24-70mm f4 vs 24-105mm f4 (video + still)

[Jay Khaos]

A topic with this same name already exists and I skimmed through it's 5 pages without really gaining any piece of mind about my concerns so I figured I'd start a fresh one. I'll summarize what I've learned so far (let me know if anything is incorrect):

24-70mm f4 IS
Best price as of 6/24/13: $1,299 (24-105: ~$750)
Pros:
- improved barrel distortion over 24-105
- lighter and smaller than 24-105
- improved corner sharpness
- overall better sharpness at 24mm

Cons:
- shitty/lose-fitting lens hood (According to learningcameras.com review. Anyone else experience this?)
- less sharp in general (also according to learning cameras.com. I've read mixed reviews on this...)
- high price compared to 24-105
- loses range compared to 24-105


For me, whichever lens I choose would be primarily used for video. When it IS used for stills, it would mainly be used for product/stock shots. A lot of times I try to fill the frame with the intention of removing the background—so this is where the 24-70's corner sharpness becomes a somewhat significant benefit to me.

I understand that the 24-105 is "good enough" and some even argue that it is overall better, especially for it's price. However, for my use, the weight-savings, corner sharpness and IS may prove to be worth the money if they are actually really improvements. I'm really interested if someone has real experience with both of these lenses (especially for video use), and can comment objectively comparing those things

Thanks!
Jay

 

[Maven]

If 24-70mm f4 IS is parfocal - I would consider that. If it's not - you can not zoom on target and maintain focus.

 

[Loswr]

If 24-70mm f4 IS is parfocal - I would consider that. If it's not - you can not zoom on target and maintain focus.

The 24-105L is parfocal, the 24-70/4L IS is not.

 

[Sporgon]

If 24-70mm f4 IS is parfocal - I would consider that. If it's not - you can not zoom on target and maintain focus.

The 24-105L is parfocal, the 24-70/4L IS is not.

Are you sure about this ? I always thought the 24-105 wasn't parfocal. After reading your post I tried it specifically to test this.

When focusing at 105mm and then zooming out it does seem to hold focus, but this may be the result of DoF on a f4 lens. However when focusing at 24, then zooming in it seems to loose focus.

 

[Loswr]

If 24-70mm f4 IS is parfocal - I would consider that. If it's not - you can not zoom on target and maintain focus.

The 24-105L is parfocal, the 24-70/4L IS is not.

Are you sure about this ? I always thought the 24-105 wasn't parfocal. After reading your post I tried it specifically to test this.

When focusing at 105mm and then zooming out it does seem to hold focus, but this may be the result of DoF on a f4 lens. However when focusing at 24, then zooming in it seems to loose focus.

I was basing that statement on a quote from Chuck Westfall (technical mouthpiece for Canon USA): "There's a cam inside the 24-105mm lens that is designed to maintain an accurate focus when the lens is zoomed from tele towards wide."

Reading that statement literally, it doesn't say that it maintains focus when zoomed from wide to tele... :-\

 

[Jay Khaos]

I read a few things that say that the 24-105 does not hold focus when zooming to the long end... I can't find anything about the 24-70 f4 though. I actually ordered the 24-70 f4 already so I'll find out for sure tomorrow

 

[Sporgon]

If 24-70mm f4 IS is parfocal - I would consider that. If it's not - you can not zoom on target and maintain focus.

The 24-105L is parfocal, the 24-70/4L IS is not.

Are you sure about this ? I always thought the 24-105 wasn't parfocal. After reading your post I tried it specifically to test this.

When focusing at 105mm and then zooming out it does seem to hold focus, but this may be the result of DoF on a f4 lens. However when focusing at 24, then zooming in it seems to loose focus.

I was basing that statement on a quote from Chuck Westfall (technical mouthpiece for Canon USA): "There's a cam inside the 24-105mm lens that is designed to maintain an accurate focus when the lens is zoomed from tele towards wide."

Reading that statement literally, it doesn't say that it maintains focus when zoomed from wide to tele... :-\

Well that cam works then ! In all the years I've used the 24-105 I hadn't realised that it is parfocal through tele to wide. I can see that this might be useful for focus in still photography, but for video I guess the other way round would be better. However this lens was introduced before the advent of video in dslrs.

The choice between this lens and the new 24-70 f4 is a tricky one. The new lens is better, especially at the wider end, and the corners are improved, but the problem is that a good copy of the 24-105 is, well, pretty good !

 

[Jay Khaos]

Yeah I got the 5DIII kit and had a chance to mess around with it for a little before selling it. If I knew how I'd be using my camera, I would have probably kept it. I went with the 24-70, but I won't hesitate to return it if it doesn't work out because the place I bought it from was a pain in the ass. If I do return it, Id probably get the 35 f2 IS to hold me over until the 24-70 f4 gets packaged in kits and goes down in price on ebay.... or if a 24-70 2.8 IS comes out (with macro mode too lol)...

 

[friedrice1212]

If 24-70mm f4 IS is parfocal - I would consider that. If it's not - you can not zoom on target and maintain focus.

The 24-105L is parfocal, the 24-70/4L IS is not.

Are you sure about this ? I always thought the 24-105 wasn't parfocal. After reading your post I tried it specifically to test this.

When focusing at 105mm and then zooming out it does seem to hold focus, but this may be the result of DoF on a f4 lens. However when focusing at 24, then zooming in it seems to loose focus.

Parfocal lenses only maintain focus from tele to wide for the simple reason that on the wide end, for the same aperture, the DoF is deeper. If the image is in focus with a thinner DoF, it will be on a deeper one, but the opposite is often not true. Notice that if you zoom to 105 on the 24-105, focus, zoom out, and in again, the image is still in focus.

 

[bholliman]

24-70mm f4 IS
Pros:
- improved barrel distortion over 24-105
- improved corner sharpness
- overall better sharpness at 24mm

I own a 24-105 but have only tried out a 24-70 F4 at a local camera shop, so can't provide side-by-side experience.

From what I've read, the 24-70 f4 has the advantage over the 24-105 at 24mm (sharper, less barrel distortion), but that advantage goes away at 35mm and beyond. TDP comparison pictures show the 24-105 to be sharper across the frame at 35mm and 50mm and in the center at 70mm. So, a mixed bag. However others have reported the 24-70 f4 to be sharper in the middle focal lengths, so it might depend on your copy. My take is that the 24-70 f4 appears on balance to be a small upgrade from the 24-105, but certainly not enough to justify the huge price difference. I decided to save up for a 24-70 2.8 II which is better than either.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=823&Camera=453&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=0&LensComp=355&CameraComp=453&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=2&APIComp=0

 

[Maven]

5D3 have abberation correction, so 24-105 should be fine for video, no need to apply correction later.
I don't know how good is IS in 24-105, but I own 100L and hybrid IS in it (similar to 24-70 f4) helps a lot for video, while on monopod or even handheld. As for wide end I got 24IS in march, and still impressed how good it is. And if 24-70 f4 have even better IS it should be realy great.