trade 24-70 for 24 105 IS?

I've been thinking recently about my 24-70, first of all i don't have any problems with it at all, it's fabulous and i really like it, but...i'm thinking that the 24-105 IS could be a better option for me, looking through my hard drive i haven't seen many instances where i used the 2.8 to it's fullest, i almost always use it stopped down to around f/4 or f/5.6 and i don't really shoot 'action' in low light much.
I'm just thinking the IS, larger focal range, lighter weight plus less bulk could be better and i could use fast primes when i need low light performance, but then again i think that the 2.8 is useful to have, i love the images the 24-70 produces and when shooting i actually like the size and weight and the way the hood works.

I suppose i'm just thinking out loud really but would you trade your 24-70 that you are happy with for a 24-105 on the basis that it could suit your usage better? I know Ronald has tried and come back to the 24-70 but then again i'm not Ronald and i don't have ff, anyone wanna swap a 24-105 for my 24-70 for a week to cure my curiosity?

Sorry for another bloody 24-70 vs. 24-105 thread but it's been nagging in my mind

F4 IS would be better for what you describe.

I finally saw a 10 rated used 24-70L on b&h this morning, dwelled on it for about 10 mins, and someone snatched it from my cart.

That's how I always felt. Can't hurt to try it, right? I've tried an awful lot of lenses, thanks to the 24-70L. About to try a couple more. However, I never doubt that I'll come back to this baby...I always do.

No way in hell!
I would not trade my 24-70 for ANY other zoom in that focal range, or about.

my best advice is this: RENT the 24-105 and use it for a day along side your 24-70. selling your 24-70 and than deciding that you want it back doesn't make any sense to me . if you can't rent, i will go to a store and try the lens myself. nobody but you can know how you are going to like it but i will not sell a copy of a lens that i am happy with until i was 100% sure that i am happy with the new lens..

I'd only trade my 24-70 for either a 24-70 f2.8 IS or a 24-105 f2.8 IS, if they are ever produced. :P

Although you may not shoot at 2.8 and step down, I've always thought (Though I could be wrong) that lenses in general get their best IQ a stop or so lower from their max.

i would never trade my 24-70 for anything canon currently produce its my favourite and one of the sharpest lenses i own

I find f/4 too limiting most of the time since my house is so ugly I need to blur out as much crap as possible.

I really should be using primes at f/1.8 minimum!

Gonna tell you my story. Debating between the two very long. Was going on honeymoon to thailand. So in the end i bought the 24-70 second hand (3 months old). Had the lens for a week and then came the dought. Would it be better to have IS, longer reach and less weight? Yes. So i sold the 24-70 and bought a new 24-105. I'm now back from thailand and the pictures are great, very helpfull IS, and reach. But i've saw in a few pictures from people at the market that they where doing things and when looked at the shot, the hands were blurry. Or they moved a bit. I knew that IS was not going to make up for action. So since then, thinking about the 24-70. And how that lens would have save the shot, make up for moving people. When looking at the site from my dealer, i saw again a 24-70, what was 3 months old. So i trade in my 24-105 for the 24-70, again. Also thinking ahead, i'm going to take more and more pictures at party's, birthday and so. Also wanna take pictures from my future children and they never stand still. So i think the 2.8 will be better for me.
Just wanna give you my side of the story.

Thanks guys i absolutely adore my 24-70 and was just wondering if the 24-105 could be better but the concensus here seems to be that most people prefer the 24-70, if i ever run into anyone with a 24-105 IS i'll see if i can borrow it but in ther meantime i'm happy with what i have

I debated myself on this very thing. Do I get the 28-135mm IS or the 28-75mm F/2.8 I know it's not the same... but I'm on a more limited budget here, work with me. Bottom line is the same. Do I go for IS or larger aperature?? I ended up going for the larger aperature of course. I did two weddings this month in the same poorly lit reception hall, and in all honesty, I don't believe IS would have helped me at all. Out of the 1000+/- images that I took between the two events with this lens, I do not have one image that exhibits camera shake blur when it comes to the subject. Some have movement in the background due to a slower shutter(I was dragging my shutter on some images for effect), but that was intended. I did have some camera shake when using my 70-200mm from a shakey church balcony... and IS really could have helped there. I was tripod mounted and using a remote cable release, so I did everything I could... the balcony was just shaking... vibrating... or whatever, but it was moving. I could visibly see it in the viewfinder. I think IS is more helpful at the long end of the telephoto. I can honestly say that with a wide angle lens say from 28-50mm you would probably have to be in the middle of seizure, or have had waayyyyyy too much caffiene to shake enough to need IS....lol.

Both are great lenses, another one to possibly consider is the EF-S 17-55 F/2.8. Kinda the best of both worlds, F/2.8 and IS

If I already had the 24-70 I would keep it. I have the 24-105 and wonder if the 17-40 wouldn't suit me better? Of course for landscapes it would but for walking around 24mm on a FF cam is pretty damn wide, I also have a really sharp copy and I have no complaints. So I am keeping the 24 - 105 and might buy the 17-40 on top, or the Tamron 17-35 as i am not a pro.....choices, choices...bottom line is what I have now is good and I would miss it dearly when travelling.

In short you would gain range, IS and weight....but would you miss that extra stop?

markbluemica wrote in post #2043308
i would never trade my 24-70 for anything canon currently produce its my favourite and one of the sharpest lenses i own

wow, even sharper than the 135L?

John you speak a lot of sense and i find myself agreeing with what you say

I suppose what got me into this line of doubting was when i was trying to take city photos at night without a tripod, just lack or preparation on my part really and wishing i had IS, before that i'd never had problems with my lens. Maybe i just need a better bag that allows me to carry a tripod

Yeah that would be perfect at the moment but i'm seriously thinking about getting the 5D in the future (keeping my 350D), the 24-70 should really shine on that.

I'd have to say yes, i find when shooting my friends band the extra stop is very useful. Like i said above i think this doubt was just put into my mind when i was too lazy to carry my tripod around with me in Prague and wished i had IS, oh well, life is full of comprimises