Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM OR???

J

jameslongstrong

Messages
101
Name
James
Edit My Images
Yes
This weekend I am buying a new 'general purpose' lens. I have 2 in mind and want to know the benefits of both as I an still undecided.

Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8 L USM Lens
OR
Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM Lens

Now my dilema is do I go for longer focal length and IS or go for a shorter focal length and no IS yet get the benefit of the constant f2.8?

I am thinking of getting the 24-70mm presently but could be swayed depending on comments.
 
When I had this dilema I went for the 24-105. If you shoot a lot of moving things the 24-70 2.8 is better for the faster shutter speed. I have been able to get some very sharp shots hand held at silly slow shutter speeds with the IS on with my 24-105, but it will not stop movement.
 
Good timing there James, as I'm facing the same decision too. I'll keep an eye on this thread for the opinions put forward.
Currently also favouring the 24-70 for the extra speed.
 
Had both twice and prefer the 24-70, I only had the 105 as it made a good light travel lens
 
If you search this forum you'll find many threads on this subject. :)
 
No-one has suggested the superb 17-55 2.8 especially as you have a crop body 50d.

However, as mentioned, there are hundreds of useful posts on this very subject - just use the search:thumbs:
 
I have the 24-105 and would choose it again - I need the IS more than the F2.8. Neither lens is by any means perfect, with the 24-105 having quite significant distortion and vignetting, the 24-70 having vignetting and field curvature.

There are perpetual rumours of a new version of the F2.8 lens, and a replacement is about due.
 
i was trying to make the same decision and was steering towards the 24-105 for the stabilization (I'd like to shoot video too), however it was my plan to get this along with a prime and a wide. Now somebody has suggested the 17-55 2.8 It might make more sense to get this and either a prime or a 70-200 instead.

I haven't even decided on 550d, 7d or 5d yet but the choices are so difficult! Does anyone know if there are vignetting issues with the 17-55 on a 5d mkII?
 
Not sure why, on a crop body, you wouldn't be looking at the 17-55. It has both IS and f2.8 and is cheaper than either the other alternatives. Whilst I love the longer length of the 24-105 on my 5D, I'd miss the 17-24 range badly on a crop. I'd also miss the IS too...
 
ah ok I didnt realise the 17-55 was out of the question on the 5d.

You mention you'd miss the IS on the 17-55 on a crop body, but am i right in saying that the 24-105 has IS too?

I would rarely take wide shots so seems a waste to get such a high quality wide lens, I'm not sure if id do better to spend more on a longer lens or a prime as i love the bokeh look and even though its 2.8 I think im right in saying this is increased with a longer zoom. For example a 70mm 2.8 would have narrower depth of field and nicer bokeh than a 30mm 2.8?
 
There's also the 28/135 IS USM although a bit slower at 3.5/5.6 max apertures.
Considerably cheaper and has a longer focal length, pretty sharp, pretty good build quality which would allow you to buy a prime or two to compliment it and have really fast lenses in addition. I'm thinking 50 1.8 and maybe 85 1.5
Three for one sort of thing.

Matt
 
tikigod19 said:
You mention you'd miss the IS on the 17-55 on a crop body, but am i right in saying that the 24-105 has IS too?
Click to expand...
Sorry, I meant I'd miss the IS on the 24-70 f2.8... The 24-105 does have IS :)

tikigod19 said:
For example a 70mm 2.8 would have narrower depth of field and nicer bokeh than a 30mm 2.8?
Click to expand...
DoF is a good subject ;)

On the same camera, for the same framing, there is no difference. Lets take a 35mm and 70mm lens. To get the same framing, you have to stand twice as close with the 35mm as with the 70mm, but the fact you have halved the distance to the subject compresses the DoF on the 35mm, so you get the same DoF. The one cancels the other out.

This doesn't hold if you change to, say, a full frame sensor as to get the same framing, you will stand closer with the same lens on the full frame than the crop. This will compress the DoF.

Bokeh (quality of out of focus bits) is to do with internal lens construction. Normally, the more expensive the lens, the better the aperture blades are which gives better bokeh. Not always though.

Beware though, you do have to worry about focusing. If you have a very shallow DoF (as an extreme something that is an f1.2 or f1.4 or even 2.8 close) your focusing system had better be spot on otherwise you'll get a blur where you want clarity....
 
24-70mm is nice glass. Test it well before buying though. QC is not the best with this lens. I think mine has centering defect (going to Canon shortly), and there are thousands more with similar issues. Check photozone.de, flicrk group, fredmiranda and google.

24-105mm does have a couple drawbacks, particularly on FF at 24mm (heavy vignette, and bad distortion). IS could do with an upgrade too.
 
IMHO, they're both good. Buy what feels better for you!

I'd use the 24-105 more, myself, but a doubling of ISO to adjust shutter speed is no issue to me. As I see it, if you need both insane ISO and tiny f/stops, then buy a faster prime, reassess how you light your scene, or accept that you're pushing the boundaries of the photographic medium.

Both lenses lose very little money if you decide to sell.
 
From my experience I would go with the 24-105 IS it also has a constant aperture of f4.0 you talking about one stop gain with the 2.8 shorter focal range and no IS for more money.
I'm guessing it would be in very few situations where you couldn't push up the iso by one stop to give you the same EV as a f2.8 ?

iso 100 at f2.8
iso 200 at f4.0 both give the same shutter speed + IS and a longer focal range :)

No brainer to me :):bonk::bang::bang:

+ a saving of £100 on current W.E. prices :):):)
 
Last edited:
Comparing the f/4 and the f/2.8 then yes - doubling the ISO at f/4 will give you exactly the same shutter speed as the faster lens wide open.

It all comes down to what you consider an acceptable ISO ceiling. I don't have one; modern DSLRs can already outperform equivalent film ASA's by a high margin. I have no problem using 6400 for a sharp shot; some people consider 800 to be far too noisy.
 
Get the 24-70, and then a 70-200 to cover the 70-105 range that is missing from the 24-70.

That way you will have two great lenses that cover 24-200 and 2.8 alll the way. ;)
 
Scarecrow said:
Get the 24-70, and then a 70-200 to cover the 70-105 range that is missing from the 24-70.

That way you will have two great lenses that cover 24-200 and 2.8 alll the way. ;)
Click to expand...

Great if your a pro making a living or selling your work or keen am and have bottomless pockets !
 
Last edited:
I had the same dillema, i chose the 24-70 as non of my lenses (upto 300mm) before had IS. I hadnt warranted the need at that point. I wasnt going to start, I shoot indoors a lot and need higher shutter speed to freeze motion rather than IS to stabalise static enviroments.

There are other points apart from the IQ both lenses suffer

weight & Bulk: Can mean the difference between taking it with you or leaving it behind.The 24-70 is wider i beleive, not sure about length so think about bag space.
 
I have the 24-105 and get decent shots from it but used a friends 24-70 last week and fell in love with it. The IQ seemed to be so much better, I remember upgrading from the 40D with a 17-85mm lens to the 5d2 with 24-105 and being disappointed at how slow it was to auto focus. I guess over time I had gotten used to it but using the 24-70 woke me up again.

Waiting for somebody daft enough to sell their's or want a swap for 24-105 + cash - still waiting :(
 
Last edited:
After using both the 24-105 and 24-70, i decided to go for the 24-70/2.8.
I used the 24-105 quite a few times and it was okay, but not fantastic.
The 24-70 blows it away.
Dont worry about IS too much, 105 is such a short length its unlikely you'de get camera shake anyway.
Dean:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top