• The Canon Rumors Forum has officially been shut down as of July 10, 2026.

    All data will be deleted on September 16, 2026.

    the ad free experience will return by July 17, 2026.

Lens suggestion - Alternatives to 24-105

  • Thread starter Thread starter kabelleger
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
K

kabelleger

Guest
Hi forum,

I'm currently using a 50D with a 17-55 2.8 IS and a 70-200 4.0 L. I mostly use the 17-55, and it is ok IQ wise (could be a bit better in the corners for larger apertures), and sometimes I'm missing a few mm on the long end. Now that I want to buy a 5D mk III, I'm not sure what lens to buy. The 24-70's range on FF is not enough for me (even shorter than my current lens on APS-C), so I'm thinking about buying the 24-105.

* A great fractor in favor of the the 24-105 is the price - buying the kit I would get the 24-105 for 550 CHF, which sounds like a really good deal.

* I read various things about the 24-105's image quality, some say the resolution isn't that good. However since the 5D3 isn't a MP monster, will it be ok?

* F4.0 disturbs me a little. Since one of the main reasons why I want to switch away from my 50D is low-light performance/ISO noise, I feel a bit stupid bying a FF superduper-ISO-performance body and at the same time an F4.0 lens. Are there any 3rd party lenses worth considering? Should I buy an additional prime instead (50mm sounds reasonnable for my purposes, but which one)? Or (I'm not kidding, since all I have to loose is the 70-200 4.0 L, which I could totally live with) would Nikon have a great offer for my purposes?
 
There are a couple but they are not as long that I am aware of - they are the 24-70/2.8 the new 24-70/2.8 Mk.II and the Tamron 24-70 VC. There are also non IS versions of the Tamron and Sigma offerings too.

For the price, value, overall quality and versatility - I will likely be adding a 24-105 to my 5D3 when I bite the bullet.
 
Upvote 0
Actually there is a Tammy, more specifically the 24-135mm. It's quite blurry and the build quality is subpar compared to the good old 24-105mm. I think the 24-105mm is one of the best lenses ever produced by Canon, all factors considered.
 
Upvote 0
There are always alternatives. Canon has a 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS, which was originally a consumer film body kit lens. Nikon has a 24-120mm f/4 VR. Neither offer IQ as good as the 24-105L.

The 24-105mm is a great lens, IQ is very good, range is useful. I've got 12 lenses, 10 of them L-series, and the 24-105mm has seen the most use of them all. It's really an ideal walkaround lens on FF. When it comes down to it, f/2.8 isn't all that fast, either - so, combining a slower zoom with a fast prime makes sense.

If you're looking for a similar focal range and a faster lens, you're not going to find it - your f/2.8 options are 24-70mm or 28-75mm (the Tamron 24-135mm mentioned above is f/3.5-5.6). If you're looking for a broader focal range without a faster aperture (what you'll get is slower/variable), there are a few options - the 28-135mm being one. If you're looking for a really broad focal range, with IQ equivalent to the 24-105mm, you're only real option is the Canon 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS. It's big, heavy, and expensive, but the only way to get the convenience of a superzoom for FF without sacrificing IQ - and that's why I've got one...
 
Upvote 0
The 24-105L is pretty lonely with that wide range, at least from Canon. There's also the 28-300L, but other than that, it's just the 24-70L. I too would find its range a bit too short for my main fancies. But there's a reason for this 24-105 loneliness: it's just great, there's no need for any others.

Some things:

- Getting primes for low-light situations is a good idea.
- The 24-105L is great, even though it's f/4, and it will surely outresolve 22Mpx.
- The increased light performance from the 5D Mk3 means you can use these lighter, wider-range, smaller aperture lenses in the same situations. You're buying the possibility to take a step backwards lens-wise on light performance, while still being in decent condition due to several steps forwards from the camera body. And on several other aspects, the lens is a step forward, too. You get slightly shallower DOF wide open, increased sharpness, much better build quality and weather sealing, bigger zoom range, and less weight (compared to an f/2.8 lens, that is)...
- Consider the Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 (pinched to f/2) and the Canon EF 85mm f/1.8 (wide-open) as some decent cheap&sharp primes.
 
Upvote 0
Yes, the 24-105 is a full stop slower than some of it's f/2.8 cousins, but remember it has IS which more than makes up for the one stop.

I currently use a 24-70 f/2.8L which replaced my original 24-105. I sometimes wish I still had the 24-105 for the long end. It's an excellent lens.
 
Upvote 0
kabelleger said:
* F4.0 disturbs me a little. Since one of the main reasons why I want to switch away from my 50D is low-light performance/ISO noise, I feel a bit stupid bying a FF superduper-ISO-performance body and at the same time an F4.0 lens. Are there any 3rd party lenses worth considering? Should I buy an additional prime instead (50mm sounds reasonnable for my purposes, but which one)? Or (I'm not kidding, since all I have to loose is the 70-200 4.0 L, which I could totally live with) would Nikon have a great offer for my purposes?

If you're seriously thinking of getting the 5D Mk III, then get the 24-70mm f/2.8L too. It will be a devastatingly good combination - both speed (since f4 bothers) + sharpness (see new MTFs)
 
Upvote 0
Harv said:
Yes, the 24-105 is a full stop slower than some of it's f/2.8 cousins, but remember it has IS which more than makes up for the one stop.

...as long as your subjects don't move. Being able to handhold at 1/4 s isn't helpful for shooting people at an event, unless Medusa was invited to the party...
 
Upvote 0
MikeHunt said:
kabelleger said:
* F4.0 disturbs me a little. Since one of the main reasons why I want to switch away from my 50D is low-light performance/ISO noise, I feel a bit stupid bying a FF superduper-ISO-performance body and at the same time an F4.0 lens. Are there any 3rd party lenses worth considering? Should I buy an additional prime instead (50mm sounds reasonnable for my purposes, but which one)? Or (I'm not kidding, since all I have to loose is the 70-200 4.0 L, which I could totally live with) would Nikon have a great offer for my purposes?

If you're seriously thinking of getting the 5D Mk III, then get the 24-70mm f/2.8L too. It will be a devastatingly good combination - both speed (since f4 bothers) + sharpness (see new MTFs)
You are referring to the 24-70mm f/2.8L II - correct?
 
Upvote 0
Thanks to you all. I guess I will go for the 24-105 then.

@buying an additional 24-70 (II): Not going to happen (for now). I cannot justify the price tag and the added weight given that I probably will not need f2.8 very often. But the 50mm f1.4 sounds like a good idea.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.