Canon 24-70 or 24-105

[spanky]

I've been eying a new lens and I'm at a little bit of a toss up as to which to get. I've recently rented both the 24-70 f2.8 L and 24-105 f4 L IS lenses and am leaning towards the 24-105 as I already have some fast lenses and like the added focal length range and IS.

I've read other reviews (dpreview, the-digitial-picture, FM) and considering what I currently own, I think the 24-105 is the better choice. Any other thoughts/opinions on the lens?

Current set-up:
Canon 20d
17-85 EF-S
70-200 f2.8 L IS
85 f1.2 L

[Tippster]

As much as I love my 24-105, considering your current quiver I think you'd get more enjoyment out of this:

http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/co...&modelid=10510

[dipstik]

I hate my 24-70.

The problem is...90% of the time I'm either shooting it at 24 or at 70.

Whenever I'm zoomed in to 70, it's only because I'm too far away and am wishing I had on my 70-200. I never really choose to shoot at 70. I don't think I've ever made a good frame at 70.

Same deal when I'm zoomed out to 24....when I'm zoomed out that much, I'm usually wishing I had on my 17-35 so that I have the option to go really wide.

As for the middle range....I already own 35 and 50 primes, so really the 24-70 is more or less a useless lens.

That being said, when I can only take one lens, I always take the 24-70.

My advice? Well, judging by your current setup, sell the 20d and the 17-85 and pick up a used 1D MarkII. You can score a used 1DII for like 850 bucks now. Then you will still have enough left over for the 24-105 or a 16-35 f/2.8, and you'll really be in camera heaven then.

[BurnHard]

^^^ Awesome! EXACTLY the situation I was in!
Hence I sold my 24-70, got a 17-40/4, use my 50/1.4 to cover the mid-range, and use my 70-200/2.8 to cover the long end. The switching is a pain in the butt, therefore my plan to get a second body very soon!

Seconded re: recommendation to get 1DII. SOOOO much better than 20D/40D...

[gholman12]

Seconded re: recommendation to get 1DII. SOOOO much better than 20D/40D...

Go on...

[spanky]

Thanks for the input so far. I'm actually saving up for 5DMII - I'll most likely buy within a year or so. So the recommendation from Tippster on the EF-S lens isn't an option. I do like the 16-35, but don't think it'll be useful enough for when I have to carry just one lens (specifically not enough reach). I'm mostly shooting people (and specifically my 3 y.o son) so I'd like the longer reach.

[4-TEEF]

Current set-up:
Canon 20d
17-85 EF-S
70-200 f2.8 L IS
85 f1.2 L

You're ready for a body upgrade soon. Even going 20d to 40d is a big improvement and going to something like a 1DII, 5D or 1DsII will really let that 85L shine.

I shoot a 24-105L on a 40d and it's a very nice lens. I don't like it for portraits but I LOVE it for skiing and boarding. On a full frame camera it might be a bit distorted on the wide end but the 40d crops much of that off.

[Tippster]

Thanks for the input so far. I'm actually saving up for 5DMII - I'll most likely buy within a year or so.

In that case get the 24-105. It's pretty much permanently attached to my 5D. You'll never realy notice the lack of that one stop due to the IS... that basically gets you 2 extra stops hand-held... an equivalent of f/2.

[gholman12]

an equivalent of f/2.

in terms of low light capabilities, not in terms of depth of field fun. And don't be a silly goose OP, get the damn 16-35 (or 10-22 if you're staying with a crop body). They fuggin rock/will take your photos to the next level, and then another 4 levels past that. My 10-22 barely ever leaves my 40D.

Do it.

[Tippster]

Actually that's what I wrote and then changed my post, because DoF is also driven by the focal length. This picture was shot at f/4, but at ~85mm....

[gholman12]

Interesting, didn't know that. So I guess if you want to be able to play with DoF at the wide end, go for the 2.8, otherwise you're fine

Pretty nice bokeh too ^^

[spanky]

Actually that's what I wrote and then changed my post, because DoF is also driven by the focal length. This picture was shot at f/4, but at ~85mm....[/IMG]

Nice shot. I find this site/tool (http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html) is great for illustrating the DoF as a function of focal length.

Also, if I want to play with a thin DoF, I still have the 70-200 f2.8 and 85 f1.2. I'm a sucker for fast glass and thought I'd want the 24-70 f2.8, but given what I have, I decided to lean towards the longer focal length and relatively slower lens. The IS is also nice, but of course that doesn't stop subject motion (i.e. antsy 3 y.o.).

[hitek79]

Another vote for the 24-105. I had it on my original 5D and now on my new 5D. It's great for video with the IS. Yeah, you won't get the same bokeh, but real bokeh is in the primes. If you need another stop of speed, bump that ISO up, because 3200 on the MK2 is so fucking clean!

[Natedogg]

get the damn 16-35. They fuggin rock/will take your photos to the next level, and then another 4 levels past that. My 10-22 barely ever leaves my 40D.

I'm with the gholman here... I can't get enough of the wide angle. For me, it has so much more creative potential than a long lens. Obviously that's a problem if you're eventually trying to shoot your son's sports, but you've got a killer lens for those days. I've got a 5D with a 17-40/4L, 50/1.8, and a 70-200/4L and I haven't wanted anything else (besides the obvious faster upgrades)... The 17-40 is on the 5D 90% of the time. I've had the thing for 8 or 9 years now and still don't get sick of playing with it.

[truth]

Thanks for the input so far. I'm actually saving up for 5DMII - I'll most likely buy within a year or so. So the recommendation from Tippster on the EF-S lens isn't an option. I do like the 16-35, but don't think it'll be useful enough for when I have to carry just one lens (specifically not enough reach). I'm mostly shooting people (and specifically my 3 y.o son) so I'd like the longer reach.

24-105 is a great portrait lens. It's actually just a great lens. If I could only have one lens that would be it. The 16-35 is amazing, but not a great lens for shooting people as the wide end can be very unflattering. Since you'll be ditching the EF-S lens in your quiver it will fill the void nicely.