24-70 f/4L IS vs 24-105L

[Zv]

Does anyone have experience with these two lenses? In particular, the IS on both. I'm interested in buying a new 24-something lens for full frame purposes. Also how would these lenses compare with the 17-55 in terms of IQ? Anyone got sample images of the new 24-70 f/4L?

I've had a play about with both lenses. The 24-105L has the advantage of being almost half the price. But is it a mistake to go from a 17-55 to 24-105? Image stabilization is more important than wider apertures so for now the 24-70II is out.

Not a fan of Tamron so that's out too.

 

[mrsfotografie]

Does anyone have experience with these two lenses? In particular, the IS on both. I'm interested in buying a new 24-something lens for full frame purposes. Also how would these lenses compare with the 17-55 in terms of IQ? Anyone got sample images of the new 24-70 f/4L?

I've had a play about with both lenses. The 24-105L has the advantage of being almost half the price. But is it a mistake to go from a 17-55 to 24-105? Image stabilization is more important than wider apertures so for now the 24-70II is out.

Not a fan of Tamron so that's out too.

Gong from a 17-55 on your 7D to a 24-105 on your 5DII is an improvement IMHO (largely because of the 5D2's sensor). The 24-105 is very versatile and surprisingly good (it clearly outshines my 24-70 f/2.8 MkI). Just my 2 cents... sorry I've no personal experience with the 24-70 f/4 IS. I understand however that its only real advantage over the 24-105 is its near-macro ability if that is important to you (I prefer a dedicated macro lens).

FWIW the 24-105 f/4 IS is my vacation-lens workhorse. Although I also bring a few other lenses on my travels, the 24-105 f/4 IS can do it all if needed, greatly helped by the weather sealing.

 

[rs]

The 17-55 and 24-105 both feature 3 stop image stabilisation, so you certainly won't lose out from that angle if you make that switch. The 24-70/4 however has a 4 stop hybrid IS system. Hybrid is only of any real use at near macro focusing distances, but the extra stop will make a difference at normal focusing distances.

The 17-55 on crop is the equivalent of a 27-88/4.5 IS on full frame - so the 24-105 (when mounted on full frame) is wider, longer, and vaguely better at gathering light (together with a correspondingly narrower DoF). Not to mention other gains such as weather sealing and build quality.

From what I can tell from the reviews, the 24-70/4 is no sharper than the 24-105, and actually has a more distracting bokeh. I'd only consider the 24-70/4 over it if you really don't need the reach, but you do need the macro capability - and are willing to pay for it.

However, for 24-70/4 money you could buy a 24-105 and a 100 (non L) macro.

 

[caMARYnon]

However, for 24-70/4 money you could buy a 24-105 and a 100 (non L) macro.

+1

 

[Sporgon]

At Building Panoramics we have both lenses. I can assure you the new 24-70 f4 is significantly better than the 24-105. Too early to tell on the IS yet.

Is it worth the hefty price ? If you can afford it then yes. If not, don't loose any sleep over it !

I've just posted a pic in 'best landscapes' shot on the 24-70. You can see a much bigger version on our website.

 

[Haydn1971]

I'm still of the opinion that the days of the 24-105mm are numbered, with something like a 24-135mm replacing it at a price somewhere between the 2.8 & 4.0 versions if the 24-70mm. I'd really like a longer reach from my walk around lens, but wanted the 2.8 ability more than reach when I got my 24-70 2.8.

I played with both the 24-105 and 24-70 f4 recently and with a few minutes of casual shop use, found the 24-70 handled nicer than the 24-105 - I used to have a 15-85 on a 450D, so currently finding my 6D & 24-70 f2.8 a real heft, which is why I also bought a EOS-M & 22mm.

The 24-70 f4 is slowly dropping in price and worth checking the cash back deals

 

[Zv]

Thanks for the replies, I'll check out Building Panos after work.

The extra reach would be nice for traveling. I hate taking extra lenses and wish I could have a one trick pony. Though I've heard (and noticed myself) that the 24mm end of the 24-105 isn't great. I like my building and landscape shots so that might dissapoint me. My 17-55 gets used at 17mm a lot.

I don't do macro but sometimes I like to take close up type shots. Things like rings at weddings or flowers, that sorta thing. I usually just crop the image to make it look like a close up. Maybe the 24-70 f/4 would get me into macro? Who knows.

Yeah I think I'll wait for the price to drop. It's tempting to get a 2nd hand 24-105L. Currently the 24-105 is going for about $750 2nd hand (¥75,000) but $950 new (¥96,000). The 24-70 f4 is going for ¥127,000 (I live in Japan hence the yen).

I recently sold off my 85 1.8 and 50 1.8 II so have about $400 or so extra. Was going to buy a Sigma 35 but might do this upgrade first. Decisions decisions.

???

 

[Alrik89]

I recently sold off my 85 1.8 and 50 1.8 II so have about $400 or so extra. Was going to buy a Sigma 35 but might do this upgrade first. Decisions decisions.

???

Are you really missing the gap between 40-70mm?

 

[Zv]

I recently sold off my 85 1.8 and 50 1.8 II so have about $400 or so extra. Was going to buy a Sigma 35 but might do this upgrade first. Decisions decisions.

???

Are you really missing the gap between 40-70mm?

Thats a fair point! However at casual parties and events a lot of group or people shots fall into the 28 - 50 ish range that gets some of the background too. Wider than that is too distorted for people off center.

 

[bholliman]

However, for 24-70/4 money you could buy a 24-105 and a 100 (non L) macro.

+1

+2

The 24-105 is a tremendous value. A very good and flexible general purpose lens. I own a 24-105 but have never used a 24-70 f/4.0. According according to most reviews, the IQ is very similar, with the 24-70 having better sharpness at 24mm and 70mm and the 24-105 sharper from 35-85mm.

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

The 24-105 has the advantages of price and reach (70-105mm) and the 24-70 has the near macro advantage and possibly slightly better image stabilization. Be aware that Photozone warns of focus shift issues with the 24-70 f/4.0:

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/798-canon2470f4?start=2

Personally, I would consider this lens if it were priced around $900-1,000, but at its current price point, I think it does not offer much.

 

[bholliman]

At Building Panoramics we have both lenses. I can assure you the new 24-70 f4 is significantly better than the 24-105. Too early to tell on the IS yet.

Is it worth the hefty price ? If you can afford it then yes. If not, don't loose any sleep over it !

I've just posted a pic in 'best landscapes' shot on the 24-70. You can see a much bigger version on our website.

Sporgon, I highly respect your work, so you comment carries a great deal of weight. Do you find the 24-70 f4 sharper than the 24-105 or is the IQ better in other ways? Do you have any side-by-side shots with the 24-105 and 24-70 you would be willing to share?

 

[Loswr]

I'm interested in buying a new 24-something lens for full frame purposes. Also how would these lenses compare with the 17-55 in terms of IQ?

Worth noting that the true FF equivalent of the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens is a hypothetical 27-88mm f/4.5 IS - so the 24-105L on FF is wider, longer, and faster (in terms of DoF for equal framing) than the 17-55 on APS-C.

I went from 7D + 17-55 to 5DII + 24-105 and the latter combo delivers much, much better IQ.

 

[tron]

According to the-digital-picture as i interpret f/4 performance

24mm 24-70 equal at center much better mid-frame and corner
35mm 24-105 better everywhere
50mm 24-105 much better everywhere
70mm 24-105 better at center, slightly worse mid-frame, very slightly better at the corner!

105mm of wait...

I didn't bother to check every aperture. It goes without saying that at f/8 or so both lenses will be more or less equal...

I would never trade my 24-105 f/4L IS for the f/4 version...

But that's me.

P.S Please don't tempt me with 24-70 f/2.8 L II ...

 

[Zv]

I'm interested in buying a new 24-something lens for full frame purposes. Also how would these lenses compare with the 17-55 in terms of IQ?

Worth noting that the true FF equivalent of the EF-S 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens is a hypothetical 27-88mm f/4.5 IS - so the 24-105L on FF is wider, longer, and faster (in terms of DoF for equal framing) than the 17-55 on APS-C.

I went from 7D + 17-55 to 5DII + 24-105 and the latter combo delivers much, much better IQ.

Can't argue with that! Cheers Neuro! Think I might be swayed towards the 24-105, second hand. Who knows how long it will take for the 24-70 f4 price to come down.

 

[pensive tomato]

I went from 7D + 17-55 to 5DII + 24-105 and the latter combo delivers much, much better IQ.

+1000 FWIW, I went from the 7D/17-55mm to the 6D/24-105mm, and just recently sold that 7D kit as it just wasn't getting used at all.

One thing to consider is the horrible barrel distortion of the 24-105mm at the wide end (reminds me of the 15-85mm if you used that on a crop, although even the 15-85mm did a bit better). The 24-70mm f/4 is supposed to be better in this department (e.g., see photozone.de), but I also feel that the current price for the 24-70mm f/4 doesn't sit well in the market.

 

[pensive tomato]

Can't argue with that! Cheers Neuro! Think I might be swayed towards the 24-105, second hand. Who knows how long it will take for the 24-70 f4 price to come down.

Oops, missed your last reply. I see you've decided, best of luck with the 24-105mm!

 

[mrsfotografie]

One thing to consider is the horrible barrel distortion of the 24-105mm at the wide end

I guess this is a personal thing, but in the real world it is only really noticeable in critical shots and can easily be corrected in post if needed. FWIW chromatic aberrations (I really hate CA) are largely absent at all apertures and focal lengths so that's a good thing.

I'm still considering selling my 24-70 f/2.8 L. The 24-105 is that good...

 

[Zv]

Can't argue with that! Cheers Neuro! Think I might be swayed towards the 24-105, second hand. Who knows how long it will take for the 24-70 f4 price to come down.

Oops, missed your last reply. I see you've decided, best of luck with the 24-105mm!

Always open to some more views on the matter! Now, how is the 6D? Are you happy with it? I'm thinking of (well kinda already in the process of) selling my 5DII for a 6D. I'm keeping the 7D, mostly for it's speed and AF. I wouldn't want a 5DII and 6D, too similar, and I like having a crop body as a sort of tele-convertor. We'll see what the 7D II brings though, been keeping a close eye on that.

 

[Zv]

One thing to consider is the horrible barrel distortion of the 24-105mm at the wide end

I guess this is a personal thing, but in the real world it is only really noticeable in critical shots and can easily be corrected in post if needed. FWIW chromatic aberrations (I really hate CA) are largely absent at all apertures and focal lengths so that's a good thing.

I'm still considering selling my 24-70 f/2.8 L. The 24-105 is that good...

Yeah barrel distortions not a major issue. To be honest I'll be using the 17-40L for most landscape stuff. The 24-105L is really just for travel and days where I can't be arsed lugging extra gear around. The 17-55 is great but it's not weathersealed and doesnt work on full frame. Otherwise I love that lens. It does everything. Great combo with a 7D.

 

[Zv]

At Building Panoramics we have both lenses. I can assure you the new 24-70 f4 is significantly better than the 24-105. Too early to tell on the IS yet.

Is it worth the hefty price ? If you can afford it then yes. If not, don't loose any sleep over it !

I've just posted a pic in 'best landscapes' shot on the 24-70. You can see a much bigger version on our website.

Wow amazing images! I only saw a handful, I'll check out more tomorrow. Can you post some 24-70 shots on this thread please? Don't have to be panos just anything shot with that lens. Thanks.