Canon Lenses for Weddings: EF 24-70mm F2.8L vs. EF 24-105mm F4L IS

[sblais]

Hi all,

I am considering upgrading my lenses as I've seen first hand the extra work required in PP by my current equipment. I currently have an EF-S 17-85mm IS which I want to replace. I am wondering whether to go for the EF 24-70mm F2.8L or the EF 24-105mm F4L IS.

I would really enjoy the extra reach of the EF 24-105 and the image stabilizer for church and reception shooting, but I am wondering if the 2.8 aperture of the EF 24-70 would compensate, at least for the IS part as I could use a slower shutter speed by one full F-stop.

(I also have a telephoto zoom lens that my wife - and assistant - uses to get close up shots)

I would really appreciate comments from users who have experience with both lenses (or any one of the two). Any pros and cons for each lens would be very helpful.

Thanks!

[KAS]

I actually shot an entire wedding using just the 24-105. The extra reach is great for sure...and f/4 is plenty for background blur if you're closer to your subject. Plus, if you've got a flash, f/4 is also plenty wide enough. I absolutely love this lens, and it stays on my camera most of the time.

Hope that helps with your decision

[ofdphoto]

I think this is the third thread in a week comparing these 2 lenses!

Surely it's obvious that you need both ;-)

Seriously, it's your call. If you like length and don't have a long lens on a second body, I'd go with the 24-105... just be aware that you'll need a flash when shooting in lowish light.

Otherwise the 24-70 is a significantly heavier but more versatile lens. I have the 24-105 for now but am thinking about changing to the 24-70 once I have a second body to put my 70-200 on.

[Master-9]

Being that you own the Rebel XT a EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS lens wouldn't hurt....

I love my 24-70L, wouldn't trade it for nothing

[Papaw]

If you are really into weddings I would suggest the 24-70L and be looking to buying a 70-200L when you can afford it. I think with these two lens you are covered with nearly any occasion.

[RobKirkwood]

Given you have XT's (350D's) and can only afford one, I'd say buy neither - get the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS instead ...it's a super lens, image quality is excellent, and it gives you the plus points from both L lenses (f2.8 and IS). If you need extra reach you can always zoom with your feet.

Rob

[Stan43]

I would first say the 24-105L, .Consider the 17-40L and the 85 1.8. Along with your 50 1.4 you would have nice low light coverage and an excellent group shot lens.

[muscleflex]

i'm getting a 17-40l real soon for weddings!!!

[sblais]

Thanks for the input!

I was leaning a bit more towards the 24-105mm and I guess I will stay with that. The extra reach overweights the small aperture. In the mean time, I'll keep my EF-S 17-85mm IS so I can still get wide angle shots and will consider upgrading in the future.

[grego]

Having 2.8 is nice for isolating images if you want to blur. Most stuff you shoot, will be closer, so longer reach isn't too big a deal. Although I do notice you don't have a 70-200 2.8. So then the longer reach might be a better choice. You have two bodies though, so in the future, the 24-70 and like a 70-200 would make a good 2 lens combo with two bodies.l

[Croasdail]

Given you have XT's (350D's) and can only afford one, I'd say buy neither - get the EF-S 17-55 f2.8 IS instead ...it's a super lens, image quality is excellent, and it gives you the plus points from both L lenses (f2.8 and IS). If you need extra reach you can always zoom with your feet.

Rob

I'll second this. IS under wedding conditions (dark chuches, dark reception hall) would be such a god send. This lens is rated as being a very fast focusing lens and optically is very good too. Having a f2.8 PLUS "IS", killer wedding combo.


Cheers.

[SuzyView]

Yeah, I thought about the 24-70L IS. That would weigh a ton! But that would cost around $2500 and it would be so worth it! I love my 24-70 as well. It is on my 20D most of the time. If I had 2 20D's I'd have the 50 1.4 on the other. But the 24-70 is my choice just because of the 2.8.