Could you give up the 24-70 for a good copy of 24-105?

I picked up a 24-105L solely to fill a slight gap between 55 and 70 (I know, silly, huh?). I also figured it would be a good general purpose/travel/daily lens. I wouldn't give up the f/2.8 for the f/4 in that focal range, as typically, the wider zooms are used a lot indoors, where light can be challenging at f/4. If you can afford it as a secondary lens, then grab it. But I wouldn't get it as a primary lens.

Talley wrote in post #16755703
I have the Tamron 24-70 which has been amazing. 0 Focus issues... super accurate and sharp as a tack...

However, my cousin has a like new (UA used about 10 times) 24-105 that he said would sell to me for $550 cash.

What would YOU do?

Depends on what you shoot. If you need the 2.8 for low light with movement, then the F4 just won't do. If on the other hand you take images of static objects like building etc..., then the IS in the 24-105 would be a benefit.

Since you have the 24-70, go through your images shot with that lens and see how many required 2.8. If not many, I would sell the 24-70 and pick up the 24-105. IS will allow you to use the lens in different situations that the 24-70 can't.

Hogloff wrote in post #16756504
Depends on what you shoot. If you need the 2.8 for low light with movement, then the F4 just won't do. If on the other hand you take images of static objects like building etc..., then the IS in the 24-105 would be a benefit.

Since you have the 24-70, go through your images shot with that lens and see how many required 2.8. If not many, I would sell the 24-70 and pick up the 24-105. IS will allow you to use the lens in different situations that the 24-70 can't.

His Tamron 24-70 has VC (IS).

Bakewell wrote in post #16756886
His Tamron 24-70 has VC (IS).

If that is the case, I see zero reason to purchase the 24-105L.

Talley wrote in post #16755703
I have the Tamron 24-70 which has been amazing. 0 Focus issues... super accurate and sharp as a tack...

However, my cousin has a like new (UA used about 10 times) 24-105 that he said would sell to me for $550 cash.

What would YOU do?

The title says it's a "Good" copy of the 24-105... If you've compared shots from both lenses and the 24-105 is sharper or has other optical advantages, then it's definitely worth considering. If it's not out-performing your Tamron... Forget it.

Without knowing what you shoot it's impossible to say if f/2.8 is important to your photography. It's not important to me. Personally, f2.8 is an aperture that's not all that useful for me... It's neither shallow enough when I want that effect nor deep enough when I don't. You may be better off with the 24-105 (if it's out performing your Tamron) and a fast prime in terms of overall flexibility and creative options.

FEChariot wrote in post #16756305
Well don't I look like a DumbSh!t....

No, no, no. Not at all. You just mis-read something. I've been known to do that myself a time or two

I wouldn't touch that deal. For $200 less you can get an EF 100mm f/2, which is smaller, lighter and two stops faster than the 24-105. No IS, though.

Go for it, use both until you decide which suits you best and sell the other.

Perhaps your cousin would allow you to borrow his lens for a couple of weeks but maybe he wants a quick sale and wouldn't like that.

Faster lens vs IS...I'm pretty happy with my 24-105 though, although I have never used the 24-70. The weight difference might be something to consider if you're lugging it around all day too.

I have my lenses in my signature and still kinda nice to see who doesn't actually see it when posting.

My 24-70 is a Tamron and it's stabilized.

I think I"ll pass on the Canon.

I had the 24-70 II and found I rarely used it for anything besides a walk around lens. Most of my shoots where done with primes for the fast ap. So I got rid of the 24-70 ii and bought a 24-105 for just over $500. I've been very happy with the trade off. Yeah, the f/4 is significantly slower but it gives me great shots. As a walk around lens it is perfect and I took the extra money from the 24-70 and invested it in other gear I needed.

Win/win for me.

Talley wrote in post #16758086
I have my lenses in my signature and still kinda nice to see who doesn't actually see it when posting.

My 24-70 is a Tamron and it's stabilized.

I think I"ll pass on the Canon.

Yeah, I noticed you already have a 70-200.... That being the case, it doesn't make much sense to me to change out any 24-70/2.8 for even a good copy of 24-105/4. Keep what you've got. Pass on the 24-105 unless you just want to get it to try out alongside your other lenses.