synth19

I can't seem to decide on:

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8 L

or

Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS

On one hand, the IS is nice.... but the the full extra stop on the 24-70 makes it very appealing. In your opinion, is faster>IS? Having a prime with no IS and a wide without IS seems OK. I don't use my kit lens (with IS) that much to determine the importance of it.....

Context: low light shooting, general walking around, car photography, family events (various lighting situations).

jupitersolo

With your context...the 24-105 is what you want. It will give you the extra reach you'll need. It's a great walk around lens and you don't have to be right on top for family events.

The 24-70 will be sharper, but it won't really be missed.

wndrlst

There's some discussion here. https://acurazine.com/forums/showthr...353360&page=24

I had a similar dilemma - I looked at both of those, as well as the 17-55. I ended up going with the 24-105. I loved it up until the moment I listened to it bounce off the side of a cliff several times on it's way to an honorable death.

Anyway, I liked it enough that I replaced it instead of choosing one of the others. I think it definitely boils down to what focal lengths you shoot most often. If you never use the long end, go for the extra stop and the slightly sharper lens. If you use the long end, buy the 24-105. It's plenty sharp.

synth19

Any links to pics @ the same focal length that compares both lens? I would love to see the quality in comparison.

Billiam

I think the 24-105 is also weighs about 1/3 less than the 24-70. Not a trivial consideration for a walk around lens.

wndrlst

I don't have any to the 24-70, but here's a link to a full-size shot from the 24-105. Taken at 105mm and f/4, so remember, most zooms soften at the extremes of their focal lengths and apertures. Scroll over to the eyelashes for the focal point.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/moxieph...49733/sizes/o/

Plenty sharp!

wndrlst

Ah yes, I meant to mention the weight differential, as well.

synth19

I need a login to access this?

synth19

haha! My top three choices were

Canon EF 24-70 f/2.8 L
Canon EF 24-105 f/4 L IS
Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS

But I narrowed it down to the L Lens'

wndrlst

Shoot, I was worried about that. I have it filtered where only "friends" can view and download the full size. Do you have a flickr?

synth19

^ no, maybe I should create an account?

wndrlst

Duh. You have an SLR and post in AZ's C&P with no Flickr account? I think that's a bannable offense. Even for someone of your elevated status.

synth19

Dan Martin

I love the 17-55 f/2.8 IS but all three options are excellent. I will keep the 17-55 as long as I have a body that it will work on because I like it that much. It's never let me down and like the focal range better on a crop body than the 24-xx range. I wasn't blown away by the wide open performance of the current 24-70 f/2.8 when I had one, but it's a workhorse of a lens that has made a lot of photographers a lot of money over the years.

That being said, I'm sure a new 24-70 f/2.8 IS is on it's way soon. It will be a "must have" lens for many pro photogs.

synth19

With this said, would the 24-105 @ 70mm look better then the 24-70 @ 70mm?

dom

Isn't the 17-55 not an 'L' because its an EF-S?

jupitersolo

There isn't going to be a very big difference in these two lens as for as IQ. The 24-70 has the edge but it isn't much. The thing is; what FL do you need? Do you think you'll need longer if so than get the 24-105, if you want to make a it a more specific lens than get the 24-70.

Check of my flickr, I shot the Cherry Blossoms with the 24-105, I brought three lens but never took the other two out of the bag. Also the IS allowed me to do some handheld water work.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/reverse...7604325291993/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/reverse...7604345952694/

jupitersolo

Yes

synth19

I want to be flexible. BUT... I like the fact the 24-105 gives me a bit more range and has the IS. If the 24-70 edge in image quality is minimal, then it seems like the 24-105 is the obvious choice.

jupitersolo

Unless you really need to pinpoint your work or subjects the 24-105 is a good lens, the extra 35mm it gives is pretty valuable to just about everyone that has it. The stigma of the 24-70 is that it's 2.8.

LIPPSTUH

iTrader: (2)

hmmm i like the 24-70mm f/2.8 just because its 2.8

Dan Martin

I don't know if you've seen this yet, but it's a pretty handy comparison tool for lenses: http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...0&LensComp=101

You can change the focal length and aperture to see exactly how they stand up to each other.

Mizouse

wouldnt a 24-70 stopped down to f/4 be sharper than a 24-105 wide open at f/4 in the 24-70mm FL range? ?

Dan Martin

Try it yourself in the above link! The quick answer is yes/no/it depends.

PixelHarmony

Canon EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS

^^ Gets my vote. Though I'm not on the Canon platform anymore, if I were to buy a zoom lens (I'm all prime as of now) it would be a 17-55 nikkor for my D300.

I'm guessing you aren't using a full frame body which in that case don't let the non "L" designation throw you off. Have the best of both worlds with a 2.8 f and IS!!

But if I had to choose between a 24-70 and a 24-105 I'd choose a 24-70 over the 24-105. I'm huge into subject isolation (bokeh) and shooting available light.

Mizouse

hmm.. a quick comparison of both lenses at 24mm at f/4, the 24-70 2.8 clearly looks sharper.

jupitersolo

Yes it is a sharper lens, the main thing a picking out a lens would be the IQ, but also what are you going to use it for.

Dan Martin

I think generally, you're going to find that most f/2.8 or faster lenses are going to be better at f/4 than a lens that has an f/4 max aperture. It's certainly not the case for all lenses though, especially when comparing lenses of different designs or from different manufacturers. Just for fun, try the 70-200 f/4 IS at 70mm vs the 24-70 at 70mm or the 24-105 at any overlapping focal length. The inherent design of the lens makes more of a difference than the maximum aperture.

jupitersolo

Let me bring up just one other issue.. the quote is from another froum about the lens or lenses that had driven them nuts.

Dan Martin

There's so much more to a lens than absolute sharpness or IQ. Go with the one that fits your style and will get the shot at the end of the day.

deltaboxxx

iTrader: (1)

i had a convo with srika on his club thread about these lenses,he shoots with the 24-70 on his club pics so those are a good example,he loves the lens but i keep getting more reccomendations for the 24-105,im also interested in one of these 2 lenses.

jupitersolo

Rubin has spoke about that lenses much here as well, he misses the 71-105 part of the 24-105 that he sold to get the 24-70. But he seems to have adjusted well to it, it was hard for him the first couple of weeks he had it.

Osamu

I was kinda considering between these two, but might go prime instead of either.

but when I was considering them, I really wanted both, but found there were cheaper alternatives to the 24-70 2.8 whereas really there is no cheaper alternative to the 24-105 (possibly the 28-135, but that is pretty different). I was leaning towards the 24-105, cause for me a walk around zoom would probably get those most use as a travel lens, and it is lighter, smaller, and has a wider range.

On the rare occasion i might actually NEED a fast lens, I could either go prime, or use my sigma 24-60 2.8 for cheap, or if I had a little more money, pick up a sigma 24-70 2.8 hsm due out in the new year.

synth19

This has to be one of the most difficult decisions! After reading TONS of threads on these two, there seems to be two "camps." One of my friends sold his 70-105 and picked up a 24-70, he mentioned that the 24-70's quality is "MUCH" better. I value this guys opinion since I have personally seen his shots, hence, my dilemma!

So I'm torn and not sure if I really need the IS. How does this lens perform "hand held" in daytime use, and regular night time room lighting (close to low lighting)? I'm going to practice with my prime and wide tonight to see how i do WITHOUT IS.....

Is it possible to use this lens in low light WITHOUT flash and tripod (and have decent results)? I know this is user specific and skill, but in general, what are your thoughts? thnx!

jupitersolo

It's not really the IS for the 24-105mm, it's the reach. Do you need the reach? If not, get the 24-70mm. Rubin did a lot of great shots with the 24-105 at the club, and he's still doing it with the 24-70mm.


It's about the reach, I think it's hard for you to say, you haven't had your set up that long.

waTSX

I can tell you from experience that IS is really valuable. Once you use it for an extended period of time, it's hard to do without it. It's not perfect for all situations, like action shooting, but it is invaluable for 80-90% of your other shooting situations.

The tough call for you is whether or not you need that wider end the 24-70 will give you, not pure IQ. I think between the two lenses you are considering, you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference between the two lenses in printed output.

jupitersolo

That's why I keep saying, "what will you use it for?"

waTSX

Yep, I know, I'm just reiterating and wanted to mention how good I think IS is. People get pretty wrapped up in the whole image quality thing. In this case, Synth is dealing with two L lenses, and the IQ is going to be excellent in either case.

And actually, I was wrong about the wide end. It's the same for both lenses. It comes down to the extra stop. Personally, while I love constant aperture f/2.8 lenses, I would probably go with the 24-105. Between these two lenses that one offers the best overall range, and it has the IS, plus it's lighter to boot.

synth19

Great feedback guys, I just had an epiphany... maybe I should keep my 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS and then get the 24-70. I can use the 28-135 as my general lens for family situations and that kind of thing... when I do shoots (and will probably always use a tripod), I can then bust out with the 24-70... and practice with/without the IS in the interim... I would only get $250 anyways for my 28-135.. thoughts on this plan?

jupitersolo