Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM vs Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L V1

I finally stepped up to full frame with a 5D4 and I have no walk around lens. I primarily shoot wildlife so I am not wanting to spend a lot of money on a walk around lens. I can pick up a used F4L lens for around 450 or a refurbished STM for around the same money. I was just wondering what you guys would pick between the two? I know the L version would be more durable but I am not too worried about that. Image quality would probably be the main thing. Thanks for any help you might have for my decision.

"With all things considered, most will find the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM to be the best fit for their needs as long as the budget stretches to its (very reasonable) price tag. If the budget is limited, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM and Sigma 24-105mm f/4 DG HSM Art remain very solid options, with the Canon lens being our preference thanks to its weather sealed design. On the other hand, if DSLR filmmaking is a high priority, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM will likely be the best choice, forgoing the f/4 constant maximum aperture in favor of a smooth and quiet AF system."

https://www.the-digital-picture.com …News-Post.aspx?News=20512


"the Canon f/4L version offers reasonably homogenous results at all aperture settings between 24mm – 50mm, but zoomed in between 50–105mm at wider aperture settings, the corners tend to drop off, but it’s still sharp in the center. That’s something of an advantage compared to the 24-105mm STM, which as discussed excels for sharpness only at f/8."

"At the other end of the focal range, 24mm at the maximum f/4 aperture, things are better for the Canon f/4L version, but here again, the 24-105mm STM is struggling to offer anything approaching homogenous results."

"Despite ranking behind the more expensive Sigma and Canon pro L competition, the new 24-105mm STM standard zoom offers respectable results across the board."

https://www.dxomark.co​m …ll-rounder-holds-its-own/

I've been using the STM for several years, with no complaints. At the wide end, it is faster, and has less distortion than the L. It is sharper (slightly) than the L at all focal lengths and/or apertures. It is smaller, lighter and less expensive than the L. It also has modern (better) IS than the L. If you do video, get the STM. Don't take my word for any of it; see the review at TDP.

On the downside, the STM is f/5.6 by 67mm,and not weather resistant. The AF speed of the STM is not USM, but is quite respectable.

IMO there is a large copy to copy variation with the 24-105 f/4 V1. I am one of the fortunate ones, and have a good one. It would be my choice, if you can find a good one.