24-70L vs 24-105L

[RCheah]

I'm starting this thread because I think there are quite a bit of interests in the comparison between these 2 lenses.

As a result of posting a WTS for my 24-70 on the B&S section, 3 persons have PM me, not because they are interested in my lens, but more on my experience with both lenses. So I thought why not start a thread and more people can join in the discussions.

There's already a Poll on the 24-105 if anyone is interested in reading.
And this is a write-up at Luminous Landscape comparing the 2 lenses.
A CS thread asking which of these 2 lenses to buy.
Another CS thread asking which of these 2 lenses to buy, and a fairly technical discussion based on lens specs.
Another CS thread asking if the 24-105 lens is really as bad as some reviewers say, with some feedback from actual users of 24-105.

A review comparing the 24-105 with 24-70 and also 28-135. (Link contributed by goering)

[sk.images]

There have been several threads on this topic already.

Simple comparison faster+shorter vs, longer+IS+slower, what else is there to say.

[RCheah]

My Personal views on the 2 lenses:

Frankly, I had a hard time deciding between these 2 lenses. I've been using the 24-70 for quite a while, and it has served me very well and I like the lens very much. So why am I selling it? Well, I'm selling it not because I don't like it, but more because of the lure of the 24-105's smaller size/weight, longer reach and IS.

I've read lots of comments on the 24-105, some love it, some don't, but there's only one way to find out, by using it. And if I ever decide to switch back to 24-70, I'm sure I can find one here in the B&S section.

What I like about the 24-70:

• F2.8 - Brighter viewfinder, better AF performance (in terms of more cross sensors on the 1D for me to use)
• Stationary Hood design - I thought it's a pretty neat design, protects the lens very well at all focal lengths. I don't like the hood to move together with the lens.
• Well controlled distortion at 24mm, can safely use to take group shots.
• Optically superb, even at 2.8.
• Looks damn pro when you're on assignment!

What I don't like about the 24-70:

• Heavy & Bulky
  I have been warned before I got the lens, but there weren't really other choices back then in this range.
  I don't really have any other complains about this lens.

Optically both lenses are superb, with the 24-105 having more noticeable distortions at 24mm, so got to watch out for that. Vignetting is not an issue for me cos I'm using on a 1.3x crop.

Bokeh? Frankly I seldom use the 24-70 at 2.8 except for low light conditions without flash. Most of the time I need deeper DOF for group shots. If I wanted bokeh, I'll probably use the 50/1.8 or 70-200.

Losing the 1 stop? Other than losing the few AF cross-sensors, I believe I can live with f4, since most of my shots in the past are f4 and above anyway.

The extra 35mm at the Tele end of the 24-105 has proved to be very useful for events. I don't like to post process my photos, so the 105 definitely allows a much tighter composition.

The IS and 105mm on the 24-105 also makes me more willing to try taking more candid shots using available light. Can't stop motion blur but neither can 2.8 in most cases. And personally, I find motion-blur more acceptable than "handshake-blur".

[tanwn]

there are too many discussions on this topic elsewhere already. There is no one lens better than the other, it all depends on your application. But based on keeper, I noticed that there are more people selling 24-70 in clubsnap but hardly anyone or infact no one currently is selling 24-105L!!! It will be a waste of time discussing which is better etc etc. There is no end to this already famous discussion, like i said, buy it depending on your application. full stop.

[kenrai]

Originally Posted by RCheah My Personal views on the 2 lenses: Frankly, I had a hard time deciding between these 2 lenses. I've been using the 24-70 for quite a while, and it has served me very well and I like the lens very much. So why am I selling it? Well, I'm selling it not because I don't like it, but more because of the lure of the 24-105's smaller size/weight, longer reach and IS. I've read lots of comments on the 24-105, some love it, some don't, but there's only one way to find out, by using it. And if I ever decide to switch back to 24-70, I'm sure I can find one here in the B&S section. What I like about the 24-70: F2.8 - Brighter viewfinder, better AF performance (in terms of more cross sensors on the 1D for me to use) Stationary Hood design - I thought it's a pretty neat design, protects the lens very well at all focal lengths. I don't like the hood to move together with the lens. Well controlled distortion at 24mm, can safely use to take group shots. Optically superb, even at 2.8. Looks damn pro when you're on assignment! What I don't like about the 24-70: Heavy & Bulky I have been warned before I got the lens, but there weren't really other choices back then in this range. I don't really have any other complains about this lens. Optically both lenses are superb, with the 24-105 having more noticeable distortions at 24mm, so got to watch out for that. Vignetting is not an issue for me cos I'm using on a 1.3x crop. Bokeh? Frankly I seldom use the 24-70 at 2.8 except for low light conditions without flash. Most of the time I need deeper DOF for group shots. If I wanted bokeh, I'll probably use the 50/1.8 or 70-200. Losing the 1 stop? Other than losing the few AF cross-sensors, I believe I can live with f4, since most of my shots in the past are f4 and above anyway. The extra 35mm at the Tele end of the 24-105 has proved to be very useful for events. I don't like to post process my photos, so the 105 definitely allows a much tighter composition. The IS and 105mm on the 24-105 also makes me more willing to try taking more candid shots using available light. Can't stop motion blur but neither can 2.8 in most cases. And personally, I find motion-blur more acceptable than "handshake-blur".

Excellent insights from your experience!

[EiRiK]

Originally Posted by cyber_m0nkey There have been several threads on this topic already. Simple comparison faster+shorter vs, longer+IS+slower, what else is there to say.

read post #3 if u wanna know what else there is to say.
not happy dont read lor, thread starter only wanted to answer questions posted to him thru PM. if u didnt PM him, skip the thread and diam diam la.

[sk.images]

Originally Posted by EiRiK read post #3 if u wanna know what else there is to say. not happy dont read lor, thread starter only wanted to answer questions posted to him thru PM. if u didnt PM him, skip the thread and diam diam la.

While what the TS wrote in #3 is certainly relavent and correct, it has all been said before.

[EiRiK]

Originally Posted by cyber_m0nkey While what the TS wrote in #3 is certainly relavent and correct, it has all been said before.

half the BS in forums are repeated and repeated anyway.
people who are not interested in the topic should keep the original thread short, by not posting "reminders" and useless comments irrelevent to the thread topic. eg post #2 and #4.

[kenrai]

Originally Posted by cyber_m0nkey While what the TS wrote in #3 is certainly relavent and correct, it has all been said before.

On the contrary, I feel that it is good for forumers to share their real personal experience and insights which there are not that many in CS. However, i do noticed that there are many “most pro use it so it must be good”, “it is definitely good but I have never used it before…” and "the reviews says this and therefore" type of postings which I think are okay but may not be as beneficial for the rest

[sk.images]

Originally Posted by EiRiK half the BS in forums are repeated and repeated anyway. people who are not interested in the topic should keep the original thread short, by not posting "reminders" and useless comments irrelevent to the thread topic. eg post #2 and #4.

Sorry, didn't realise you were the post police. At least my posts were on the TS topic, whereas yours have nothing to do it with it. Maybe you should butt out.

[jywong]

i just buy 24-105 f4 L is usm yesterday at ms color.
actually,before that i also consider between 24-70 or 24-105 this two great lens.
ya,24-70 have f2.8,more good quality of picture,great BOKEH.but the weight 1kg,i think not so suit for those will hold that over 3 hours(for me,i cant).

24-105 just only f4,and add in IS then sell around 2.1k.so some people say .
but for me,i feel IS function is very useful for me(may be i old already) for 105mm range.
last time i use nikon 17-55 f2.8,but after i check my picture,almost 85% of that use range
20mm above...so for those just will owner one lens only,24-105 is more suitable.ya.i feel that is correct,if i want great bokeh.i will buy 50mm f1.8 0r 85mm f1.8 to shoot...

now,market 1.7k u can get the second hand 24-70 already.but may be still very new lens, 24-105 still not easy to get second hand...
brother,please dont me,if ur not agree me..

[RCheah]

Actually if there are other useful resources or discussions (in CS, other forums or websites) comparing these 2 lenses, you can PM the links to me, I can consolidate and put them into my first post. This way, all related resources can be found here, and it should be beneficial to anyone who is interested.

On the point of getting 2nd hand 24-105, I agree that there are very few in the market. People who bought it first hand would want to keep it for a little while longer. Others may find the brand new price too high and just wait for a 2nd hand one. Just like few years back when I was looking for the 24-70, I could hardly find one. Nowadays, it's everywhere.

[+evenstar]

Originally Posted by EiRiK read post #3 if u wanna know what else there is to say. not happy dont read lor, thread starter only wanted to answer questions posted to him thru PM. if u didnt PM him, skip the thread and diam diam la.

in conjunction to what cyber_m0nkey has posted, i usually tell people to "Do a search" for such topics if it has been discussed before. stop wasting bandwidth by creating a new thread.

[rayphua]

Originally Posted by +evenstar in conjunction to what cyber_m0nkey has posted, i usually tell people to "Do a search" for such topics if it has been discussed before. stop wasting bandwidth by creating a new thread.

Actually I don't see anything wrong with anyone restarting any topic. Views change over time. About bandwidth, now if the forum operator finds it wasteful, let them say so.

I believe what the threadstarter did was great. It gave me some new insights, and I think Cyber Monkey did a great job too as he provided me with info that there are also various threads about this comparision. I just think that we should be more tolerant. There are lots of new readers like myself, which decides on whether to participate in conversations dependant on how friendly the forum group conducts themselves.

I'm curious, thread starter, what kind of shots do you make with the 24-70 and with the 24-105? Now I'm assuming that this has never been discussed by the thread starter before, or should I start searching first?

[astroboy]

Maybe 90% of the threads in CS should be deleted because there really isn't anything in the world of photography that haven't been discussed before.

[Danntbt]

Was using 24-70, am contemplating 24-105 now....17-55 2.8 is tempting, but may not be a wise long term...as FF is also calling....anyway see no harm in restarting topics which have been discussed....afterall this is not a private forum, everyone has the right to post as long as its not offensive or against the stated rules and regulation, sometimes, a newbie might not be as savvy with the forum structure or familiar of the topics that has been discussed...so a little tolerance goes a long way in making this a more friendly community.
If we do indeed want to avoid repetition, perhaps a topic index should be part of the forum architecture....where one see the topics on the opening web page...if that happens, it'll just be not much different from flipping thru a refernce site/book....I guess many of us are drawn to the forum because of the live reponses, and the opportunity to dialogue and communicate with others. I believe many have made friends in the process...and enemies too I guess...its dynamic and alive....not a web of archived topics....

[EiRiK]

Originally Posted by +evenstar in conjunction to what cyber_m0nkey has posted, i usually tell people to "Do a search" for such topics if it has been discussed before. stop wasting bandwidth by creating a new thread.

u usually waste more bandwidth by posting that, y not just keep quiet

[RCheah]

... It's interesting to see how many people get irritated easily by little things like new threads that seem to repeat an old topic. I just tried to search for similar topics in this forum, but have not found one that talks about an actual user's experience with these 2 lenses, and how they arrived at a decision on which lens to get.

However, there are many "technical" and theoretical discussions based on the lens specs and the pros and cons of both lenses. I have updated the links to some of the threads I found in my first post above.

I remember Clubsnap used to be a much friendlier place, where we were free to air our views and share our experience without fears of being criticised, and comments were much more constructive. I don't know what happened later on. Maybe we could all remember a good advice, that we should only speak out if we have constructive things to say.

[sonix]

Originally Posted by RCheah I remember Clubsnap used to be a much friendlier place, where we were free to air our views and share our experience without fears of being criticised, and comments were much more constructive. I don't know what happened later on. Maybe we could all remember a good advice, that we should only speak out if we have constructive things to say.

I missed the old days too. Look at my join date! It was fun

Anyway to add to the cons is, 70mm sometimes to short to take a close up short or candid shot.

In weddings normally people immediately know i'm taking them so they quickly react differently which i dont want that. Using 70-200 is good, they dont know who i aiming at, so sometimes people try to act normally which is what i want.

Of course there is no perfect lens. The best I find its still using 2 bodies at the same time, but well again there is a cons... too many thing to carry heavy arh! haha

For travel, 24-105 will be my choice! for events and stuff I'm still trying it out, i have access to both lens (via friend) hopefully one day i can decide which one suite me best.

THe discussion can go endless but its always good to have some thought put here. For some, i think will find the information you put here is useful. If others know very well about this topic, they always have the options not to even click this thread, correct?

Cheers!

[rayphua]

Well, I was considering 4 lenses when I sold my 28-135mm IS USM. the 24-70L, 28-300L, 28-200, and 24-105L. A bit of info, I travel alot, both for work and pleasure, to both extremes of the comforts and nice amenities of cities, and on the flipside - trekking, mountain climbing, wintery places, or countries like eygpt..turkey... And what I find really bothersome was having to keep swapping lenses even though I have a Lowepro Micro Trekker 200 to bring 2 or 3 lenses with me for a day shoot. Personally I find it a lot easier just having a camera with lens attached; one that can be used for most occasions during such travelling, without having a bag on my back. So, it was really a question of convenience, plus wanting a really solid lens that does just about everything with great clarity. Well, I ended up with the 24-105L and I must say that after using it, it has been truly a wonderful decision.

The 24-105L is similar in focal length to the 28-135 that I had, plus the IS, which is great if you want to shoot pictures fast with confidence and not wanting to check for camera shake. However it is far superior to the 28-135 in terms of sharpness! Shots I normally make would be people related, and scenery. I especially like the fact that I did not have to lose focal length by too much since I was already used to the 135.

24-70L, I've heard it's a great lens, but seriously I do not shoot a lot indoors, or in dark places, or anything that may need flash photography. And besides, a 70 may not be long enough as I realize that I sometimes reach as far as 100. Further, it's heavier.

28-300L, well, it's way too heavy, especially with my already heavy 1DsII body. In terms of sharpness, it does not compare with both the 24-105 and the 24-70. I also thought that to carry such a lens would really invite too much unwanted attention when I travel. Having said that, this may still be something I would explore further into.

28-200, read the reviews, not very good - too much distortion and not sharp enough though I secretly wish that it would be sharp enough for my needs as this would really be a great walk about lens.

Obviously the above are my personal views...which fits me fine. So...in conclusion, I love the 24-105.