Having had the 24-105/4 & having the 24-70/2.8 & 70-200/2.8 (and other L's)... If I had to choose between the 1x f4 and 2x f2.8's the 2.8's will win (and they have, hence the reason I haven't replaced my f4 yet). However, replacing the 24-105/4 at some point will happen... it's just a matter of timing. Lately I have been able to walkabout with 2+ lenses so it isn't a priority yet. However, if I go back to 'just one lens' in a walkabout situation the 24-105/4 was a safe choice (especially with my next comment).OK, I unerstand now that over the 24-240, the Canon RF 24-105/4 is sharper and better. Now honestly is it worth to buy it or use the RF 24-70 f2.8 and sacrifice the extra 35mm of the telephoto lens for documentary/travel photography?
Here is something to think about... you have the RF100-500 already. Paired with the 24-105 you would have 24-500mm covered w/ just 2 high-quality L lenses (700 if you take your 1.4x tele). That's a massive focal range w/ just 2 lenses...
Last edited:
Upvote
0