24-70 or 24-105 walkaround lens?

[OiCecil]

For my preference I went for the 105, down to the focal length, I wanted a lens that would stay on my camera more, and i felt with 70mm I would be changing lenses more so than with 105mm, that little bit more from 70-105 does a lot for me!
I would struggle to say which one was better, as they are both brilliant lenses (have used both), but both quite different. My opinion anyway!
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

The extra focal length is another small reason I'm looking at the 24-105. Although to be honest, i can't imagine switching between the 24-70 and 70-200 to bother me too much. I guess this is mostly down to a photographers style of shooting.


I've also heard the quality/sharpness to be better in the 24-70.

Here is what Bryan has to say


..."The Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens quickly became one of my favorites. If I had only one lens, this would be the one. " ....


... "For my personal uses in this focal length range, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens is on my camera
more than the 24-70 L. If your needs are for wider focal lengths and
you are using a 1.6x FOVCF body, you should also consider the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens. It is another excellent choice.
"

I'm staying away from EF-S lenses, as further down the line I plan on moving to a full frame camera. Possibly a 5D MKII - or equivalent at the time - though this will be some time.

You say you have the 17-55 kit lens...do you mean 18-55?


Take a look at your pictures and the EXIF data in them. Analyze
what's blurry. If the whole picture is blurry, you MIGHT want to aim
for IS, as your shutter speeds are likely too slow. If the subject is
blurry but the background is crisp, your shutter speeds are high enough
to eliminate shake but not high enough to stop action, so aperture is
more likely what you want.

That's right, the 18-55. I've corrected my original post.


I've never used the 18-55 without IS, so I haven't much to base this on. Although your explanation has helped and from seeing subject blurriness with crisp backgrounds from a 70-200 f/4 I borrowed briefly, I think the higher aperture may be what I need.

[TheRoff]

My $.02


I found the 24-105 to be a bit too long for walking around with a 1.6 body, a 30D in my case. I found myself always changing to my 10-22.


It is a completely different story on my 5Dmk2. The 24-105 screams. Perfect.


Larry