24/70 or 24/105 Canon Lens

[Znut Reefer]

Ok. I'll be ordering my Canon 30D camera body tomorrow along with a Canon 100 macro lens.

I also want to get either a 24/70 lens or the 24/105. And of course I can't decide between the 2. I wanted to hear what some of you think that owns either one of these lens and regret not buying the other. They both have good reveiws on B&H photo.

 

[jwedehase]

The 24-70mm has the f/2.8, which is a real jealousy creator. It also has quite the reputation for being so razor sharp. I've never had the opportunity to use it, though. I have, however, used the 24-105mm. It was certainly no slouch, but that 24-70 has one serious reputation.

I know! Get them both!

 

[Znut Reefer]

Lol... I can't afford both at this time. I'm leaning toward the 24/70.

 

[GuOD]

2.8 is worth it

I went with the 24-70... it also fits perfectly with the 70-200 hehe

 

[Blazer88]

Have you considered the 17-55 F/2.8 IS? I had the 24-105L with my 30D for a while but I didn't think the 24mm on the wide end was enough plus I wanted faster than F/4. The 17-55 gives you F/2.8 AND IS, plus it's a razor sharp lens. I don't have any experience with the 24-70L, I just know it's a brick of a lens.

 

[MCary]

This is a huge debate between Canon owners. The 24-105 has image stabalization and is longer. With IS sometime you can make up a stop difference. But only as far as sharpness. You cannot match the creamy bokeh of the large aperatures.

The 24-70L does not have IS. But it does have the f2.8. One might argue how much you need IS with such a fast lens.

I am having the same problem deciding as you are. I already have a 70-200 so the 24-70 would be a perfect fit. But I said I didn't want any more new lenses without IS. But I also said I didn't want anymore new lenses <200 mm without at least a f2.8. What to do?

For you, since its a first lens, I think I would get the 24-105 for the extra reach. BTW, the Canon 40D is supposed to come out September 20th.

Mike

 

[BlueCorn]

I love my 24-70 but it's a heavy beast. It's on my camera about 90% of the time. that being said, I'm considering trading my 24-70 & 70-200 for a 24-105 and 100-400 combo.

You really need to consider how and what you shoot. I shoot almost exclusively landscapes. Because of that I rarely find myself at 2.8. Most of my images are up around f/8 or 11.

 

[BlueCorn]

Another consideration, when deciding which lens is realizing that virtually every lens won't be at its sharpest at either end of it's aperture range. i.e. my 24-70 goes from 2.8-22 the nearer to the middle of the range you are, the sharper the lens will be.

 

[danskim]

Yes, most lenses are sharpest at f/8 and f/11.
I love my 24-70L. I haven't used the 24-105L personally, but it seems like it's a good lens. However, there is more barrel distortion with the lens and of course slower at f/4.

You have to look at the pros and cons and decide what aspects of the lens you need most.

 

[TIMMYE]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10635406#post10635406 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by znut Reefer
Lol... I can't afford both at this time. I'm leaning toward the 24/70.

Sell a kidney......and Now you can.... :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[ahuxman58]

I have and use the 24-105 alot its on my 400D all the time except at airshows, like Beerguy said :You really need to consider how and what you shoot. I shoot almost exclusively landscapes. Because of that I rarely find myself at 2.8. Most of my images are up around f/8 or 11. Your just gonna have to make a decision, dont think you can wrong with either one really, both good pieces of glass.

 

[Znut Reefer]

Thanks for all your replies.

I will need either the 24/70 or 24/105 for everyday use. And it will also be used at horse shows.
I know they are both good lens. But wanted to see what everyone else were using and if they were pleased with their choice.

Looks like I'll hold out and get the new Canon 40D. Since it has so many nicer upgrades.

 

[kwl1763]

Do you have a longer lense (like a 100-400 or a 70-200)

If so i would highly recommend the 24/70 2.8. As others have mentioned it's awesome. I have a 17-55 IS that I really like but it's not as sharp or as fast as the 24/70 mentione dabove.

If it's pretty much your only carry around lense you may want the extra length of the 100 for your horse shows and such.

 

[BlueCorn]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=10648991#post10648991 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by znut Reefer

I know they are both good lens. But wanted to see what everyone else were using and if they were pleased with their choice.

It all depends on what you shoot. Landscape, sports and portrait shooting have very different needs. In your case I think that you'd welcome the extra reach of the 105.

 

[manse]

I just rented a 24-70 for a trip to acadia national park.

It's good for landscape, but I found it way too wide for candids of the family (even at 70mm).

I'd rent them both, then decide, check out rentglass.com or ziplens.com.