24-70L or 24-105L+Macro 100 ?

Is it a good idea to use 24-70L as an all around lens Indoor and outdoor (no sports) for 5Dc or
24-105L plus one prime like 100macro (for portrait / nice bokeh).

I find my 5Dc and 24-70L are great with portrait and indoor still subjects also the lens produce great details on outdoor shots. (Great bokeh and control of DOF too!)

Can I duplicate the 24-70L versatility if I get a cheaper 24-105L plus a 100 2.8 macro?

Does the 24-105L maintain great details like the 24-70L?

24-70 is a much sharper lens. 24-105 has extra reach and IS. I'll be buying 24-70 soon and I'm lucky enough that I can keep both ^^ if IQ and one moar stop of light is important to you then you know your answer. But NOTHING beats 24-105 versatility.

I can't make your decision... but I can tell you that I'm extremely happy with my recent 24-105 purchase. I was debating between the 24-70 & 24-105 also... the extra reach and IS of the 24-105 was the deciding factor since I could get a recent copy of the 24-70 for less than a $100 more. The IQ has been amazingly good on the 24-105.

I also have the non L 100 macro and it too is a fantastic lens.... very versatile indeed.

Good luck in your pursuit.

I too have the 24-105 and a 100 macro. I was never i doubt of which lens to choose (24-70 or 24-105). The IS on the 24-105 gives you more than the 1 stop 24-70 offers. I use mine a lot for indoor shooting without a flash. Of course if it is for shooting portraits or indoor sports, then I would prefer the 24-70 because of it's better DOF, but as a all-round lens I would absolutely go for the 24-105 and when I need 2.8 I use my macro.

pfpeter wrote in post #10377200
I too have the 24-105 and a 100 macro. I was never i doubt of which lens to choose (24-70 or 24-105). The IS on the 24-105 gives you more than the 1 stop 24-70 offers. I use mine a lot for indoor shooting without a flash. Of course if it is for shooting portraits or indoor sports, then I would prefer the 24-70 because of it's better DOF, but as a all-round lens I would absolutely go for the 24-105 and when I need 2.8 I use my macro.

Agree on this. I use the same combination.
Beside that extra mm and IS for me is more important then on stop.

Thanks for the input guys. I just find the 24-70l needs a lot of care when carrying it around during outodoor shooting like theme park etc. It's a bit heavy too. I just don't want to lose the nice background blur it produce at f2.8.
With the 100 macro non L in mind, is this comparable to the 70mm 2.8 of 24-70l for portraits or better? Back ground blur the same? What about IQ?

AWGD8 wrote in post #10377726
Thanks for the input guys. I just find the 24-70l needs a lot of care when carrying it around during outodoor shooting like theme park etc. It's a bit heavy too. I just don't want to lose the nice background blur it produce at f2.8.
With the 100 macro non L in mind, is this comparable to the 70mm 2.8 of 24-70l for portraits or better? Back ground blur the same? What about IQ?

Canons EF 100mm F/2.8 Macro USM is one of the sharpest lenses you can get. In some situations maybe too sharp regarding portraits. And the blur is awesome too. It beats both the 24-70 and the 24-105 in IQ, but lack the capability of zoom.

Here are reviews of the 24-70 and 24-105:
http://www.photozone.d​e …eos_ff/528-canon2470f28ff
http://www.photozone.d​e …s_ff/420-canon_24105_4_5d

I like my 24-105 on vacation and family outings and always bring a prime with me for the low light situations.
The 24-105 is very light and has a nice reach for walk around.
With the 100mm you would have a deticated macrolens that adds a whole new world, so I would pick that option.

stsva wrote in post #10378421
Here are reviews of the 24-70 and 24-105:
http://www.photozone.d​e …eos_ff/528-canon2470f28ff
http://www.photozone.d​e …s_ff/420-canon_24105_4_5d

Thanks for the links, I`ll check these out when I get home.

Here's another vote for the 24-105 f4L IS. The caveat is "for what I shoot" which is predominantly outdoor, natural light fashion/swimsuit. I might feel differently if I shot mostly indoors where the f2.8 would be more critical.

The 24-105 is my walkaround lens and handles at least 75% of every click of the shutter. While the 70-200 f4 IS is my favorite lens for IQ, there are too many instances where it's just too long on my 450D (1.6 crop). Thus the 24-105 lives on my camera while the 70-200 and the 50mm 1.4 are always with me.

JelleVerherstraeten wrote in post #10378485
I like my 24-105 on vacation and family outings and always bring a prime with me for the low light situations.
The 24-105 is very light and has a nice reach for walk around.
With the 100mm you would have a deticated macrolens that adds a whole new world, so I would pick that option.

It makes sense now, that`s how I intend to use the lens, for vacation, outings etc. then low light/background blur for indoors.
I would like to get a 100mm f2 or 85mm f1.8 but both don`t have the macro capability. So 100mm f2.8 macro sounds good~ no need for faster prime since I`m not shooting indoor sports.

I've had the 24-105 (sold it with my 50D recently) and it's a great lens. I also have the 100L IS macro and use it often. I will say, having owned both, I'm waiting anxiously for the new 24-70 IS. My 24-105 was a fantastic walk around and general purpose lens, what it lacked was a wider aperture for additional low light, indoors use. It still worked well but could have been better when compared to my primes and 70-200 2.8 IS. The 100L IS macro is also a great lens but lacks, of course, the variable framing but does well for small objects and portraits. Not as good as a "do it all" type lens though.

I think the new 24-70 2.8 IS will finally give us a perfect "do it all" lens and if in your shoes I would wait and put my money into one lens. Now, if Canon will get off their butts and get the lens out....

The 24-105 f/4L won't give you the same background as the 24-70 f/2.8L, it just can't with the narrower aperture. The 100mm f/2.8 might be good, I prefer the 135 f/2L for portraits, even better blur and tighter for good headshots. For body shots the 24-70 f/2.8L is excellent.

I love the 24-70 f/2.8L for walkabout use. It may be the brick but I like how solid it is made. On my 40D it is fairly light but it actually balances a bit better on my 1D. If I want something light I'll bring my T1i with 50 1.8 or 18-55IS

You gotta love the reverse zoom and hood design of the 24-70L. I also like the 24-105, but FOR ME, I'm just not as happy with it as the 24-70. Does not make either lens lesser of the other, they both have their strengths.