I will go for the 24-70 as the 2.8 comes in very handy. In terms of weight, one will always get used to it. I would also consider the EFS 17-85, it is great, it is cheap and great for outdoors, gives wider angle for crop sensors. If an L that you want then go for the 24-70. Cheers.
24-70 vs 24-105
- Thread starter hellfire241
- Start date
nelson-tan
Senior Member
The 24-70mm f/2.8 is an excellent lens, but for my own personal perference I lean towards the 24-105mm as my walk-about lens. I suspect you might like the 24-105mm better since the extra 35mm at the long end is very useful to have especially for shooting candids, when you need that extra reach. It's my primary lens when I travel, although it's not a really small lens due to the f/4 constant max aperture and focal length.
In terms of sharpness, it's easily one of the sharpest zooms out there, so that shouldn't be your concern. Perhaps your only defining criteria is to choose between a faster max aperture or a longer zoom. And oh... I really think the IS is a major factor in the choice of the lens too.
http://www.nelsontan.com/reviewspage/EF24-105mm.html
In terms of sharpness, it's easily one of the sharpest zooms out there, so that shouldn't be your concern. Perhaps your only defining criteria is to choose between a faster max aperture or a longer zoom. And oh... I really think the IS is a major factor in the choice of the lens too.
http://www.nelsontan.com/reviewspage/EF24-105mm.html
engrmariano
Senior Member
i was using the 105 on 5D2 as kit for over a year & didt ever think of upgrading to 70 as the 105 has the same zoom range of current canon speedlites (my silly reason :hammer
...
but got a good deal of 70 in manila and so i tried it. also, im thinking of re-selling it if i wont like it. so i did this comparison...
my reasons for retaining 70 are...
...but got a good deal of 70 in manila and so i tried it. also, im thinking of re-selling it if i wont like it. so i did this comparison...
my reasons for retaining 70 are...
- sharper aperture-per-aperture
- better bokeh-per-FL
- better maximum magnification
- i use IS only 10% of my shots from the 105, so IS is not so much of an issue to me a these range.
- looks better :bsmilie:
Fantasy747
Member
I am using the 24-70. After having send it in to CSC 2x for calibration, it is still soft at 2.8. It only begins to shine above 3.5. After that it is very very sharp, as good as a prime. I spent a lot of time with the CSC people over the softness at 2.8 and they really tried their best to help me resolve it. I have to say their service was way above expectations. I have come to the conclusion that it is either my copy that is like this(but I have tried a few copies at CSC and they were worst) or it is just the inherent characteristic of the lens. I tend to sway on the latter. It is a heavy lens but after a while you get use to it. In my opinion it is a great lens. If I have to travel with 1 lens this is the one I take. I also have the 17-55 but somehow I prefer the 24-70. So much for the odd FL to some. I was very close to selling it because of the softness at 2.8 but have learn to live with it, after checking out all the available alternatives. I have yet to try the 24-105, but from what I read it is not sharp wide open as well. If that were the case then it would be of no use to me having to shoot close to f5 and above to be satisfied with it. That's just me.
hi
when u say soft at f/2.8, u mean it can only be seen when viewing at 100% right?
cos i seldom view at 100% and i am just using the cheap kit lens 18-55 so till now i "think" kit lens is great... haha.. but my frens keep telling me the kit lens is not as sharp.. so i really wish to know how u guys discern sharpness... is it at 100% or 50% etc etc..
tks alot in advance
this is so true.
i had the 24-70 but the weight and size were bothering me so much.
i switched to the 24-105 and its much lighter and the extra 35mm has been very useful.
i suggest u try the lens with ur body and feel the weight distribution before deciding.
if u regret, i'm sure u wont have any problems selling it for a slight loss.
pattanct
Senior Member
you may like to read the article and point at the photo to compared sharpness between
17-55 & 18-55 to see what is sharpness...
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-S-17-55mm-f-2.8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx
Finally, someone got some enlightenment :bsmilie:
Kenji
New Member
I made a thread of this before, and in the end, I choose 24-70L. Because I find that it's more sharper. I rented both lens before. http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5534228#post5534228
Kenji
New Member
commonjunks
Senior Member
Direct from camera (converted to JPG + resized).
@ 2.8 (No Flash)
100% crop
@2.8 (with flash)
100% crop
Fantasy747
Member
Your copy is definately much sharper than mine. I must go and test it on my new 5dmkII and see if there is any improvement. On your first pic it seems like the child's left eye is sharper.
commonjunks
Senior Member
my vote goes to 24-70. i had just order my 24-70 last week and i am going to collect it next monday. anyway. i had the same issue with you i long considered the 24-105 but after i rented the 24-70 to try. i love the constrast and the sharpeness on the lens. also if you are like me planning to get a 70-200 then by all means go for the 24-70. its widely used by portrait and wedding photographers.
my 2 cents worth of advise
my 2 cents worth of advise
