24-70 f2.8 or 24-105 f4

I am considering one or the other, I would appreciate your thoughts on these for weddings, portraits and landscapes. This will be mounted on the 5DmkII, my other lenses are 50 f1.4, 100 f2.8 and 100-400L
Pros and cons to both would be appreciated.

Keith

I would say for weddings and portraits you'll benefit more from the f/2.8 of the 24-70. Landscapes, I would go with the 24-105 as you'll want to use a smaller (larger #) f stop to get a greater DOF and the IS will come in handy when not using a tripod to prevent camera shake.

I've had both and chose to stick with the 24-70 for the ability to create a narrower DOF.

I've been using the 24-105 for wedding work on the Classic 5D for 4 years now - superb for that type of event as well as landscapes, walkabout, and hiking. I've never used the 24-70 so can't say anything about it.

These are very different products in spite of their similarities. My summary:
24-70:
Pros: f/2.8. Great IQ. Seems to be preferred amongst wedding shooters.
Cons: Heavier. Couple of hundreds more with no IS.
24-105:
Pros: Great IQ. Lighter, cheaper. IS.
Cons: Slower f/4.0.
Some of the cons of the 24-105 are offset by the 5D's ability to use higher ISOs. I use this lens all the time in relatively low-light situations at ISO 1000+. Now, not weddings. (I did one years ago for a friend and would never do one again--I admire those of you that do--successfully.)
The conclusion is, I'd take the recommendations of those who do shoot weddings over mine, but I think either can be made to work.

At the end of the day, the trade off is f2.8 vs. IS. The 24-105 can be used indoors but you will have to pair it with a flash.

You might want to take a look at this thread from the other day too:
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=832308

Hi , shooting in high speed with 2.8 is't it going to be the same as using the IS. The 24-105 has vingeting problems so i read.

I use it all the time at weddings - my mainstay - but having been a flash user since the '70's I've continued the practice with my 24-105, in combination with my 580ex. This has rarely been an issue. And with the IS (giving you at least 2-stops) and the ISO power of the 5D, I've been able to work it quite well . But I do agree - it would be nice if it was an f/2.8, but the size, weight and price would likely be quite obnoxious.

KCMO Al wrote in post #9684613
24-105:
Pros: Great IQ. Lighter, cheaper. IS.
Cons: Slower f/4.0.
Some of the cons of the 24-105 are offset by the 5D's ability to use higher ISOs. I use this lens all the time in relatively low-light situations at ISO 1000+. Now, not weddings. (I did one years ago for a friend and would never do one again--I admire those of you that do--successfully.)
The conclusion is, I'd take the recommendations of those who do shoot weddings over mine, but I think either can be made to work.

Hardly an issue - has never caused me any problems.

loizour wrote in post #9685774
.....The 24-105 has vingeting problems so i read.

Go with 24-70mm you won't regret it

Thanks everyone, this is exactly what i was looking for. I have used the 24-105 last yr for a wedding and was pretty happy with the results. However i was thinking the 2.8 might be a bonus over the IS. Do you really think the IS is a benefit and do you really have a use for it??

Keith

The 24-70 would be great for the 2.8, but you will only be able to use a small amount of focal length due to distortion. Anything less than say 40mm may start to distort heads and limbs etc if not used correctly. Where the extra focal length of the 24-105 will give you a little more scope for crops. Wide angle focal lengths arent really ideal for people photos.

I have the 24-105 and love it, but i would prefer a 24-70 and 70-200 2.8, if only i could afford them.
They all have their trade offs and plus and minus points.

I have both. I tend to use the 24-70 more indoors where I need the extra stop and don't necessarily need the reach. The 24-105 is great outdoors. Love the IQ, weight and the reach. If I had to live with one, it would probably be the 24-105.

I don't shoot weddings so I'm speculating on this, but doesn't the IS compensate for the extra stop since most of the shots at a wedding are relatively still? Other than a couple of dancing shots, it would seem to me that having the IS and additional focal length would be a bigger benefit than extra stop.

How does the 70 compare to the 105 at the 24mm end in terms of barrel distortion? I'm in the market for one of these lenses and will be using it for Landscapes so I'm concerned about distortion more than aperture size. The IS of the 105 sounds very useful but if the distortion is worse than the 70 then I can see myself getting the 70 instead.