Which New Canon Lens

[wdwwishes]

Which would you choose and why: The Canon EF 24-105 mm F/4L or the Canon EF 24-70 F/2.8L?

 

[jann1033]

i need a low light lens so i 'd get the 2.8 although i really like the length of the other better

 

[minie_meese]

I looked at both of these lenses and purchased the 24-105

The 24-105/4.0 is about 23 oz and the 24-70/2.8 is about 33 oz. The 24-105 has IS but I don't believe the 24-70 does. I purchased the 24-105 for about $950. I think the 24-70 is about $1200. Both had good reviews and both have been around for a while. The weight and focal length were more important to me than the speed so I went with the 24-105. The IS works very well. I use this lens as my carry around lens and have been very happy with it. It takes great photos.

 

[VVFF]

Full frame or crop?

If it's crop I would pick neither if that is an option.

 

[Master Mason]

I looked at both of these lenses and purchased the 24-105

The 24-105/4.0 is about 23 oz and the 24-70/2.8 is about 33 oz. The 24-105 has IS but I don't believe the 24-70 does. I purchased the 24-105 for about $950. I think the 24-70 is about $1200. Both had good reviews and both have been around for a while. The weight and focal length were more important to me than the speed so I went with the 24-105. The IS works very well. I use this lens as my carry around lens and have been very happy with it. It takes great photos.

I was just the opposite. I looked at both and bought the 24-70... The deciding factor to me was appeture. IS will not freeze a moving subject, so to get action shots in less than steller light you need a faster lens and not the IS. I use this as my walk around lens as well.

Neither of us is right or wrong, just looking for differnent things.

 

[bostran1]

I'm with Master Mason on this one. The larger aperture and good range of focal lengths would sell me. In circumstances when I need a steady shot it is more often of a moving subject so the quicker shutter speeds available on the f/2.8 lens would be more important to me than the benefits of IS. I already have a long lens to cover up to 105 mm too.

 

[pointandshoot]

I have the Canon 24-105 F4 and really like it. It is my walking around lens. IS helps for low light and I like the extra reach of the zoom. I have borrowed and shot the 24-70 F2.8 quite a few times. I think it is sharper from my experience and performs well in sports/action shooting martial arts inside and portraits. It all depends on what you want to shoot.

A few weeks ago, I shot the Canon 85mm F1.2 USM II. That is the best glass I have ever used on either Nikon or Canon. Unbelievable. Sports, portrait, low light, etc. it is awesome.

 

[AKVTiger]

I was trying to decide between the same two lenses. I went with the 24-105 as well. I felt the 24-105 would suit me better as a walk around lens and it was cheaper/lighter. Overall I am very pleased with my decision. I don’t think you could go wrong with either.

Good Luck.

 

[photobob]

I can't speak about the 24-105, but i own the 24-70 2.8 and it is an excellent lens. It is my primary lens for weddings and portraits, coupled with the 17-40 4.0 and the 70-200 2.8. I guess the decision you need to make is whether the extra stop on the 24-70 is more important or the extra 35mm focal length and IS is more important TO YOU.

 

[Rob_Drebel]

I went with the 24-105 on a 50D (actually got it for my xti first, then got the 50D).
Anyways I went back and forth as well as the others. I can push the iso up with good results till 800, si I figured I would like the longer length. I guess tha same could be said (I could just crop with the 50D too).
Anyways the 24-105 L lives on my camera about 90%.
I guess it depends on what else you have. for really low light i have the 50mm/1.8 as well as the 10-22 for ultra wide.

Either lens you cannot go wrong with I only hear great things about both.
On a crop the 24mm is a little tight, so make sure you have something else wide just in case.

 

[mabas9395]

Just tonight I told the wife that the 24-70 was next on my list. Then I remembered that soccer season starts pretty soon and with my kids moving up to the larger fields I started thinking about the 100-400.......

Anyway, between those two you mentioned, I would go with the 24-70. For me, nothing compares with a fast lens.

 

[MassJester]

Just tonight I told the wife that the 24-70 was next on my list. Then I remembered that soccer season starts pretty soon and with my kids moving up to the larger fields I started thinking about the 100-400.......

Anyway, between those two you mentioned, I would go with the 24-70. For me, nothing compares with a fast lens.

I have the 100-400 -- quite a lense, but it's a bit of a beast. I'd plan on bringing at least a monopod with that.

 

[bdtracey]

I'm presently looking at the 24-70. For me I like the extra speed over the 35mm AND I don't own anything with zoom....yet.

 

[AKVTiger]

Which would you choose and why: The Canon EF 24-105 mm F/4L or the Canon EF 24-70 F/2.8L?

Have you made your decision?

 

[wdwwishes]

Have you made your decision?

I have and I went with the 24--70 f/2.8. Just got it today. I'm looking forward to using it. My next step is to upgrade from my Rebel xTi to the EOS 50D. Hopefully I'll have photos looking as nice as those posted here in the weekly contests someday There are some real beauties this week!

 

[AKVTiger]

You got yourself a great lens! I look forward to seeing some pics soon.

Congrats on the lens and have fun!

 

[iluvdisnee]

My BABY is my 24 70 2.8 L!! you made a great choice!

 

[giantstu]

Just tonight I told the wife that the 24-70 was next on my list. Then I remembered that soccer season starts pretty soon and with my kids moving up to the larger fields I started thinking about the 100-400.......

I have the 100-400 and very rarely use it after buying the 70-200 f2.8IS.

I would see if you could borrow one first to make sure, as the 70-200 seems to be more useful for most people

 

[mabas9395]

I have the 100-400 and very rarely use it after buying the 70-200 f2.8IS.

I would see if you could borrow one first to make sure, as the 70-200 seems to be more useful for most people

Its interesting that you say that. I have the 70-200 f2.8IS plus the 1.4 extender but I am still wanting more reach on the sports fields. The smaller fields were fine, but my 12yo moved up to the much larger soccer fields last year and I missed so many shots. I guess I'll have to keep thinking about it and maybe find a rental place nearby.