Question for owners of EF 24-105mm who also acquired EF 24-70mm II

[RC]

Not that I think many people are following this thread, but I have get this out of my system.

I picked up the 24-70mm II yesterday...January couldn't wait as it's on sale.

I am so floored with the IQ of this lens!

I seem to be lucky to get a copy that is apparently bang on the focus with my camera body, and the results are so...WOW! Out of camera JPEGs show a pop that I have not seen with the 24-105mm that I have. With RAW on Lightroom it's even better.

The lens is so sharp where I want it to be, at 2.8 the area within the plane of focus is full of detail.

The 24-105mm will be jealous, I hope they don't fight inside the cabinet.

I want to thank all those who responded to this thread! ;D ;D ;D

Thanks for the update and starting this thread. Now that the rebates are on, it's time for me to get off the fence and make a decision. Got a few days off next week so I'm going to rent the 24-70 II even though I'm 90% sure I'll buy it before this current rebate ends. I guess my only hang up is having both the 24-105 and 24-70 II. Like I said in an earlier post, I'd rather keep the 24-105 as a back up than sell it for such a low price but I sure could use the cash towards the pricey 24-70.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

I'd rather keep the 24-105 as a back up than sell it for such a low price

+1 ... I kept mine and would recommend anyone else to do the same ... I think I'm way too attached to that lens :-[

 

[Triggyman]

+1 ... until I bought the 24-70 f/2.8 L II, the 24-195 f/4 L IS was the most used lens on my 7D ... after my 24-70 f/2.8 L II was stolen, I bought Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VC lens (couldn't afford the 24-70 L II again)

Sorry to hear that. I know how that would feel when that will happen to me...knock on wood and praying it won't. That lens on a gripped 5D sure is a temptation for snatching.

Which comes to mind that it's almost necessary to buy a second body (a less pricey one) to make it the one to bring to crowded places where we are not comfortable going around with.

 

[Pixel]

I LOVE the optical ability of the 24-70 2.8L II but the build quality leaves a lot to be desired.
•The button on the lens hood is malfunctioning and requires that I tape the lens hood to the lens
•One of the rubber grip rings has become stretched and is barely holding on to the lens
•There's a stringy, velvet material that has worked it's way out of the lens barrel now

It's going in tomorrow

 

[Pi]

I've got to differ. Especially if you are landscape shooter. The 24-105 is much maligned for that sort of work near 24mm on FF, f/8, f/10, it's still often mush at the edges and it still tosses spades of PF on branches against clouds and such.

The corners at 24mm are soft, indeed, even at f/11 (lenses are not the same at f/11 ) but PF is almost non-existent on my copy.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Which comes to mind that it's almost necessary to buy a second body (a less pricey one) to make it the one to bring to crowded places where we are not comfortable going around with.

Less expensive to just buy some insurance.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

but PF is almost non-existent on my copy.

hmm try shooting fine branches edge to edge across the top against white clouds

It's hard to imagine your copy wouldn't show lots of PF then. I've never heard of one that didn't, even from those who say they got an unusually sharp copy.

 

[Pi]

but PF is almost non-existent on my copy.

hmm try shooting fine branches edge to edge across the top against white clouds

It's hard to imagine your copy wouldn't show lots of PF then. I've never heard of one that didn't, even from those who say they got an unusually sharp copy.

Here are two crops, 24/16 and 24/11. Not from the center but not from the corners either.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/105206784@N04/10252514275/#
http://www.flickr.com/photos/105206784@N04/10252319154/#

A bit soft because the focus was much closer in both cases.

 

[bholliman]

I just sold my 24-105 via Craig's List. I purchased a 24-70 2.8 II in July and planned to keep both. But, the 24-105 was not being used and I figured I could use the money toward something I would use, like a 100L Macro or 24mm TS-E.

The 24-70 2.8 II is sharper at all common focal lengths, especially at the very important (for me) 24mm length. Lack of IS has not been a significant issue for me.

 

[Dylan777]

I just sold my 24-105 via Craig's List. I purchased a 24-70 2.8 II in July and planned to keep both. But, the 24-105 was not being used and I figured I could use the money toward something I would use, like a 100L Macro or 24mm TS-E.

The 24-70 2.8 II is sharper at all common focal lengths, especially at the very important (for me) 24mm length. Lack of IS has not been a significant issue for me.

You not the only one

There is no comparison between these 2.

 

[curtisnull]

The 24-105L was my most-used lens until I got the 24-70/2.8L II. Whether or not it makes sense to have both depends on what you shoot. The IS of the 24-105 makes it useful for static subjects in low light with no tripod. In a studio situation, where you have lots of light and a backdrop, meaning you can stop down to f/8 or narrower, the IQ differences are minimal (the 24-105 is very sharp stopped down), and the longer tele end is very useful - you can go from a group portrait to an individual headshot with one lens.

Having stated that, after a few months of not using my 24-105L, I sold it...and haven't regretted it at all.

Same here.

 

[Triggyman]

but PF is almost non-existent on my copy.

hmm try shooting fine branches edge to edge across the top against white clouds

It's hard to imagine your copy wouldn't show lots of PF then. I've never heard of one that didn't, even from those who say they got an unusually sharp copy.

Here are two crops, 24/16 and 24/11. Not from the center but not from the corners either.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/105206784@N04/10252514275/#
http://www.flickr.com/photos/105206784@N04/10252319154/#

A bit soft because the focus was much closer in both cases.

The first pic shows a lot of purple. Oh, they're purple plants, not fringing.

My 24-105mm copy had a problem with CA. You will notice on the upper left hand corner branches
http://www.flickr.com/photos/62288946@N05/7785241096/#

So far I have not seen CA on the 24-70 II, which helps preserve sharpness around tree branches against the sky. The more I'm using it, the more I'm not missing the money I spent for the lens.

Still, I could probably keep that lens for a second body. I've got a soft spot for it since it's my first L lens. I'm thinking of something like a T4i/T5i or 70D. Nooooo!

 

[Pi]

My 24-105mm copy had a problem with CA. You will notice on the upper left hand corner branches
http://www.flickr.com/photos/62288946@N05/7785241096/#

It is pretty obvious, even at that size. I would not be happy with that.

The 24-105 I rented years ago had some pretty bad CA (but no visible PF). I was using an 8mp crop body then, same pixel density as the 5D3/3. My (newer) 24-105 has much less CA, which LR corrects nicely.

 

[RLPhoto]

I sold my 24-105L for a used Tamron 24-70 VC. It was an equal trade $$$ wise and the Tamron is sharper. (Even though so far Its been used only a handful of times ) I ended up valuing that stop more than the 35mm of reach when I can crop in.

 

[hwoarang5]

i have a 5dmkIII with 24-105kit , sold it for tamron 24-70F2.8 VC.. then sold it for canon ef 24-70mm f2.8II... and been loving it so far.. and now im planning to get a used 24-105 f4 again... for the purpose of wider coverage when im travel on holiday and not working... and even for work, shooting on day time or with strobe will be great... eg... day time sport.. events.. etc..

indoors.. and critical work, ill go back to my 24-70f2.8II + 85mm f1,8 + 135mmf2... +2nd body

ps: i sold off my "TAMPON" 24-70 because i exchange about 3 units in the terms of 4 months time, it just doesnt have a good QC on the batch of stock i have, gen 1 & 2 stock all potential have problems like front/back focus problem, battery drain, broken VC, after a period of time using it, 3rd gen stock i got have solve the issues according to tamron, i tested it for months between canon mkII before decide to sell it, and stick with canon..

 

[Triggyman]

i have a 5dmkIII with 24-105kit , sold it for tamron 24-70F2.8 VC.. then sold it for canon ef 24-70mm f2.8II... and been loving it so far.. and now im planning to get a used 24-105 f4 again... for the purpose of wider coverage when im travel on holiday and not working... and even for work, shooting on day time or with strobe will be great... eg... day time sport.. events.. etc..

indoors.. and critical work, ill go back to my 24-70f2.8II + 85mm f1,8 + 135mmf2... +2nd body

Yes, the 24-70mm II is proving to be stellar IMHO, I've been getting to know its strengths and weaknesses (vignetting, etc.) and how to deal with it, I'm just raving about it I think my friends and cousins are getting tired of me :

I still do have high regard for the 24-105mm, I have found the best settings for my style of flash photography with it that I will keep it.

Nice combo of lenses.

 

[kennykodak]

24-105 for outdoor work such as little league individuals and team shots. also the longer reach is pleasing for indoor activities such as ballet and school dances. i use the 24-70 II for commercial and weddings.