Which lens? 24-70mm or 24-105? - DPChallenge Forums

Fisher Price Kid-Tough Digital

12/13/2006 05:43:31 PM · #1

CANON EF 24-70mm F2.8L USM
Or
CANON EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM LENS

I know there is a similar thread to this but i'd like one for my specific needs.

I'll be using them for portaits and weddings.

I'd like the added reach of the 24-105 but think the 2.8, of the 24-70, would outweigh that somewhat, but then would the IS of the 24-105 bring it back equal?

I'd like peoples thoughts.
After all it's an awful lot of money to spend.
Thanks very much.

LalliSig

12/13/2006 05:44:48 PM · #2

I always say go for aperture over reach and IS but that´s just me, I love big apertures.

Canon EF 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6 IS USM

12/13/2006 05:45:21 PM · #3

Me too.

xstream

Canon EOS-40D

12/13/2006 05:46:22 PM · #4

I've never got to play with the 24-70, but I do have the 24-105 and I can say it is a great lens. Really the only thing that would make it better would be f/2.8. The IS is great if YOUR the person moving, but if its your subject moving the IS does no good.

For weddings with dim light I'd say get the faster lens myself.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

12/13/2006 05:54:27 PM · #5

I think you'd have a hard time finding a better lens than the 24-70mm f/2.8 - the added couple of stops are so important in creative DoF shots in portraits and weddings. The optics in the 24-70mm are a touch better than the 24-105mm too from what I've read. Doubt there is a better lens made in that focal range either.
I haven't used or had a chance to play with the 24-105mm, but have used the 24-70mm, and it will be in my equipment list when the funds are there.

Message edited by author 2006-12-13 17:56:00.

violinist123

Canon EOS-6D

Olympus 40-150mm f/2.8 PRO M.Zuiko

12/13/2006 05:57:48 PM · #6

I've played with both lenses. Decide if you want F2.8 or not, then buy. That's it. I went with the 24-105.

kirbic

Canon EOS R5

Canon RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS

12/13/2006 06:04:50 PM · #7

Although the IS on the 24-105 will gain you significant ground on the long end of the 24-105, on the short end, it's of little benefit for live subjects. The f/2.8 is of more value. The 24-70 also has much less distortion at the wide end, a fact that's often overlooked. Still, neither of these lenses are ver wide at all on an APS-C camera. If you go with a lens in this range, you'll want something wider for groups, and you'll also want a fast 70-200 class zoom.

Brad

Olympus OM-D E-M1

12/13/2006 06:09:45 PM · #8

Another consideration is durability.
Take a mishap/fall with either lens. My money is on the non-IS lens coming out OK.
IS systems do add a touch of fragilility to the equation.

Message edited by author 2006-12-13 18:10:00.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

12/13/2006 07:11:41 PM · #9

Thanks guys.

I like the sound of the IS but i think the F/2.8 is just too good to turn down.
Anyone else?

NstiG8tr

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

12/13/2006 07:15:43 PM · #10

Get both!!!

fotomann_forever

12/13/2006 07:32:27 PM · #11

Originally posted by NstiG8tr:

Get both!!!

LOL!

If it were my choice, I'd take the 2.8 over IS and longer reach myself. Get the 24-70 and perhaps a 70-200 later.

Message edited by author 2006-12-13 19:33:05.

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/15/2006 02:55:17 PM · #12

Ok so i'm heading for the 24-70mm F/2.8L, anyone else have anythoughts?

Hidden bump

jemison

Canon EOS-5D Mark III

12/15/2006 03:18:15 PM · #13

Well, I'm going through the same quandry. I do an occasional wedding, but mostly not. However, I have an added dilemma in my present lens assortment. I have a 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 which I am looking to replace. At the upward range from that I have a Canon 100mm2.8 and the wonderful Sigma120-300mm2.8.

Obviously, the 24-105 would fill in very nicely for me. It is the 2.8 thing that makes it a hard decision. Plus the fact that the 24-70 would leave me with a "zoom gap". Most of my wedding shots are with a flash. I'm thinking that for the very few times where it isn't allowed I could get by with my 100mm (I've already gone this route successfully once) along with the venerable 50mm1.8 (which I don't have but easily could get).

A friend, who has many Canon "L" lenses, including both the 24-70 and the 24-105 has recommended the 105. That is probably the way I'll go. If I find I really need the extra one stop I can always sell it for darn near what I paid for it.

robs

Canon EOS R6 Mk II

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

12/15/2006 03:31:58 PM · #14

You really have to figure out who is moving more - you or the subject. If it's you then the IS is probably more useful and if it's the subject then faster is better. Also the f4 is lighter the lug around, but obviously misses the really nice background blur (not using the B word cause too many meanings).

Personally, I am trying to resist buying the 24-105 while the rebates are happening :-o) I use fast primes for portrait stuff mostly (just picked up the 50f1.4 in fact), so for me the IS would be more useful for a walk-around type of lens.

Both is a decent option obviously :-) otherwise wait for them to put IS on the f2.8 or the body :-)

Edit: If you plan to use a flash (wedding stuff) then IMO I would probably hit the 24-105, since the flash will freeze the moving subject mostly (not fool proof).

Message edited by author 2006-12-15 15:33:05.

Ecce_Signum

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L USM

12/15/2006 03:44:27 PM · #15

imho (tho never shot a wedding) swop a 17-40/4 and a 70-200/4 or 2.8 on one body and keep the 24-70/2.8 on another - sorted :)

FotoMunki

Canon EOS-5D Mark III