Another 24-70 vs 24-105

What exactly makes the STM lenses better for video vs say the 105?

I'm happy to stick with the single lens as I don't just take video. As a typical example of my usage, I take my camera with me to the bike track with my son. I take stills and video, so not really keen to swap lenses back and forth. I want good quality images and video, but the videos are just family vids, as well as the stills, they aren't anything but personal records to make up for my crap memory. Lol Plus I may enter the odd image into my local club comp etc. In saying that, I prefer to buy well and buy once, if that makes sense.

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17721110
I don't see the purpose of buying a 24-70 f/4 instead of the 24-105 (which is an f/4 too), but i see very well the purpose to buy the 24-70 f/2.8 instead of the 24-105
Having said that, i regret to have not bought the 24-70 f/2.8 instead of the 24-105, but i do not regret at all to have bought the 24-105 instead of the 24-70 f/4

I have and love the 24-105 on a FF camera, but I do note that the lens has extreme vignetting and distortion in the range 24mm to 28mm. If you shoot things where this matters, the 24-70/4 IS might be a better lens choice.

muvro wrote in post #17721192
What exactly makes the STM lenses better for video vs say the 105?

I'm happy to stick with the single lens as I don't just take video. As a typical example of my usage, I take my camera with me to the bike track with my son. I take stills and video, so not really keen to swap lenses back and forth. I want good quality images and video, but the videos are just family vids, as well as the stills, they aren't anything but personal records to make up for my crap memory. Lol Plus I may enter the odd image into my local club comp etc. In saying that, I prefer to buy well and buy once, if that makes sense.

The Stepping Motor is pretty quiet and ideal for video when focusing. The 70Ds dual-pixel sensor are a great match for STM lenses.

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17721110
I don't see the purpose of buying a 24-70 f/4 instead of the 24-105 (which is an f/4 too), but i see very well the purpose to buy the 24-70 f/2.8 instead of the 24-105
Having said that, i regret to have not bought the 24-70 f/2.8 instead of the 24-105, but i do not regret at all to have bought the 24-105 instead of the 24-70 f/4

I completely agree, from the two choices at f/4 it's a no brainer, get the one with longer reach. The better lens by far is the 24-70mm f/2.8, and until I went through 3 copies of the 24-105mm I finally dismissed my regret and upgraded.

One other point, if the OP has any designs on upgrading to a FF body in the future, whatever you invest in now - whether ideal for crop or not - will be good.

Nethawked wrote in post #17721556
I completely agree, from the two choices at f/4 it's a no brainer, get the one with longer reach. The better lens by far is the 24-70mm f/2.8, and until I went through 3 copies of the 24-105mm I finally dismissed my regret and upgraded.

One other point, if the OP has any designs on upgrading to a FF body in the future, whatever you invest in now - whether ideal for crop or not - will be good.

I am currently thinking to dismiss my regrets and upgrade to the 24-70 f/2.8

If it's the noise, I don't have a problem with focus noise with my current lenses. I haven't taken a video and heard anything from the camera.

The only thing I found was my 70-200 and my 16-35, when zooming, these lenses were perfectkymfluid. My 17-55 2.8 non L lens was jerky and not smooth.

I actually have the opportunity to try a 24-205. So this will be the test

I had the 24-105 f4 for years and was relatively happy. However, I recently switched to 24-70 f4. While I occasionally miss the length of 105, the 24-70 f4 is on another level of image quality in terms of sharpness, color, and microcontrast. My copy is much closer to 24-70 2.8 (which I've rented numerous times) than the 24-105. Also, in my testing and reading, the 24-70 is a 1/3 of a stop brighter than the 24-105. Now that the prices are relatively equal (I think some of the negativity towards it stemmed from its initial high price tag), I would say that unless reach is absolutely critical (and it's not for me because I have the 70-200 f4 IS), the 24-70 f4 is the better option for its superior image quality, its build, its improved IS, and its slight light-gathering advantage.

It also has pretty decent Macro functionality.

The 24-105L is very good at 105 for portraits on full frame, and the range is useful.
I read mixed reviews of the 24-70F4, with reports of focus shift (Photozone, Lenstip) and poor performance at 50 mm (SLR Gear). There must be a lot of variability, since many owners like the lens.
The reports of focus shift at 70 mm at close distances when stopping down would be a problem for portraits.
Has anyone besides testers noticed this?
Personally, I have been happy with the range of the 24-105L on crop and full frame.

Desert Dog Photography wrote in post #17722243
I had the 24-105 f4 for years and was relatively happy. However, I recently switched to 24-70 f4. While I occasionally miss the length of 105, the 24-70 f4 is on another level of image quality in terms of sharpness, color, and microcontrast. My copy is much closer to 24-70 2.8 (which I've rented numerous times) than the 24-105. Also, in my testing and reading, the 24-70 is a 1/3 of a stop brighter than the 24-105. Now that the prices are relatively equal (I think some of the negativity towards it stemmed from its initial high price tag), I would say that unless reach is absolutely critical (and it's not for me because I have the 70-200 f4 IS), the 24-70 f4 is the better option for its superior image quality, its build, its improved IS, and its slight light-gathering advantage.

Wow. That is shocking to me.

I have owned the 24-105 for many years. I rented the 24-70 f/4 IS a while back for a weekend. I saw no clear difference in terms of image quality between the two. At some lengths, one was a bit better and at others, the other was better.

If you want a smaller, lighter, shorter focal length and more expensive lens (still $900 vs. $500 given that the newer lens is harder to find mint used) and with a touch of macro capability, then by all means get the 24-70 f/4 IS.

I have owned the 24-105 f4 IS, 24-70 f2.8 II and the 24-70 f4 IS. I currently own the 24-70 f4 IS, which I prefer for its compact size, excellent IQ, IS and macro capability.