situation. My Canon 24-105L is in the shop for repair. I used my newly purchased Tamron 24-70 for shooting a corporate event last Thursday. In the low light of the event, low house lights, spot lights, stage setting for awards, the lens had trouble finding a focus point. In the lobby and outdoors for the networking, no problem. When I attempted live-view the damn thing hunted and hunted but never found usable focus (I only use live-view to shoot over the crowds in order to get a view from above). I have processed the images and about 20% of those shot on stage are unacceptably soft, I believe as a result of the lens not being able to achieve focus. I believe this is a good lens and would perform well in many situations but it didn't work for me in this one. I must say that when it did achieve focus, the images were tack sharp. As a result, the lens has been returned and I bit the bullit and spent the additional $500 for the Canon 24-70 f2.8L II USM. The warranty is not as good and it doesn't have IS but it is one of the best lenses one can buy. I'll give it a shot and if it does not perform to my satisfaction, perhaps I'll give the Tamron another chance or maybe the Tokina? Sigma?

Thanks. I will be shooting an event next week and I have ten days to change my mind. Oh, and 6 year warranty.

The stabilization sold it for me and its performance when compared to the 24-105 which I was very happy with. It is now in the shop and will be repaired prior to sale.

Done and done. Purchased the Tamron after renting and using both on a RE shoot this morning. Cost: net zero using gift CCards received for recommending the folks who installed my solar power system to friends.

Thank you all for your help. I followed the link to the video and lost a couple of hours watching them all. From what I've learned here, and read/watched on the inter webs, I believe that the Tamron will be a good choice for me. I have been shooting with the Canon 24-105 f4 for a number of years and have been happy with it (with the exception of the problem with the ribbon cable). It appears that the Tamron is a significant upgrade, and when compared with the Canon 24-70 f2.8 is nearly equal in every way, with the Tamron having the VC advantage. Though I do shoot landscapes, where the Canon's sharpness beats the Tamron at the edges, I shoot corporate events in crappy (ever changing) lighting conditions and feel that the VC will give me an added assist. I'm sorry that my question brought about some quarreling but have noticed that it doesn't take much to get that going on UUH. There is enough divisiveness in this world. We don't need to bring it down to the level of this relatively small community. Once again, thank you all. Think I'll go buy a lens.

Best,
Bob

Really? What is your reasoning?

Thanks,
Bob

Time to upgrade. My 24-105 f4 lost communication with my 5D SR at the beginning of my 15 day land/sea tour of Alaska and the Yukon. I was forced to shoot everything at f4.0 and use manual focus. All things considered it could have been worse. I'm pretty sure it's the ribbon cable as I have experienced this once before and had the lens repaired. That was good for about 2.5 years at a cost of $350. So... time for an upgrade. I stopped by my local camera store today and it was suggested that I buy the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 Di VC USD @$1,200 rather than the Canon 24-70 f2.8 L II USM @ $1,800. Is there any reason that I should not follow this advice? I shoot mostly corporate events and real estate. I'll likely have the 24-70 repaired back to factory condition and sell it to off-set the cost.

Thanks,
Bob

Another great shot Brent and right in my backyard. PL & OB resident off and on since 1964. I've taken this shot as well and like you have found it nearly impossible to get it without those annoying sightseers. Wish we could tell them to stay out until we've got our shot. Your depth of field focus is exceptional. What lens and setting did you use?
quote=BrentHarder]While at the Point Loma Lighthouse in San Diego I got to the top of the stairs and looked down....this was my view. Please download it.[/quote]