Canon 24-70L or 24-105L
- Started
- Last post
- 17 Responses
- graphiknature
I'm doing some research on my next lens for my Canon 5d Mk I. I currently have a 50mm f/1.4. I mostly shoot landscape, architecture, and portraits. A lot of my shots are in low light and I was wondering what people here are using. I know the 24-70 has a larger aperture and is faster and is also more accurate at 24mm. I know the down fall is that it's heavier and I heard it is a bit soft wide open. I originally had my eyes set on this lens but i have heard the 24-105 is something I should consider since it has image stabilization. I understand that the IS doesn't really matter if you are shooting something that is moving, so i was wonder what peoples thoughts are. Please post any examples if you have them. Thanks
- ok_not_ok0
Go for the 24-70
- utopian0
I am about to purchase a Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM SLR Lens for EOS Digital SLRs
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-EF-S…
Customer photo gallery:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/custome…
- bigtrick0
The choice here is so personal and dependent on what you end up doing with it that asking all of us is going to give you a cacophonic mix of answers, none of which may actually be applicable.
It depends on whether you could use the IS and longer reach of the 24-105, or the one-stop faster glass of the 24-70. Issues with softness won't really matter unless you like to shoot wide open all the time, and then blow up your pictures to 12x18 and then spend all your time looking at the corners. I liked the 24-105 when I rented it - I am sure that the 24-70 is excellent also.
- epic_rim0
24-70, easy decision.
also, 10-22mm is fun, but pretty soft around the edges at 10mm.
- SumWurk0
24-70
Larger aperture=better choice, imho
- bigtrick0
Also:
Why don't you try renting both lenses for a week and seeing which you prefer?
http://www.lensrentals.com/for-c…
- graphiknature0
^Yeah, I am looking for a good walk around lens. I think I'm leaning towards the 24-70. I shot with it on a 1d Mark II. i just haven't had the chance to really see or hear much about the 24-105. Hopefully someone on here has used both and give me their thoughts.
- Tungsten0
If you can wait a few months the new 24-70 f/2.8L is supposed to be launched and will include Image Stabilization.
- 3x the price!ok_not_ok
- TSo the price should come off the old one?graphiknature
- mmmm... maybe only a little, that lens is pretty sweet....vaxorcist
- graphiknature0
Thanks Big trick. I think im going to go with the 24-70l.
http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/…
that link helped.
- vaxorcist0
I love the 24-70, haven't used the 24-105, but I know people who like it for weddings and events with a flash bounced off a wall....
Question: Do you mind walking around a bit, or do you like to stand and zoom? Do you pre-visualize your images then pick up the camera, or do you aim and zoom and re-think your image with the camera to your eye? If you stand and zoom and keep your eye in the finder, get the 24-105, otherwise consider the 24-70 or 24/50/85 primes....
I like the 24mm f2.8 optically more than the 24-70 at 24, and I love my 85mm 1.8. The 24 prime has less barrel distortion than the zoom.... the 85 1.8 is a total gem.... If I had the $$, I'd get a 24mm f 1.4... I'm a prime lens person, but it took a while.... yes, the 24/2.8 has noisier AF... for extremely wide stuff, I use a 20mm nikor on an adapter, as focus isn't as much of an issue anyway that wide....
Personal preference, but if you are used to the 50mm F1.4 and you like the depth of field and the ability to shoot in low light, you might find an F4 lens irritating... at 70mm up close at F2.8, the 24-70 can do pretty nice out of focus backgrounds, not sure about the 24-105
- vaxorcist0
Try renting the 16-35 F2.8, it may blow your mind if you shoot landscapes and you can get your head around really wide.... yes, it takes time to think wider, beyond gimmick wide-lens shots, but it can be great once your eye gets good at it....
Shooting a 24mm prime also forced me to think wide in a nicely disciplined way, you walk a alot more and visualize before aiming camera....
- graphiknature0
Yeah I had a 28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 when when i was still using a 10d which had the 1.6 crop. I sold after i got my 50mm f/1.4 because i never used it. I'm more used to walking than standing and zooming. I think the 24-70 may be the way to go too because I'm in NYC and the space is tight. I'll probably get some wider primes later down the road.
- 24-105L is sharper, but pretty similar to 28-105 otherwise... prime lenses are like fixed gear bikesvaxorcist
- I wonder why they don't use fixed gear bike sin the Tour de France? I mean...if they're better...Mimio
- Fixies suck. Primes are dope!graphiknature
- ArmandoEstrada0
24-70mm no question....
- OSFA0
I've used both, and for some reason, the 24-105 seemed better for me.I hate when I get this answer, but it is true... it's up to personal preferences... altho, I would listen to the guys ^ since they know more than I do ;)
- raf0
I've been planning to buy the 24-105. I have a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 now and I wish it had more range and IS.
I actually use 17-40 as a walk-around travel lens.
When I want a fast lens, I'm using a prime anyway.On the 5D MkII the IS is not that relevant though - the high ISO makes up for it.
- inv0
I have the 24-105mm and of all my lenses this is the one with the most usable shots. Something magical about this lens =)
- sherm0
since I got my 5dmk2 I have shot with the 24-105. I like it. Its a good all around lens.
In low light, its a bit of a bitch but when you crank the ISO it makes up for it.
The only lens I really feel I need at the moment is the 70-200 2.8L.
Here are some shots with the 24-105
- regardless of zoom or prime, it helps to see the shot before you take it.sherm