Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 19 Oct 2013 (Saturday) 11:25
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-70 2.8L II worth extra $1K over 24-105L?

 
Eyal
Senior Member
569 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Oct 20, 2013 03:14 |  #16

In a word: Yes.
The 24-105 is a good glass, but the 24-70 is just a huge leap forward in terms of IQ in general (sharpness, amazing colors).


5DMarkIII+Grip | Extender 1.4x III / 2x III
16-35mm F/2.8L II | 24-70mm F/2.8L II | 70-200mm F/2.8L IS II
Σ 50mm F/1.4 | 85mm F/1.2L II | 100mm F/2.8L IS Macro | 135mm F/2L | 300mm F/2.8L IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
dave_bass5
Goldmember
Avatar
4,303 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 197
Joined Apr 2005
Location: London, centre of the universe
     
Oct 20, 2013 08:12 |  #17

ed rader wrote in post #16383169 (external link)
yes. the 24-70LII is the first medium range zoom that I am completely happy with. it is a stellar lens that I love to use. for years I switched between 24-105L and the brick and really liked neither.

Totally agree. I cant find any fault with mine, no matter how hard i tried when i first got it.

I dont think you can really justify something like this in monetary terms though. Its a bit of plastic and glass, how can it possibly be worth what Canon charge for it, especially to someone who cant make the money back because of it.
On the other hand, i say its worth paying the asking price for it, just because its such a top class lens.

I still use a 24-105L, it still has its advantages IMO, and in fact i use it more on my crop camera, but given the choice of only having one it would definitely be the f/2.8 lens.

As far as the Tamron 24-70 goes. I had two and both were faulty, and i struggled with AI servo with them. Wouldn't touch that lens again, although the IQ is very good IF you get a good copy.


Dave.
Gallery@http://www.flickr.com/​photos/davebass5/ (external link)
Canon 5DMKIV | Canon EOS-M50 | Canon 24-70 f/2.8L MKII | 70-300L | 135L f/2.0 | EF-S 10-18 | 40 f/2.8 STM | 35mm f/2 IS | Canon S110 | Fuji F31FD | Canon 580EXII, 270EXII | Yongnuo YN-622C Triggers.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Greg_8
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
561 posts
Gallery: 26 photos
Likes: 181
Joined Nov 2006
Location: Michigan, Northern Lower & Eastern Upper
     
Oct 20, 2013 08:41 as a reply to  @ dave_bass5's post |  #18

I'm really enjoying these responses and thanks to you all. But, please, what is "the brick"?


Keep 'em flying,
Greg B

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gtpstrunz1o98
Member
Avatar
85 posts
Joined Sep 2013
Location: virginia
     
Oct 20, 2013 08:43 |  #19

It's the version 1.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tapeman
Sliced Bread
Avatar
3,722 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 124
Joined Jan 2004
Location: Twin Cities
     
Oct 20, 2013 12:05 |  #20

Extra focal length or better IQ. Too bad you can't have both. What you shoot should determine which is better for you and your wallet.

I used to have the 28-70 f/2.8L. Better IQ than the brick (not as good as the new 24-70 f/2.8L)
I hardly used it after I got the 24-105.


Canon G1X II, 1D MKIV, 5DSR, 5DIV, 5D MKII, 16-35/2.8L II, 24-70/2.8L II, 70-200/2.8L IS II, IS, 100-400/4.5-5.6 L IS II, 500/4 L IS II, 24-105/4 IS, 50/2.5 macro, 1.4x MKII, 1.4X MKIII, 2X MKIII,580EX II, 550EXs(2), ST-E2.
Gitzo 1228, 1275, 1558, Lensbaby 3G. Epson 3880, Bags that match my shoes.:)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
light_pilgrim
Senior Member
Avatar
922 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Best ofs: 9
Likes: 149
Joined Jan 2012
     
Oct 20, 2013 22:50 |  #21

I agree with everything you say completely. If i was only doing people photography, then yes....but 24-105 is just too practical and i do a lot of street, landscape and travel photography. I did a test against zeiss 35 1.4 .... Used both lenses at 35 mm and f4, you would not tell the difference.

24-105 is just so practical....andwhen you think about the cost of the lens....it is super good lens

kurt765 wrote in post #16384193 (external link)
I have owned the 24-105 for many years now, and recently I rented the 24-70 2.8L II for a week when I went on a trip. I left the 24-105 behind. My impressions were thus.

The 24-70 is incredibly sharp indeed. AF was quick on my 5D3 and corner to corner it was pretty much completely awesome. Sunstars were nice and pointy. I can't complain about the image quality at all. It's top notch.

I missed the extra 35mm on the long end quite a bit. If I wasn't so used to having it maybe I wouldn't, but that reach to 105mm is incredibly useful in a walkabout lens. I did a lot of indoor people shooting during this week, and to compensate for lack of IS I ended up cranking the ISO which is not something I normally do.

A week or so after I returned the rental, I was pondering the switch. Then there was a night-time arts festival and I took my camera and the 24-105 to it. This was really challenging to shoot and incredibly dark. I had the IS on and was able to get sharp images down in the 1/8th second range. Such a shot would have been utterly impossible with the 24-70 2.8 unless using a tripod, which wasn't a very good practical option for this event.

Before I sent it back, I did a series of test shots on a tripod with my 16-35 2.8L II, the 24-105, and the 24-70 II shooting the same scene, in the same light, at f/8 and f/11 at 24mm. First place was the 24-70 predictably. Second place was the 24-105, and it was a CLOSE second. Sharpness was almost equal at those apertures. Distant third was the 16-35. Since I do landscapes mostly, this complicates things with my thoughts on trading the lenses. I was expecting a huge sharpness difference even at f/8 and f/11 but didn't find it (although I found a big difference with the 16-35)

The conclusion I came to was that I will keep the 24-105. Someday I will add the 24-70 II to my kit, but the 24-105 is just too useful to let go of. B&H selling the 24-70 II for $1699 after rebate makes it really, really tempting. If I had both the 24-70 would be on my camera for most landscape stuff. 24-105 would remain the walkabout choice for most of the time.


www.lightpilgrim.com (external link) ||1x.com (external link) ||500px.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
vengence
Goldmember
2,103 posts
Likes: 107
Joined Mar 2013
     
Oct 20, 2013 23:00 |  #22

IMHO, if you're looking at these lens and talking about the difference in focal length, then no, it won't be worth it for you.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
marcosv
Senior Member
775 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Oct 21, 2013 11:16 |  #23

kurt765 wrote in post #16384193 (external link)
I have owned the 24-105 for many years now, and recently I rented the 24-70 2.8L II for a week when I went on a trip. I left the 24-105 behind. My impressions were thus.

The 24-70 is incredibly sharp indeed. AF was quick on my 5D3 and corner to corner it was pretty much completely awesome. Sunstars were nice and pointy. I can't complain about the image quality at all. It's top notch.

The conclusion I came to was that I will keep the 24-105. Someday I will add the 24-70 II to my kit, but the 24-105 is just too useful to let go of. B&H selling the 24-70 II for $1699 after rebate makes it really, really tempting. If I had both the 24-70 would be on my camera for most landscape stuff. 24-105 would remain the walkabout choice for most of the time.

FWIW, I agree with your assessment. I bought a 24-105L to go with my 5D2. When I bought the 24-70/2.8L II, i decided to keep my 24-105L. Stopped down to f/8 to f/11, the 24-105L is very good and having the extra reach and IS are major pluses.

Another interesting exercise is to consider the 24-70/4L IS and Tamron 24-70 vs. the 24-70/2.8L II.

As of right now, I use the 24-70 as my walk-around. I haven't shot with the 24-105L in over a few months. But, I'm in the mood of not shooting longer than 70mm or lugging the 70-200/2.8L IS II. But, if I want to go with a single lens and not sure if 70mm is long enough, I won't hesitate in bringing the 24-105L.


EOS-M | 40D | 5DII | 5DIII | EF-M 22 | EF-M 18-55 | 10-22 | 17-55 | 17-40L | 24-70L mk II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS mk II| 35L | 85L II |35/2 | 40/2.8 pancake | 50/1.8 | 50/1.4 | 100/2 | Rokinon 14/2.8 | 90 EX | 270 EX II | 580 EXII | 600 EX-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben805
Goldmember
1,197 posts
Likes: 97
Joined Mar 2007
     
Oct 21, 2013 11:22 |  #24

Ain't worth it to me, it doesn't has the wide coverage range of 24-105, nor is it fast enough for me to skip primes, won't even consider it even if it cost exactly the same as the 24-105.


5D Mark III, Samyang 14mm, 35LII, 85L II, 100L IS Macro, 24-105L, 70-200L 2.8 IS II. 580EX, AB400, AB800.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
parfilator
Member
Avatar
109 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 3
Joined Apr 2012
Location: Anacortes, WA
     
Oct 21, 2013 12:26 as a reply to  @ ben805's post |  #25

Dont have the 24-105L but just bought the 24-70 2.8II and its the first lens I have used that physically made me hoot and holler about (out load) after seeing my photos in LR. I agree with the limitation of the 70 mm as compared to 105 mm, more reach would be nice. Overall though I feel the quality of the 24-70 justifies the price. Tried the Tammy 24-70 2.8 VC but was decentered and focus IQ was not great producing many OOF shots.


Canon 5D II|EOS M w/22mm f2.0| 50mm f1.4 |17-40mm f4 L| 70-200 mm f4 L| 100 mm f2.8L Macro | 24-70 mm f2.8LII |Yongnuo YN568EX|YN622c|Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
dave_bass5
Goldmember
Avatar
4,303 posts
Gallery: 34 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 197
Joined Apr 2005
Location: London, centre of the universe
     
Oct 21, 2013 13:17 |  #26

I find the IQ is good enough to be able to crop the 24-70 images quite a bit, so I don't really miss the extra 35mm the 24-105 offers.
The 24-105 is of course much better for hand held video ;-)a


Dave.
Gallery@http://www.flickr.com/​photos/davebass5/ (external link)
Canon 5DMKIV | Canon EOS-M50 | Canon 24-70 f/2.8L MKII | 70-300L | 135L f/2.0 | EF-S 10-18 | 40 f/2.8 STM | 35mm f/2 IS | Canon S110 | Fuji F31FD | Canon 580EXII, 270EXII | Yongnuo YN-622C Triggers.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
oviewankenobi
Hatchling
4 posts
Joined Feb 2013
     
Oct 21, 2013 16:14 |  #27

For my use, if the 24-70 had IS, it might be worth the extra cash.

I plan on checking out the 24-105 next. My only concern is low light situations, but I'm getting a little better with flash and ISO. Also, I'll be interested to see how fast it is.

Sounds like the 24-105 sacrifices a bit in those two areas above, but having the IS and the cash difference between the 24-70 to spend a prime might be the best way to go.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
flashpoint99
Senior Member
411 posts
Likes: 8
Joined Dec 2012
     
Oct 21, 2013 16:30 |  #28

I have owned the 24-70 II for awhile now. I have shot a ton of things with it from an Engagement shoot to a Dance Comp in low light. Excellent lens, couldnt be happier with it and I have not once thought "gee I wish this lens had IS. Even hand held in low light I have yet to see a need for it. If it had IS great but the fact that it doesnt shouldnt be a deterant from buying it if your pocket book is willing!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nick_Reading.UK
Senior Member
Avatar
836 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Reading, Berkshire, UK
     
Oct 21, 2013 16:55 |  #29

flashpoint99 wrote in post #16388233 (external link)
I have owned the 24-70 II for awhile now. I have shot a ton of things with it from an Engagement shoot to a Dance Comp in low light. Excellent lens, couldnt be happier with it and I have not once thought "gee I wish this lens had IS. Even hand held in low light I have yet to see a need for it. If it had IS great but the fact that it doesnt shouldnt be a deterant from buying it if your pocket book is willing!

This is what I am worried about, No IS on the 24-70mk2 !!! Now I am so stuck between the Tamron (not so good iQ) and the canon (no IS)
WTF do I do?????


EOS 5Dmk3 X2, 60D, EF24-70mm f2.8L mk2, EF70-200mm f2.8L IS mk2, EF85mm f1.8, EF50mm f1.4, EF50mm f1.8 mk1(350D with 18-55mm Sh"kit" lens).
Speedlite 600EX-RT, 430EX II Flash. manfrotto 190XDB tripod, Giottos GTMML 3290B Monopod, B+W 77mm 110 Single Coated filter, Hama 77mm Variable Neutral Density Filter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tagnal
Goldmember
1,255 posts
Likes: 62
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Bay Area, CA
     
Oct 21, 2013 18:18 |  #30

I find that in low light, having IS won't really help me in my situations. Wedding receptions, people, etc. As most of the time, I need a decent shutter speed anyways just to prevent motion blur. So, it is either bump the ISO or use flash anyways. Therefore, I would choose IQ over IS. YMMV


5D3 / M3 / S100 / Σ 35 Art / 50 1.8 / 135 L / 17-40 L / 24-70 L / 70-200 f/4 IS L / m 22 2.0 / 580ex II
Toy List | flickr (external link) | FAA (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,373 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-70 2.8L II worth extra $1K over 24-105L?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is miltiades
2007 guests, 313 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.