The Great 24-70 vs 24-105 Debate

[neuroanatomist]

Another option for that little extra reach you're looking for with the 24-105 could be made up with a 1.4 extender.


$1059 for the 24-105 + $309 for the Canon 1.4 extender

Nice suggestion. Or, it would be except for the small but critical fact that the Canon 1.4x extender does not work with the 24-105mm f/4L lens.

I found "Juza" a bit biased...

Yeah, that sums it up, except for mentioning the frequent factual errors in his reviews, too.

My current photographic disciplines include wildlife, BIF, photojournalism, and a lot of indoor event photography and my other lens is a 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS.


The 24-105 is more for outdoor photography where the fewer times I need to expose my sensor to the elements, the better.The wider angle is good for landscape stuff...

Given your interests, I'm not sure you'd benefit too much from the 35mm on the long end. If you're out in nature, 105mm is not going to be any better for wildlife or BIF than 70mm - you're still looking at a lens change to go from wildlife to wide landscapes. For photojournalism and indoor event photography, I think the 24-70mm is the better choice (better subject isolation when needed, better low light performance with moving subjects).