Best optics: Canon 24-70L or Canon 24-105L IS?

TRying to decided between the 2 for a Canon 5D MII body....
I realize the focal lengths are different but I am interested in build/optical quality. Any opinions?

Thanks.

24-70L for several reasons.

24-70L without a doubt.

24-70mm....

Better closest focusing distance
Better control on distortion and vignetting
Sharper IMO
F/2.8 for low light situation
Better feel on hand, I like heavier lens~!

24-70 is a better lens. I owned both and I was never really that impressed with the 24-105. Its not bad but the 24-70 is just better. Sharpness is a non issue.

If your using your camera for travel the 24-105 is a great choice but for pro use or best results the 24-70 is the way to go if you can live with the weight.

What would you want to use the lens for?

On FF, the 24-70L is a short standard zoom (centered around 41 mm), the 24-105 is a normal standard zoom (centered around 50 mm).

The 24-105 has more zoom, and IS, and at 105 mm reaches proper standard portrait focal lengths, is well balanced and not too heavy.
The 24-70 clearly has less zoom, no IS, but is a stop faster. It is well balanced but very heavy.
They are both very good lenses.

If you think you do need F/2.8, and/or the shallow DoF that goes with that, go for the 24-70L.
If you prefer a more universally usable lens, go for the 24-105L.

If you really want fast glass, neither will be good enough - you'll have to invest in L-primes .

HTH, kind regards, Wim

I was pretty much in the same boat and went with the 24-70. 2.8 will get you a stop faster, but in low-light, either a flash or a faster prime might be better. That said, the one stop advantage along with the 5D2 might allow you to get away with not using a flash in a lot of situations. In the one week that I've had it, I find the bokeh on the 24-70 is pretty good as well, enough so that I can leave my 50/1.4 behind. The 24-105 I think is definitely more hand-holdable for long periods of time. If you go with the 24-70, make sure you hit the gym first -- it is a brick, and when you combine that with the 5D2, it turns into a concrete block. You literally have 4lbs on your wrists, which comes to 5lbs if you put on a flash. Definitely my BR strap comes in handy...

Had both for many years. Have since sold the 24-70 and kept the 24-105. No regrets.

Easy choice for me 24-70.

I have heard that optically they are almost identical, it just comes down to f/4 + IS or f/2.8 basically.

The 24-70 has less distortion at the wide end. Could be important to you, it was to me.

both are great lenses (with different personality) and that's why you (and many others) are debating.

I just switched from a Pentax K-x (in body IS) and a Tamron 17-50 non-VS, and using my new setup for the first time this past weekend, 5D2 @ F/4 with IS, i find it (image quality and color rendition aside) DoF and low light capability just a tad better than my old setup. I took some shots in a restaurant and some group photos, and i am happy with the results.

so it really depends on if you need F2.8 all the time, at all focal lengths, if not, the the weight saving all the time, worth some consideration. and it's cheaper to get 24-105L + 50/1.8.

My 24-105 is mainly used as a walk around lens. It has speedy focusing and great IS. So like others have said it depends on your use.

24-70 has less distortion at 24mm... and a whole lot less vignetting. 24-105 commonly has 3 stops light fall off in the corners at it's widest.... Of course, the vignetting is pretty easily fixed in post production (RAW) or in the camera (JPEGs) with Peripheral Illumination Correction.

24-70 is bigger, heavier... There is reason it's nicknamed "the brick". Hella big lens hood too (makes sense when you see how the lens zooms).

Both are close focusing... 24-70 slightly closer.

24-105 has IS.

I bought the 24-70... couldn't live with f4 on my "standard" zoom.

If I were considering 24-105, I'd have to also consider that 28-135 IS can give virtually identical image quality for about 1/4 the cost (bought lightly used). It's not L build quality or sealing, but has USM, close focus, IS, decent "mid-grade" built, and is a very viable alternative that more than a few pros use without complaint. I had one, replaced with the 24-70 (which I'm quite happy with), then ended up rebuying another 28-135 as a backup.

You might check out http://www.the-digital-picture.com …s/Canon-Lens-Reviews.aspx You can do side-by-side test shot comparisons with various lenses at various focal lengths and apertures on various cameras.

If you learn how to use it the 24-105 has a slight advantage in image quality. The resolution numbers are really very close.

While the 24-70 is a stop faster I can´t use it because of field curvature. I do a lot of landscape and night-sky photography and at F2.8 the field curvature is really a problem. I realize this is not a problem for portrait shooters so it´s just a matter of what you want to do with the lens.

My 24-105 is sharpest at F9 and it needs a good software to correct the distortion (I use DXO optics).