December 17, 2014, 05:03:37 PM

Author Topic: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...  (Read 12053 times)

DaveMiko

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 104
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2013, 01:10:49 PM »
The 24-105s trump card over the 24-70II is of course IS. Its usefulness depends upon your technique, but if you're hand holding shots where you want to hold small fine detail, I find IS incredibly useful.

I've actually tested this for my own benefit, and I've found that without IS I can get camera shake at random with shutter speeds up to about 1/320 with 50mm focal length. I'm not that shaky, but I do drink a lot of coffee, and tend to arrive late and be in a rush. However for myself the 24-70 II, despite it's superlative optical performance, could result in softer images than the 24-105 when off the tripod. So I stick to a 'general purpose' lens with IS.

+1  ;) :)
1DX, 5D Mark III, 24-70 f2.8 II, 24-105 f4 IS, 70-200 f2.8 IS II, 70-200 f4 IS, 100-400 f4.5-5.6 IS, 600 f4L IS II, 300 f2.8L IS II, 2x Mark III, 1.4x Mark III.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #15 on: November 09, 2013, 01:10:49 PM »

Normalnorm

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 185
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #16 on: November 09, 2013, 01:26:50 PM »
Another vote for the 24-105.

I am often at the 105 length. I am also often in low light situations shooting candid groups.
I used to think that f4 was a real drawback but I found that even at f4 the DOF was insufficient for good images of multiple subjects.

F 2.8 would help with focus and image isolation but as that is not the goal of my work I can pass on it.
Available darkness needs high ISO and a still camera.

I do a lot hand held but I also use it on a tripod where I get extremely sharp results.
I am happy about the price drops as it allows me to get a great price on a backup of this critical tool.

Pi

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 937
    • View Profile
    • Math and Photography
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #17 on: November 09, 2013, 02:47:00 PM »
The 24-105s trump card over the 24-70II is of course IS. Its usefulness depends upon your technique, but if you're hand holding shots where you want to hold small fine detail, I find IS incredibly useful.

I've actually tested this for my own benefit, and I've found that without IS I can get camera shake at random with shutter speeds up to about 1/320 with 50mm focal length. I'm not that shaky, but I do drink a lot of coffee, and tend to arrive late and be in a rush. However for myself the 24-70 II, despite it's superlative optical performance, could result in softer images than the 24-105 when off the tripod. So I stick to a 'general purpose' lens with IS.

+1  ;) :)

+1

I have no doubt that the 24-70 II is better optically in every respect, and it is faster, of course. But I often find myself in situations where IS is more useful than fast apertures. I always carry with me fast primes, and use them often in low light. But when I want more DOF and motion is not a problem, I use the zoom. For me, f/2.8 is not fast enough to replace the IS, and when I need faster apertures, I will use primes anyway. On the other hand, the extra 70-105 range is not a big deal, IMO.

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4047
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2013, 04:08:14 PM »
I've had the 24-105 for about a year and a half now. It came as the kit lens for my 5D Mk III. My copy is a very good one, tack sharp and quite fast, as far as I seem to notice. 3 months ago I bought the 24-70 II. It is an outstanding lens, as far as AF response and sharpness are concerned. I think it's better than the 24-105. That being said, is it possible that the 24-105 can still be useful? If I keep it, and don't sell it, to what uses, if any, can the 24-105 be put? Is there anything that I can do with the 24-105 that I can't do with the 24-70 II?!

If you are not wanting to be slowed down and bother with/can't use a tripod then it could deliver better results than the 24-70 II when light is low and subjects are static and don't work with f/2.8 DOF (the 24-70 f/4 IS could do that too, even more effectively, although that's a $$$ combo compared to 24-105+24-70II). Maybe like hikinh through dark woods and not wanting to slow stuff down too much with tripod shot after tripod shot, trying to quickly get a ton of shots before light fades, etc.

Ruined

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 653
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #19 on: November 12, 2013, 05:02:48 PM »
The 24-105s trump card over the 24-70II is of course IS. Its usefulness depends upon your technique, but if you're hand holding shots where you want to hold small fine detail, I find IS incredibly useful.

I've actually tested this for my own benefit, and I've found that without IS I can get camera shake at random with shutter speeds up to about 1/320 with 50mm focal length. I'm not that shaky, but I do drink a lot of coffee, and tend to arrive late and be in a rush. However for myself the 24-70 II, despite it's superlative optical performance, could result in softer images than the 24-105 when off the tripod. So I stick to a 'general purpose' lens with IS.

In your case you might want to look at the 24-70 f/4 IS.  It has the sharpness of the 24-70 II, with better IS than the 24-105.  But, it is overpriced at the moment for sure as its now a 5diii kit lens.  Probably will be in the $1000 range in 3-6 months.

bholliman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #20 on: November 12, 2013, 05:29:31 PM »
In your case you might want to look at the 24-70 f/4 IS.  It has the sharpness of the 24-70 II, with better IS than the 24-105.  But, it is overpriced at the moment for sure as its now a 5diii kit lens.  Probably will be in the $1000 range in 3-6 months.

The 24-70 f/4 IS, is not as sharp as the 24-70 f/2.8 II.  Similar sharpness to the 24-105L according to the TDP comparisons (link below).  The 24-70 f/4 is sharper with less distortion at 24mm and 70mm, but the 24-105 is better at 35mm and 50mm.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=823&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=355&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

I believe some other CR members have had better luck with their copies of the 24-70 f/4.0 however.

The 24-70 f/4 IS does have the advantage of being somewhat smaller than the 24-105 and has near macro capability, but until its street price comes down considerably, I can't see it being worth the money compared with the 24-105L.  If the prices does drop to $1K, it would probably be a decent value.
« Last Edit: November 12, 2013, 05:34:42 PM by bholliman »
Bodies:  6D, EOS-M
EF Lenses: 35mm f/2.0 IS, 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, 135mm f/2.0L, 16-35mm f/4L IS, 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II; EF-M Lenses: 22 f/2, 18-55
Speedlites: ST-E3-RT, 600EX-RT (x3)

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2077
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #21 on: November 13, 2013, 03:14:27 AM »
The 24-105s trump card over the 24-70II is of course IS. Its usefulness depends upon your technique, but if you're hand holding shots where you want to hold small fine detail, I find IS incredibly useful.

I've actually tested this for my own benefit, and I've found that without IS I can get camera shake at random with shutter speeds up to about 1/320 with 50mm focal length. I'm not that shaky, but I do drink a lot of coffee, and tend to arrive late and be in a rush. However for myself the 24-70 II, despite it's superlative optical performance, could result in softer images than the 24-105 when off the tripod. So I stick to a 'general purpose' lens with IS.

In your case you might want to look at the 24-70 f/4 IS.  It has the sharpness of the 24-70 II, with better IS than the 24-105.  But, it is overpriced at the moment for sure as its now a 5diii kit lens.  Probably will be in the $1000 range in 3-6 months.

Already have ! In fact we've now two copies at Building Panoramics, but one is with our man in the States. Changed a Tamron 24-70 2.8 VS GTi for it.

A fine lens, much better than the reviews give it credit for. However I do like the 70-105 range but may eventually give it up for the better qualities of the 24-70 IS and its more compact, handy size.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #21 on: November 13, 2013, 03:14:27 AM »

Ruined

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 653
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #22 on: November 13, 2013, 07:47:24 AM »
In your case you might want to look at the 24-70 f/4 IS.  It has the sharpness of the 24-70 II, with better IS than the 24-105.  But, it is overpriced at the moment for sure as its now a 5diii kit lens.  Probably will be in the $1000 range in 3-6 months.

The 24-70 f/4 IS, is not as sharp as the 24-70 f/2.8 II.  Similar sharpness to the 24-105L according to the TDP comparisons (link below).  The 24-70 f/4 is sharper with less distortion at 24mm and 70mm, but the 24-105 is better at 35mm and 50mm.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=823&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=2&API=0&LensComp=355&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

I believe some other CR members have had better luck with their copies of the 24-70 f/4.0 however.

The 24-70 f/4 IS does have the advantage of being somewhat smaller than the 24-105 and has near macro capability, but until its street price comes down considerably, I can't see it being worth the money compared with the 24-105L.  If the prices does drop to $1K, it would probably be a decent value.

I dunno, I've been looking at a lot of real-world A/B comparisons of photos and while the 24-105 is just as sharp in the center, it seems to be less sharp in the corners with increased CA.  Just what I have observed.  And technically the IS is inferior to the IS in the 24-70 f/4...

I think the extra range of the 24-105 is pretty cool to have though, especially if you have an a crop in addition to your FF.  Ideally, if you were to have two it might be neat to have a 24-70 f/2.8 II and a 24-105 IS.  But if you just picked one and wanted the best IQ in the smallest package, I'd say to go for the 24-70 f/4 IS.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2013, 07:50:13 AM by Ruined »

gferdinandsen

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 191
  • was mich nicht umbringt, macht mich stärker
    • View Profile
    • Home
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #23 on: November 13, 2013, 08:21:05 AM »
I shoot with both, but find that I rarely use the 24-105.  The contrast and detail on the 24-70 is amazing.
1v HS, 5D3, 60 Da, 40D (IR), G1-X, 17-40L, 24-70L (Mk II), 24-105L, 70-200L (2.8 Mk 1), 24 TS-E L (Mk 1), 45 TS-E, 50 1.2L, 100 L Macro -- CPS Gold Membership

Dylan777

  • Canon EF 400mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *********
  • Posts: 4361
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #24 on: November 13, 2013, 10:13:19 AM »
I've had the 24-105 for about a year and a half now. It came as the kit lens for my 5D Mk III. My copy is a very good one, tack sharp and quite fast, as far as I seem to notice. 3 months ago I bought the 24-70 II. It is an outstanding lens, as far as AF response and sharpness are concerned. I think it's better than the 24-105. That being said, is it possible that the 24-105 can still be useful? If I keep it, and don't sell it, to what uses, if any, can the 24-105 be put? Is there anything that I can do with the 24-105 that I can't do with the 24-70 II?!

Tack sharp @ at what f-stop? 8 or 11?

sell it and save bag space for other lenses.

« Last Edit: November 13, 2013, 12:53:50 PM by Dylan777 »
Bodies: 1DX -- 5D III
Zooms: 16-35L f4 IS -- 24-70L II -- 70-200L f2.8 IS II
Primes: 40mm -- 85L II -- 135L -- 200L f2 IS -- 400L f2.8 IS II

sawsedge

  • Rebel SL1
  • ***
  • Posts: 97
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #25 on: November 13, 2013, 10:16:02 AM »
Of the two, I only have the 24-70 II, yet I often wish I had a little more reach.  The range of the 24-105 seems ideal to me.  In my film days, my trio was a 24, 50, and 100mm.  But, the AF speed, accuracy, contrast and resolution of the of the 24-70 II are outstanding and I'm unlikely to give that up.  About my only complaint with it is the size.  It's just fat with the 82mm filter.  :-)

All that said, I still think about picking up the 24-105 for certain occasions.  But I'd prefer one with a 67mm filter to match the 70-200 f/4L IS.

Perhaps someday Canon will make a 24-105 f/2.8L IS, match the current IQ, and then we'll all know what to do.

J.R.

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1520
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #26 on: November 13, 2013, 10:45:44 AM »
I think the troubling conflict starts once you own both.

I got the 24-70 II a few months ago and kept the 24-105 for the IS and the additional focal length. Despite having that intention, I found that I was rarely using it. I kept convincing myself that I would be using the 24-105 when the need for IS arose but that rarely happened because the 24-70 II would invariably be the lens mounted on one of my bodies and it made no sense to carry a lens with overlapping focal length out in the field.

After getting the 70-200 II, I realized that the 24-105 would not being seeing any action at all because for the corresponding focal lengths (above 70-105mm), the IS and the IQ of the 70-200 leaves the 24-105 in the dust.

I finally sold the 24-105 yesterday for close to $750 - this goes straight to the fund for the 300mm f/2.8 L II.

If you have both the 24-70 II and the 24-105, the 24-105 will be sold, it's only a question of time ...

Cheers ... J.R.
5D3, 6D, 600D, RX100
16-35L, 24-70L II, 70-200L II, 100-400L, 50L, 85L II, 135L, 24TSE, 40, 100 macro, 18-55 II, 55-250 II, 600RT x 4
I come here to learn something new, not to learn how bad my gear is - I know that already ;-)!

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ************
  • Posts: 15189
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #27 on: November 13, 2013, 10:54:30 AM »
I think the troubling conflict starts once you own both

I think this issue was addressed a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away….

Quote from: Darth Vader
There is no conflict.

 :D

(I also sold my 24-105L…)
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #27 on: November 13, 2013, 10:54:30 AM »

bholliman

  • 1D Mark IV
  • ******
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #28 on: November 13, 2013, 11:50:47 AM »

If you have both the 24-70 II and the 24-105, the 24-105 will be sold, it's only a question of time ...


+1 Same situation for me.  With the 24-70 2.8 II and 70-200 2.8 II in my bag, the 24-105 was gathering dust.  $750 is a really good sales price in the current market!

The 24-70 2.8 II is an incredible lens!
Bodies:  6D, EOS-M
EF Lenses: 35mm f/2.0 IS, 100mm f/2.8L IS Macro, 135mm f/2.0L, 16-35mm f/4L IS, 24-70mm f/2.8L II, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II; EF-M Lenses: 22 f/2, 18-55
Speedlites: ST-E3-RT, 600EX-RT (x3)

Sporgon

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2077
  • 5% of gear used 95% of the time
    • View Profile
    • www.buildingpanoramics.com
Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2013, 11:54:56 AM »
I think the troubling conflict starts once you own both

I think this issue was addressed a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away….

Quote from: Darth Vader
There is no conflict.

 :D

(I also sold my 24-105L…)


I would expect a Neurosurgeon to have hands as steady as a rock. A Neuroanatomist must be a close relation.

Me, I shake like a leaf. And that's before the morning coffees.  ;)

canon rumors FORUM

Re: The 24-105 and/or the 24-70 II ...
« Reply #29 on: November 13, 2013, 11:54:56 AM »