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

[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.

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?

@bholliman: many thanks for that.

Despite the reviews that are floating around about the 24-70 f4 saying otherwise, this lens is sharper than the 24-105 across the focal lengths. For instance at f5.6 - f8 it is equal to the 40mm STM and 50mm 1.4 at those same focal lengths in centre and mid frame. It is not as good as those primes in the corners. At 24 to 28mm it has less barrel distortion than the 24-105 as well as being better across the frame. The 24-35mm range is much better spaced. Some reviews have stated that 50mm is the lenses weakest focal length: this is not what we have found. Colour rendition, contrast, chromatic aberration etc similar to 24-105. We have found no issues with rsa in the way we use the lens.

The 24-105 on the other hand is not as sharp as those prime lenses mentioned above. It is also worse in the corners at the wider focal lengths.

However we are in the digital age, and computers generate the pictures we produce. The resolution of the 24-105 is of sufficient quality to allow very effective sharpening. People are quite rightly raving about the quality of the 40mm STM. Apply an un-sharp mask of say 0.2 pixel @120% and a good copy of the 24-105 will produce an image that is pretty much the same as that lens. This is why we use one at Building Panoramics, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Most of the pictures that we currently have on our website are shot with one or other 24-105mm lenses.

At present the 24-70 f4 is in the south of England, and the other's in the north, but when we have the two lenses in the same place I'll produce some 'real life' back to back comparisons.

 

[rs]

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.

I'd be tempted to sell both your 5D2 and your 7D to fund a 5D3 and a 1.4x TC instead. While it doesn't have the frame rate of the 7D, the superior AF is nice compensation. And when you need reach, the TC will get it back for you.

If an imaginary 1.6x TC existed, you'd get the same framing and depth of field options with the lens mounted bare on a crop camera or with the TC on FF. And due to the greater light gathering capabilities of the larger sensor (meaning higher ISO's are usable), the light loss caused by the TC is negated. You can always do a minor crop to get the 280mm of your white lens + 1.4x up to the EFL of 320mm you get on your 7D.

And with f8 autofocus on the 5D3, you can even get away with a 2x TC.

 

[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.

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.

Many thanks Zv, I'll see what I can produce, but the resolution of these pages isn't really going to tell you that much. Watch this space.................

 

[pensive tomato]

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.

I'm really happy with my 6D, very impressed with IQ and high ISO performance; the AF system works fine for my needs (I use mostly the center point or MF). I'm a hobbyist and only had limited experience with the 5D2, but for me there was no doubt of going with the 6D over a 5D2. Whether it's a good upgrade for you depends on your needs -the 5D3 being the obvious alternative)

I originally kept my 7D thinking along the same lines as you, but I honestly don't do much action or long reach shooting. After a 4-month period, I realized the 7D wasn't getting used, so I decided to sell all my APS-C stuff and get a tilt-shift and updated macro. In my case, those lenses made more sense than doing a quick upgrade to the 5D3.

I brought up the distortion issue on the 24-105mm to add that to your consideration. I do use the 24-105mm as my walk around and I deal with its limitations just fine. Same as you, for a walk around I chose to stick with the longer reach and IS. I do think the 24-70 f/4 has better IQ. I tested it last weekend at the store, yet I couldn't convince myself to make the switch.

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hi All,

What drives me since getting back into photography after many years of absence is all the commentary based on personal attachment or brand bias. If you love something love it, hate it, hate it, but do so based on first hand personal experience and don't parrot what's on the internet and don't brow beat others. I agonized with my 6D, 24-70 F4 kit purchase and read all kinds of negatives such as WiFi is a joke and the 24-70 macro is a joke. Well such comments are a joke and I'm just thrilled to death with what I've got (not saying it's great, only that I'm satisfied).

Since I've been shooting with my first love - 70-300 F2.8 II mainly, I've only used the 24-70 a little but I could certainly post more shots such as this one at 31mm. I don't have any PP capability so it's untouched. The original post asked for shots and I can provide more if it would be helpful, I'd just have to make a point of wandering around for an hour with the lens. Let me know if I can help guided by what's desired.

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

Here's two crops of the previous.

Jack

 

[Sporgon]

Jack: you're gonna have people queuing up to try your 70-300 2.8 II. I must have missed the I version

That's a very fine Bebby.

Can't say the same about your lawn.......

 

[Jack Douglas]

Hi Sporgon,

I've been posting relative to the 300 and 1.4X and 2X in other topics. I don't mind trying to help as that's the least I can do based on others helping me, of course that's what it's all about.

Now about the lawn! This is the old cottage at the lake that just sold and that's 66% of the new ownership quite unrelated to me, the night I turned the keys over. Isn't it easy to draw conclussions without full informnation, we all do it.

Here's a couple more shots I just thought of that might help whoever is thinking about this lens.

Jack

 

[Jack Douglas]

one more, that's my son and a friend, so as not to confuse

Jack

 

[Zv]

Thanks Jack for posting the images. The shots look good.

@pensive and rs - I thought about that but I'd still rather have two bodies than one. My future plan is to have a 5D III and 6D. Just making the transition gradually and within means. And I just like the 7D, I enjoy using it!

 

[duydaniel]

Here is sample pic from:
24-105

24mm
f8
1/60
iso200
5D3

I didn't apply any lens correction

 

[Zv]

Corners look a lot sharper in the 24-70 shots. Though the 24-105 shot would do the job. Considering how much I shoot at the wide end and the fact that I'm getting fussy about corner sharpness these days I think I might have to consider the 24-70. It's about $100 cheaper as a kit with the 6D. Then again the 24-105 is $200 cheaper as a kit!

 

[bholliman]

Despite the reviews that are floating around about the 24-70 f4 saying otherwise, this lens is sharper than the 24-105 across the focal lengths.

Thanks for the detailed response Sporgon.

Have you experienced any of the focus shift problems with your lens that Photozone reported in their review?
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/798-canon2470f4?start=2

 

[tron]

Here is sample pic from:
24-105

24mm
f8
1/60
iso200
5D3

I didn't apply any lens correction

It looks good enough to me.

 

[MLfan3]

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.

???

hi, now the 24-70f4L is cheaper than that price , you can go an actual shop(not online) and bargain it , you can get a bit better price.

I paid around 109800 yen and it is a good price, but I regret I should have bought it in a part of my 6D kit.
Anyway, try discount it , I am sure you can get it cheaper than 120000yen.
that said the optical quality of the 24-70f4LIS is not much better than that of the 24-105mmf4LIS ,which I got with my 5D2(sold now, though).
But I think the 24-70f4L has much better coating and its hybrid IS works better than the IS of the 24-105mm f4L.
In addition to that, the 24-70f4LIS has new Fluorine Coatings ,which reduces finger prints and protects front elements from unwanted scratches.
And finally, the 24-70mmf4L is a much smaller lens than the 24-105mm f4L.

IMO, the Fluorine coatings alone makes it worth the premium over the old kit lens , the special coating makes it very tough and that eliminates all needs for a lens protective filter.

 

[Zv]

MLfan3 - I didn't know you could "bargain" anything in Japan! I thought they were always very strict with their price. Is it different for lenses? Are talking about Yodobashi and BIC camera stores or smaller stores?

 

[Frodo]

And finally, the 24-70mmf4L is a much smaller lens than the 24-105mm f4L.

Earlier in this thread Jack noted:
"What drives me since getting back into photography after many years of absence is all the commentary based on personal attachment or brand bias".

I too value unbiased advice.

From Digital Picture:

Canon EF 24-70mm f/4 L IS USM Lens 21.2 oz (600g) 3.3 x 3.7" (83.4 x 93mm) 77mm 2012
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens 23.7 oz (670g) 3.3 x 4.2" (83.5 x 107mm) 77mm 2005

Frankly, 1 1/2 ounces and half an inch does not make it "much smaller". Its about 1/10th lighter and 1/8th shorter.

 

[Sporgon]

Despite the reviews that are floating around about the 24-70 f4 saying otherwise, this lens is sharper than the 24-105 across the focal lengths.

Thanks for the detailed response Sporgon.

Have you experienced any of the focus shift problems with your lens that Photozone reported in their review?
http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/798-canon2470f4?start=2

In a word : no. But then we are not using the lens in a way where it would show up. I'll have a play with it and see if I can make it happen.

 

[Zv]

And finally, the 24-70mmf4L is a much smaller lens than the 24-105mm f4L.

Earlier in this thread Jack noted:
"What drives me since getting back into photography after many years of absence is all the commentary based on personal attachment or brand bias".

I too value unbiased advice.

From Digital Picture:

Canon EF 24-70mm f/4 L IS USM Lens 21.2 oz (600g) 3.3 x 3.7" (83.4 x 93mm) 77mm 2012
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens 23.7 oz (670g) 3.3 x 4.2" (83.5 x 107mm) 77mm 2005

Frankly, 1 1/2 ounces and half an inch does not make it "much smaller". Its about 1/10th lighter and 1/8th shorter.

Yeah I've handled both lenses and "much" is a bit of an over statement! "Little bit" would be accurate. However that little bit makes some difference when carrying your backpack of gear around as well as around your neck. Always nicer to carry less weight. Length wise it's not that big of a difference, not really going to matter in real life shooting.

The main pros for the 24-70 right now for me are -
Sharper corners at 24mm.
Fluorite coating on front element.
4 stops of IS (biggie - I rely on IS as I travel without tripod).
It's newer (ok that one makes no sense really).
Macro (meh not bothered but sure, I'll take it).

The only con is range and price. Range is not that big a deal as I have the 70-200 and traveling with 2 lenses isn't so bad. And price is well within what I can afford.

Yet I still think the 24-105 might be more useful overall.

Seems I want a 24-105 f/4 v2!!

 

[Frodo]

Good points Zv.

Interesting, I went the other way. I had the 24-105 and 70-200 and found with the overlap I tended to use the 70-200 mainly at 200mm. So I sold it and got the 200 prime which is lighter, smaller and less conspicuous than the zoom. I have a two month trip through Europe (including northern Norway) and the Rockies coming up in a month. My travel kit is just the 24-105 and 200 prime (+1.4x). I expect to take 90% of the photos with the 24-105.

I would like a smaller 24-xx, but with the extra range of the 105, I can get by with just the 200.

Cheers