which lens 24-70 or 24-105

want to get a good L lense but dont know which to buy. Does someone have one or both of these lens so you can help me figure out which option is better.
Which one would be best for in studio portraits. Also how about the new EF-S 17 - 55 mm F2.8 IS lens that just came out. Anyone know if that lens is just as good as the other 2 mentioned.

For studio settings, I would imagine the 24-70 would get the nod. For everything else, 24-105. Sounds like the 17-55 is going to be the best of both, we'll have to wait and see.

I have 24-105 not happy @ 24 - f/4 a fare bit of vegetating. I am looking at the 24-70 next week.

See attached lick has a go info on all 3 lenes: http://www.the-digital-picture.com …8-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx

A recent discussion on these two lenses took place, might help:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=154346

I was deciding between these two as well before I go out and get my first DSLR - a new 30D. I'm very much a novice and have read through quite a bit of info that can be found on this very informative forum (thanking all of you kind people) and other reviews as well. I have just about decided on the 24-105 for the following reasons:

- because I am looking to appoint the winning lens as my walkaround lens (if not the only lens for the moment) the extra 35mm of reach will provide me with pretty much the full range of focal lengths I need most of the time. The lighter weight and smaller size holds advantages for me too.

- I've never used IS on a camera but I have certainly seen in a number of situations where it would be very useful to be able to slow the shutter speed when a tripod is not practical or handy. I think the ability to get around without a tripod most of the time is of great value.

- in regard to the extra stop the 24-70 has over the 24-105 I understand that the main advantage of this is the increased ability to freeze moving subects (particularly in low light where IS will do nothing for you). I am in Australia and here the saving I make by buying the 24-105 over the 24-70 will allow me to pick up a fast prime to answer this problem. I would save pretty much enough for the 50 f1.4 or the 85 f1.8. People have also called attention to the advantage a faster lens provides when it comes to the background blur in portraits. If you are looking at the 24-70 for portraits or freezing action I don't see why the 50 f1.4 for instance (being right in the centre of the range of focal lengths of the 24-70) wouldn't suffice for those occasions.

I could be way off and maybe the quality of the 24-70 is better than the 24-105 and 50 but for me the quality of these lenses (from the pictures I've seen on this forum and elsewhere) are more than acceptable. I just feel that, for what I would use it for, the extra reach at the tele end, greater portability and advantages of IS far outway the benefit of one extra stop (and 300 extra grams) when I can purchase a prime (with the savings from the 24-105) that will provide a further one or two stops advantage over the 24-70.

That's my two cents and if I haven't already put you to sleep with this long-winded reply I hope it may have helped.

I was in the same quandry. I chose the 24-105 because of the reach and the IS. I have been very pleased with the pictures.Both are great lenses. Pick one, take great pics and don't look back.

I have been considering exactly the same thing. An alternative suggestion made to me was to get the 28-70 so you benefit from the bokeh and freezing action, and get an 85 1.8 for those longer portraits, with great bokeh. I still haven't decided as I'm also considering the 70-200 f4L for outdoors portraits.

If you haven't done so, you should read the link on choosing a lens at the top of the lens forum. https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=86975

There has been endless commentary on this forum concerning these two lenses. If you use the search function you will shortly have more reading material than you could possibly imagine!!:p

I prefer the 24-70L. The lens/hood relationship of the 24-70L allows the hood to be truely effective through out it's focal range. I'm not a fan of IS (it has it's own issues) and really don't see the need on this range of focal length. I have the 24-70L and wouldn't spend additional money if an IS model was available. I'm also not a fan of slower than f/2.8 maximun apertures (if possible), the 20D's fastest and most accurate AF mode only comes into play with f/2.8 or faster lenses. Seems the most complaints I have seen involve zoom lenses with greater than a 3X ratio.

I went through this stage last month and decided to go with the 24-105/4 but it also depends what you're shooting, If i could choose again I'd go with the 24-70/2.8, I'll probably be picking one up to compliment the 24-105/4 though =)

too bad it's not 24-105/2.8 with IS

the 24-70 has the biggest hood i've ever seen for a mid-range zoom. it better be effective.

have you tried the 24-105 or are you going on what you heard?

ed rader

The 24-70L's lens elements move seperate from it's hood which is attached to the outter lens barrel. The lens extends as the focal lenght is widen which is reverse of how the 24-105L's elements move. Also the 24-105L's hood moves with it's lens elements.

i know. i've own the 24-105 and i've used the the 24-70 for several hundred shots.

the 24-70 has a unique zoom movement and a super huge hood....so i would not expect a problem with flare nor did i encounter any.

the 24-105's hood is affixed as most hoods are. i don't see any disadvantages to this method and the lens uses a much smaller petal hood.

i've taken thousands of shots with the 24-105 in all conditions and there are certainly no problems with flaring.

so, if you are comparing the two lenses i think the 24-105 is superior in this respect and the 24-70 may be over engineered.

ed rader

I believe the 24-105 is the better choice as an everyday lens for all the reasons noted above by Nick. If you are using the lens primarily for portrait work, the 24-70 would probably get the nod. Both lenses are wanting at the wide end on a crop body, so there most likely will be a 10-22 or 17-40 in your future as well

Sorry, just not so. Since the hood, on the 24-105L, moves with the zooming of the lens, the hood can only be designed to be most effective at the widest focal range or else it will cause vingetting there if tele flare control was effective.