View Full Version : Canon 24-70mm vs 24-105mm
Am sort of considering the move from the 24-70mm L f2.8 to the new 24-105mm L f4. Although the 24-70 is a fantastic lens, I'm finding it a bit heavy as it's my 'walkabout' lens on a 20D with battery grip. (Bloody wimp! :oh-hum: )
I could live with the one stop speed loss but how do they compare optically? Anyone know? I've seen images/reports from each, but does anyone know of a head-to-head between the two.
Also the price difference is a slightly more than I would like, probably due to availability (Come on Fai, get this lens available soon mate!!), but if it really is as good, then may consider it.
Also, if anyone is considering a 5D, I would willingly go a split on a package to reduce costs...
Seek and ye shall find
http://luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/28-105.shtml
The review thread at Fred Miranda (http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=295&sort=7&cat=27&page=2) is gradually increasing. A number of the reviewers have 24-70s. Overall the reviews now seem really positive. There appeared to be some doubters initially but these now seem the minority. I am waiting on a 5D package (the lens for me) with someone and it's not coming any time soon :(
Now the screaming fits seem to have subsided it looks like a good solid lens, and the comparisons with the 28-135 IS are interesting.
Bizarrely it's currently cheaper to get it from Warehouse Express than it is to get from HK or the US! Tempting!
UZUBAIRU
11-10-2005, 18:59
Thanks DamienB,
I'm in the States on holiday at the moment and have been looking for this lens.
Most places that have them are sold out within hours of getting them in.
Mainly priced at $1249 + 7/8% tax.
I've just purchased online at warehouse Express. That is definitely the best price!
It will hopefully be waiting for me when I get back into the UK.
Thanks again,
Umu
Sounds good, Is anyone interested in my Canon 24-70mm L f2.8 lens. I bought it a few weeks ago from Fai. Paid £749 for it (as you can see on his site) I'd like to get as close to £699 inclusive of Special delivery.
Gotta act quickly though, I'm off to Spain on Sunday.
Sprout Crumble
11-10-2005, 20:37
Damn. Would've been tempted except I just got a 24mm 1.4L and an 85mm 1.2L (deal didn't go tits-up after all :thumbs:)
I'm the same as you. Need a walkaround lens and think the 24-105 is the one.
I'd like to get as close to £69.90 inclusive of Special delivery.
I'll give you 70 quid for it?
Umm....Lets see if I get a better offer first, if not, then.......
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.Dream on! :lol:
OK, Gone for it. Ordered from WE (Thanks for the heads up on the price.) Hope it's in stock as I need to take it to Spain on Sunday. They say they provide next-day delivery, anyone put this to the test?
EDIT: Darn, just phoned to confirm - Out of stock! :(
Not surprising at that price!
Edit - bristolcameras.co.uk doing it for the same price...
Not surprising at that price!
Edit - bristolcameras.co.uk doing it for the same price...
Not yet they're not :( Due soon! Good price though, wish I'd booked my hols a week or so later....
EDIT: Well, Jessops Cardiff dropped their price from £869 to £750 as I'd been promised. They were reluctant to go lower as the 'pricematch' shops were out of stock. So in a weak-knee'd moment as the lens was in my hands, I crumbled and gave in to their salesman for that price...Could have waited and saved £50 (minus postage), but I really wanted it for my hols.
Got some works overtime to do tonight, so unlikley I'll be trying it much, not even to enter the weekly comp. :( (but you never know...)
Just gotta sell the 24-70 now......
Sprout Crumble
12-10-2005, 18:51
Let me know what you think. Very interested.
me too! </subscribes to thread>
i'd be replacing a 28-135 IS, so it should be a noticeable jump in quality, and my first 'L' lens.
Sprout Crumble
12-10-2005, 21:42
The 85mm 1.2 saga finished today when the lens turned up. Damn fine optic and everthing the seller said. Utterly mint. :thumbs:
stormywhether
12-10-2005, 21:48
how much did you find that for sprouty?
Oh dear... 24-105 recalled due to flare problems...
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/296538/
Sprout Crumble
20-10-2005, 20:32
how much did you find that for sprouty?
£470 and its like new, absolutely mint. I'm putting the money i've saved towards a back support to wear when i'm carrying it. ;)
Saw the flare problems. Seems quite severe by the examples posted. Can't imagine how Canon are going to do a quick fix unless its a quality and not a design issue or maybe IS related. I've got this vision of Canon sending owners a new hood thats a foot long... :D
Matholwch
20-10-2005, 20:53
£470 and its like new, absolutely mint. I'm putting the money i've saved towards a back support to wear when i'm carrying it. ;)
A camera shop in Cardiff had one of these second hand - very nice it was too, comes in a leather bound carry case - weighs a fair bit, but a lovely piece of optics :)
The 85mm 1.2 saga finished today when the lens turned up. Damn fine optic and everthing the seller said. Utterly mint. :thumbs:
Can we have a pic of the f/1.2 please?
/wipes drool off chin
Oh dear... 24-105 recalled due to flare problems...
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/296538/
Just bloody great. The guy I was getting this and the 5D with has been chomping at the bit to get his 5D. Just as the store appears to be getting the kit in this happens. My cheap(ish) 24-105 get will no doubt be recalled and he will get the body only option (not that I blame him). Canon's QC on some of their lenses sucks :(
Those flare effects really are funky:
http://eos-d.axisz.jp/joyful_exif/img/325.jpg
Sprout Crumble
21-10-2005, 10:18
Looks like she's being probed by an alien.
I actually quite like that shot though. Good stuff.
http://k41.pbase.com/v3/91/200591/2/50946586.Flare.jpg
Not so nice here, though. And the guy had the hood fitted.
Sprout Crumble
21-10-2005, 17:29
Yeah, that one is just plain lousy.
Its been suggested that the problem is just with an early batch and that later ones are okay. Remains to be seen what the final outcome will be although that makes more sense than Canon actually releasing a lens with a flaw that obvious.
If you read the FM thread, someone states that Canon have a fix already, and parts will be shipped next month or so - no need to send a lens in until then.
Sprout Crumble
21-10-2005, 21:46
Wonder what the problem is and what the fix will be though.
Bugger, just home from my hols to see this.. :(
Must say that I've not had any problems with the lens but then I've not taken any images in the circumstances that people have described when these flare issues occur. I will have to do some further testing.. There seems to be much discussion about the actual numbers of lenses affected, hope mine turns out to be a 'good-un', though as I bought it in Jessops I don't see that there will be a problem if a change is necessary..
I have not had a chance to really check out the images I've taken, but at first glance sharpness appears to be on-par with the 24-70 it has replaced. As I didn't take a tripod I found the IS to be a saviour even at this relatively short focal length. I have hardly switched it off, it's silent in operation and performs well, much better and more subtly than on some previous lenses (70-300mm IS, though this lens is obviously in a different league). I did notice a shortening of battery life using it this way, even with the battery grip, but the overhead I feel is well worth it. This image, for example, was handheld with elbows on a balcony railing, taken wide open at 1/5 of a second. :eek: Would have been nice to have the dual-mode IS for panning perhaps, but maybe that's asking a bit much.
http://www.mentalasanything.com/street.jpg
Ignore the content, this was taken as a test for the IS only. :dork:
The lens is bigger than I thought it would be, but is still a bit shorter and lighter to carry around than the 24-70 and is ideal as a general/walkabout lens. The extra reach is always handy, but after dialling-in 70mm and then zooming to 105mm, I was surprised to see just how little further reach it means in real life, but I suppose could make a shot 'a keeper' if a heavy crop was necessary.
Build quality is to me identical, people have said it's more 'plasticy' but I cannot say that there is any discernable difference. Feels a quality product in your hand, and, as you would expect for a lens costing this much, everything operates positively and silky smooth including the zoom. I am yet to experience any zoom-creep despite carrying all day.
The stop slower in aperture is not an issue for me, or hasn't been yet though it may be for some especially if you shoot indoor sports. I have used up to ISO 800 and used Noiseware with no ill-effect. The 20D does however cope well with high ISOs.
So based on what I've seen so far I must say that I consider the move a good decision as long as this flare issue does not turn into a real problem, but it would obviously have been better for me to buy it first rather than 'upgrade' - had it been available at the time, and would not hesitate in purchasing again.
I'm sure thiswill be a popular lens.
Thanks impossible-to-type-user-name-dude :thumbs:
hadn't realised it was single mode IS :oh-hum:
Looks like it affects lenses with a control no. of UT1000 or less. See this Service Notice (http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&keycode=2112&fcategoryid=216&modelid=11924) Also a pretty good review of the lens at The-Digital-Picture.com (http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EF-24-105mm-f-4-L-IS-USM-Lens-Review.aspx) which mentions the flare problem.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.