Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
PhasmatosOculus Junior Member • Posts: 47
Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

Hi guys,

I am after some honest feedback in relation to these two particular lenses to be used with my 1DX Mk II.

Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mk I

and

Canon 24-105 f/4 IS mk I

Firstly the Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mkII is way out of budget and I do not want to look at 3rd party brands as I have had bad experience with their lenses.

At the moment I am struggling to decide between the two lenses. The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 I can get in a good condition from £650ish onwards where as the 24-105 f/4 I can get in near mint condition for almost half that cost, around £300

This lens is for general walkabout, family photos, whether that be static portraits or chasing my little one around in a playground, on the slides etc.

I already have the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 which is amazing, but I would like some versatility.

How does image sharpness compare between these two lenses?

Does the one stop extra with no IS trump one stop less with IS?

Personal views and experiences?

Many thanks

-- hide signature --

M

 PhasmatosOculus's gear list:PhasmatosOculus's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM +2 more
Andy01 Senior Member • Posts: 4,599
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

Does this help ?

https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=101&Camera=453&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=355&Sample=0&CameraComp=453&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

I have never had the f2.8 lens, but I did have a EF 24-105L (original) for about 6 years and found it to be pretty good. The IS on the 24-105L ii is better than the Mk i.

The IS will obviously only help you with static subjects, so if your subjects are moving then f2.8 may be more useful. I like the extra range of the 24-105mm.

Colin

 Andy01's gear list:Andy01's gear list
Canon EOS M5 Canon 6D Mark II Canon EF-M 11-22mm f/4-5.6 IS STM Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon EF-M 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM +5 more
OP PhasmatosOculus Junior Member • Posts: 47
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

Hi there,

thanks for the link. I’m wanting more of personal experience and hands on rather than tech data.

i understand the IS vs a wide aperture and that’s something to consider

Just want someone with experience of these lenses and their thoughts

-- hide signature --

M

 PhasmatosOculus's gear list:PhasmatosOculus's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM +2 more
NikonHaoleboy
NikonHaoleboy Senior Member • Posts: 1,437
The Limits of Variation - Lensrentals
1

Roger Cicala of Lensrentals, October 23, 2011, comments on the original 24-70 F/2.8 L, "It definitely has some reliability issues and a lot of copy-to-copy variation, at least some of which relate to its design".

 NikonHaoleboy's gear list:NikonHaoleboy's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM +3 more
Abbott Schindler Senior Member • Posts: 2,845
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

PhasmatosOculus wrote:

This lens is for general walkabout, family photos, whether that be static portraits or chasing my little one around in a playground, on the slides etc.

Does the one stop extra with no IS trump one stop less with IS?

I've had a 24-105 v1 for 14 years (!), used on 1DIII, 1DIV, 7D2, 5DIV and now on my R5 (with a Control Ring Adapter). I thought about upgrading to the v2, but the tradeoffs between the newer and older versions didn't impress me as being worthwhile, so I'm still on the v1. I did, though, get the RF 24-105, mostly to have a native RF lens.

For you: it's more than questions of price and ±IS and 1 stop. The f/2.8 lens is bigger and heavier than the 24-105 (I've handled both), so you're talking about reasonable AF on a lighter lens vs no AF on the heavier one. For me, the lighter lens + AF wins.

For your use, as soon as I saw "chase the little one", having 105mm vs 70 sure sounds like a biggie to me.

Both lenses will work fine for your other uses, although depending on where "walkabout" is, you need to decide whether greater reach (I often shoot at the higher end) or faster max aperture (if you're doing a lot of low light work) is more important. Even then, if you're not using a tripod, f/4 stabilized probably has a slight edge over f/2.8 not stabilized.

I have no direct image quality comparison experience, but what I recall reading at the time was that there wasn't enough benefit in the 24-70 over the 24-105 at the wide end to make a difference for my shooting, and having the extra 34mm of FL at the long end is huge for me.

The last thing: the faster lens will produce a somewhat brighter viewfinder image, if that's important to you. Never mattered to me, but people who shoot a lot of low light situations may care. Your 1DX2 will be fine with either lens.

Net is that from what you say, I think that the 24-105 would be the better choice.

OP PhasmatosOculus Junior Member • Posts: 47
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

Abbott Schindler wrote:

PhasmatosOculus wrote:

This lens is for general walkabout, family photos, whether that be static portraits or chasing my little one around in a playground, on the slides etc.

Does the one stop extra with no IS trump one stop less with IS?

I've had a 24-105 v1 for 14 years (!), used on 1DIII, 1DIV, 7D2, 5DIV and now on my R5 (with a Control Ring Adapter). I thought about upgrading to the v2, but the tradeoffs between the newer and older versions didn't impress me as being worthwhile, so I'm still on the v1. I did, though, get the RF 24-105, mostly to have a native RF lens.

For you: it's more than questions of price and ±IS and 1 stop. The f/2.8 lens is bigger and heavier than the 24-105 (I've handled both), so you're talking about reasonable AF on a lighter lens vs no AF on the heavier one. For me, the lighter lens + AF wins.

For your use, as soon as I saw "chase the little one", having 105mm vs 70 sure sounds like a biggie to me.

Both lenses will work fine for your other uses, although depending on where "walkabout" is, you need to decide whether greater reach (I often shoot at the higher end) or faster max aperture (if you're doing a lot of low light work) is more important. Even then, if you're not using a tripod, f/4 stabilized probably has a slight edge over f/2.8 not stabilized.

I have no direct image quality comparison experience, but what I recall reading at the time was that there wasn't enough benefit in the 24-70 over the 24-105 at the wide end to make a difference for my shooting, and having the extra 34mm of FL at the long end is huge for me.

The last thing: the faster lens will produce a somewhat brighter viewfinder image, if that's important to you. Never mattered to me, but people who shoot a lot of low light situations may care. Your 1DX2 will be fine with either lens.

Net is that from what you say, I think that the 24-105 would be the better choice.

Thank you for the in depth reply. This has given me some great food for thought. Of course I’ll be open to other people’s opinions so I can make an informed decision.

Thank you again

-- hide signature --

M

 PhasmatosOculus's gear list:PhasmatosOculus's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM +2 more
nonproshooterdad Contributing Member • Posts: 860
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

Depend on the copy you get. They are all old lenses. Old lenses have bigger copy variance. Mark ii are much better.

 nonproshooterdad's gear list:nonproshooterdad's gear list
Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS 7D Mark II Sony a7R IV Sony a9 Sigma 150-600mm F5-6.3 | C +13 more
gipper51 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,295
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

While I don't own both lenses you mention, I do have the 24-105 f/4 and also a very good 3rd party 24-70 f/2.8 (Tokina). Just based on the merits of each lens, I grab the Canon for most outings. The Tokina comes along only if I know it's going to be just people shots at a specific destination (like somebody's house). The 24-70 is not a lens I enjoy lugging around for a day trip.

The Tokina is better optically than the 24-105, but most times it doesn't matter for me. The versatility and weight savings outweighs the image quality loss.

Overall, I tend to find 24-70 f2.8s lenses...uninspiring. At least for me anyway. Both lenses serve a purpose and I like having the option to pick which one comes along for the day. But if I had to keep only one it would be the 24-105.

-- hide signature --
 gipper51's gear list:gipper51's gear list
Panasonic LX100 II Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS 5DS Sigma 12-24mm F4.5-5.6 II DG HSM Canon EF 16-35mm F4L IS USM +12 more
1Dx4me
1Dx4me Forum Pro • Posts: 12,083
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

PhasmatosOculus wrote:

Hi guys,

I am after some honest feedback in relation to these two particular lenses to be used with my 1DX Mk II.

Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mk I

and

Canon 24-105 f/4 IS mk I

Firstly the Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mkII is way out of budget and I do not want to look at 3rd party brands as I have had bad experience with their lenses.

At the moment I am struggling to decide between the two lenses. The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 I can get in a good condition from £650ish onwards where as the 24-105 f/4 I can get in near mint condition for almost half that cost, around £300

This lens is for general walkabout, family photos, whether that be static portraits or chasing my little one around in a playground, on the slides etc.

I already have the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 which is amazing, but I would like some versatility.

How does image sharpness compare between these two lenses?

Does the one stop extra with no IS trump one stop less with IS?

Personal views and experiences?

Many thanks

i understand your question is specifically these 2 lenses so i'll try my best i purchased my 1st "L" lens in 2006, which was 24-105 f4.0, and loved it to this day. i still use my 24105 once in a while and enjoy using it. i have never had any issue with my canon gear right out of the box and never been disappointed, either, period.

canon 24-105 has a very usable FL range that is great for walk around the city, and just about everything else without changing lenses. 24105 has decent IQ, not one great, such as 24-70 f2.8 II, but not a slouch, either. i have had a lot of fun and have taken some of my most memorable photos with this lens.

i don't have the canon 24-70 f2.8 mk1 but rather mk2. if i remember correctly, mk1 had some issues, hence canon came out with mk2. so i can't comment much about mk1. however, mk2 is one of the best lenses i have owned and i have been using the heck out of it. if you shoot event, weddings in particular, you must have a mk2 in your bag. mk2 is so good that i have retired several primes in that range, must be because i dislike changing lenses in the middle of an event.

personally i stay away from 3rd party lenses as far as i can, i guess that is why i call them jellybean lenses

so that is all i can say, experiencing with those 2 lenses, although my 24-70 is mk2

-- hide signature --

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!

OP PhasmatosOculus Junior Member • Posts: 47
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

1Dx4me wrote:

PhasmatosOculus wrote:

Hi guys,

I am after some honest feedback in relation to these two particular lenses to be used with my 1DX Mk II.

Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mk I

and

Canon 24-105 f/4 IS mk I

Firstly the Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mkII is way out of budget and I do not want to look at 3rd party brands as I have had bad experience with their lenses.

At the moment I am struggling to decide between the two lenses. The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 I can get in a good condition from £650ish onwards where as the 24-105 f/4 I can get in near mint condition for almost half that cost, around £300

This lens is for general walkabout, family photos, whether that be static portraits or chasing my little one around in a playground, on the slides etc.

I already have the Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 which is amazing, but I would like some versatility.

How does image sharpness compare between these two lenses?

Does the one stop extra with no IS trump one stop less with IS?

Personal views and experiences?

Many thanks

i understand your question is specifically these 2 lenses so i'll try my best i purchased my 1st "L" lens in 2006, which was 24-105 f4.0, and loved it to this day. i still use my 24105 once in a while and enjoy using it. i have never had any issue with my canon gear right out of the box and never been disappointed, either, period.

canon 24-105 has a very usable FL range that is great for walk around the city, and just about everything else without changing lenses. 24105 has decent IQ, not one great, such as 24-70 f2.8 II, but not a slouch, either. i have had a lot of fun and have taken some of my most memorable photos with this lens.

i don't have the canon 24-70 f2.8 mk1 but rather mk2. if i remember correctly, mk1 had some issues, hence canon came out with mk2. so i can't comment much about mk1. however, mk2 is one of the best lenses i have owned and i have been using the heck out of it. if you shoot event, weddings in particular, you must have a mk2 in your bag. mk2 is so good that i have retired several primes in that range, must be because i dislike changing lenses in the middle of an event.

personally i stay away from 3rd party lenses as far as i can, i guess that is why i call them jellybean lenses

so that is all i can say, experiencing with those 2 lenses, although my 24-70 is mk2

Thank you so much for that. I have gone with the 24-105 f4 L series and purchased it for £325, near new condition, no internal dust at all (that I could see anyway).

When the time / finances are right then will look at the 24-70 F2.8 mk II.

Thank you all for advice!

-- hide signature --

M

 PhasmatosOculus's gear list:PhasmatosOculus's gear list
Canon EOS-1D X Mark II Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon Extender EF 1.4x III Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 Macro USM Canon EF 50mm F1.8 STM +2 more
MitchAlsup Veteran Member • Posts: 5,425
Re: Canon 24-70 F/2.8 vs Canon 24-105 f/4 IS

PhasmatosOculus wrote:

Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mk I

and

Canon 24-105 f/4 IS mk I

Firstly the Canon 24-70 F/2.8 mkII is way out of budget and I do not want to look at 3rd party brands as I have had bad experience with their lenses.

At the moment I am struggling to decide between the two lenses. The Canon 24-70 f/2.8 I can get in a good condition from £650ish onwards where as the 24-105 f/4 I can get in near mint condition for almost half that cost, around £300

The 24-70 F/2.8 (I) has been my main lens since 2003, I used it for 90% of my 20Ds pictures, and it now sits on my 5Ds taking lots of great pictures. There are times F/2.8 is more valuable than 2 stops of IS.........

-- hide signature --

Mitch

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads