Canon 24-70mm L or 24-105mm L

9

99hjhm

Messages
283
Name
James
Edit My Images
Yes
I know this question has been asked a few dozen times before but I would like to know a few extra things from personal experience...

1. The 24-70 doesn't have IS, is it needed on such a lens? I have never felt a need on the 10-22 which I use alot, guess the 24-70 is much heavier?

2. Is the 24-70mm a better build? More robust design?
 
Don't think there is any difference in build both are L series lenses and well weather proofed.

I guess the difference is which will be of more use to you. the 24-105's extra length and IS or the 24-70's wider aperture F2.8 vs F4.

Personally I think IS is valuable on the 24-105 lens. I use it all the time (unless on tripod).

The other advantage of the 24-105 is it is that bit cheaper.

You makes your choice and you pays the money. BOTH are excellent lenses. I opted for the extra length and IS option (but then again I am a cheapskate).
 
i bought the 24-105 over the 24-70 for the IS and the fact it is nearly half the price
 
downs523 said:
i bought the 24-105 over the 24-70 for the IS and the fact it is nearly half the price
Click to expand...

I had the 24-70 (mk1), sold it and bought the 24-105. I can't say I've missed it too much as I don't shoot that much in low light (where I would presume the "brick" had the advantage).

Regarding build quality, the 24-70 definitely feels better built - due in part to the weight - and of late I've heard stories of the red ring falling off the 24-105. Needless to say I'll be being extra careful with mine!
 
Last edited:
What are you going to shoot?
If you are into weddings, portraits or low light stuff, then the 24-70 should be your jobbie. If you only shoot in good light and landscapes then the n24-105 is the ticket.

The 24-70 will give you better bokeh, but otherwise save some cash.
 
If you are looking at new, then you'll be getting the new mmii version of the 24-70 which is still commanding a premium at the moment - is around 3 times the price of the 24-105IS. The mkII version seems to be getting very good reviews.

The mkI is available 2nd hand, and seems to be going for around the £750-800, which is still more expensive than the 24-105 new or 2nd hand.

Do you feel the extra reach of the 24-105 would be beneficial to you ? If I was choosing then I'd probably opt for the 24-105 for the extra reach ...

Just to throw another option - the new 24-70 F4 IS ?
 
I'm getting more confused.

I think I would like the extra reach. I want the lens as a general purpose lens for my 1D3, it will get used out in the rain though.

I wont be buying new, I'm going towards the 24-105 due to the reach, IS and cost. If I feel the need for f/2.8 or some more weight I'm sure I could sell on for little loss.

Thanks.
 
99hjhm said:
I wont be buying new, I'm going towards the 24-105 due to the reach, IS and cost. If I feel the need for f/2.8 or some more weight I'm sure I could sell on for little loss.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Seems the best option - I don't think you'd be disappointed with the 24-105, but as you say, you could always sell on for a minimal loss
 
I love the 24-105. It is my favourite on my 5D2 and serves for most of my landscapes.
 
99hjhm said:
I know this question has been asked a few dozen times before but I would like to know a few extra things from personal experience...

1. The 24-70 doesn't have IS, is it needed on such a lens? I have never felt a need on the 10-22 which I use alot, guess the 24-70 is much heavier?

2. Is the 24-70mm a better build? More robust design?
Click to expand...

Are you asking about the new 24-70 mark2?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top