Cancelled: ...

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

...

PaulR01 Loc: West Texas

I have a Tamron SP A001 70-200 f 2.8 LD AF IF DI and two tele-converters up on Ebay right now. It just gets loaned out for football and weddings to local photographers. The 24-70 interest me but I have the 24-105 version f 4 all ready. Its just not as sharp. The 50mm I could use but would need something else with it.
Here is the link to the e bay listing. https://www.ebay.com/itm/202153810066?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1558.l2649

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

PaulR01 wrote:

I have a Tamron SP A001 70-200 f 2.8 LD AF IF DI and two tele-converters up on Ebay right now. It just gets loaned out for football and weddings to local photographers. The 24-70 interest me but I have the 24-105 version f 4 all ready. Its just not as sharp. The 50mm I could use but would need something else with it.
Here is the link to the e bay listing. https://www.ebay.com/itm/202153810066?ssPageName=STRK:MESELX:IT&_trksid=p3984.m1558.l2649

I own both the 24-105 and the 24-70, both are of course f/4. The 24-70 is sharper plus it doesn't have the aperture ribbon wire issue that has popped up on some 24-105's.

Your lens isn't what I'm looking for, it must have stabilization. I often shoot in dark churches and you can't use flash, thus the need for f/2.8 but as I'm shooing with a slow shutter it must have stabilization.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Beercat wrote:

I own both the 24-105 and the 24-70, both are of course f/4. The 24-70 is sharper plus it doesn't have the aperture ribbon wire issue that has popped up on some 24-105's.

Your lens isn't what I'm looking for, it must have stabilization. I often shoot in dark churches and you can't use flash, thus the need for f/2.8 but as I'm shooing with a slow shutter it must have stabilization.

Canon does not make a 24-70mm F2.8 lens that has stabilization. Your ONLY choices for that particular lens will be from Tamron or Sigma.

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

MT Shooter wrote:

Canon does not make a 24-70mm F2.8 lens that has stabilization. Your ONLY choices for that particular lens will be from Tamron or Sigma.

You are correct .... I'm OK with:

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM Lens
Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 DG OS HSM Art Lens

The 70-200 must have stabilization. I'm OK shooting 24-70 at a slower shutter but not the 70-200 unless it has stabilization. I shoot 1/80 - 1/100 all the time with my 50mm, even during the processional and it has no stabilization. I shoot my 70-200 with IS in the 1/40 - 1/80 range at 200mm once they are standing at the platform, no problems.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Beercat wrote:

I own both the 24-105 and the 24-70, both are of course f/4. The 24-70 is sharper plus it doesn't have the aperture ribbon wire issue that has popped up on some 24-105's.

Your lens isn't what I'm looking for, it must have stabilization. I often shoot in dark churches and you can't use flash, thus the need for f/2.8 but as I'm shooing with a slow shutter it must have stabilization.

Canon has a number of fast wide primes that do have stabilization (24 f2.8, 28 f2.8, 35 f2 etc).

My thought is that the OP may have better luck selling all the lenses outright (on UHH) and repurchasing the faster glass separately rather than waiting for a trade.

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

TriX wrote:

Canon has a number of fast wide primes that do have stabilization (24 f2.8, 28 f2.8, 35 f2 etc).

My thought is that the OP may have better luck selling all the lenses outright (on UHH) and repurchasing the faster glass separately rather than waiting for a trade.

I'm in no rush .... I have the 50, 85 and the 100 fast primes for low light situations but prefer to use my zooms when possible but if I still use my fast primes this year no big deal.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Beercat wrote:

I'm in no rush .... I have the 50, 85 and the 100 fast primes for low light situations but prefer to use my zooms when possible but if I still use my fast primes this year no big deal.

Yep, I have found both the 85 f1.8 and 135 f2L to be useful in dimly lit venues, but I certainly understand the convenience of a zoom for weddings - you'd have to tear my 70-200 f2.8L IS from my cold dead fingers 🤗. Good luck with your trade.

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

Beercat wrote:

I own both the 24-105 and the 24-70, both are of course f/4. The 24-70 is sharper plus it doesn't have the aperture ribbon wire issue that has popped up on some 24-105's.

Your lens isn't what I'm looking for, it must have stabilization. I often shoot in dark churches and you can't use flash, thus the need for f/2.8 but as I'm shooing with a slow shutter it must have stabilization.

The 2.8L 24-70 does not have IS. I own it

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

foathog wrote:

The 2.8L 24-70 does not have IS. I own it

Read closely .... the two sentences refer to separate lenses ;)

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

Beercat wrote:

Read closely .... the two sentences refer to separate lenses ;)

So your not looking for the 2.8 24-70??? perhaps you could have explained it better,

foathog Loc: Greensboro, NC

This was NOT your original post. the original was quite confusing. That's what I was trying to answer. I don't always have all day to read all of the following posts. If you had written it this way at first I could have made sense out of what you were talking about.

Beercat wrote:

READ: br br "I do wedding photography and so... (show quote)

Beercat Loc: Central Coast of California

foathog wrote:

This was NOT your original post. the original was quite confusing. That's what I was trying to answer. I don't always have all day to read all of the following posts. If you had written it this way at first I could have made sense out of what you were talking about.

But you have time to complain and then go read and then respond ......... it's called being a troll.