24-70 or 24-105 walkaround lens?

[alexniedra]

I personally feel that the advantage of the IS is greater than the disadvantage of the f/4 vs the f/2.8.

In my case (and I'm more of a landscape / cityscape photographer), this is definitely the case.

And for me, f/2.8 is. It just depends on you shooting style.

[OiCecil]

Thanks for all the replies guys.


I've decided to go for the 24-70 f/2.8, which I feel will better compliment my shooting style.


This doesn't fit with all of your suggestions but every reply has helped me a great deal. Even those who opted for the 24-105; you've told me why you made that choice.


Thanks again everyone!

[Julius]

I have the both and prefer the 24-105 f4 L IS USM as a general walk about lens for the extra reach that it gives me.

[Maleko]

Thanks for all the replies guys.


I've decided to go for the 24-70 f/2.8, which I feel will better compliment my shooting style.


This doesn't fit with all of your suggestions but every reply has helped me a great deal. Even those who opted for the 24-105; you've told me why you made that choice.


Thanks again everyone!
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

The main things is you have gone for the len you want, hope your enjoying it!

[Backland Photography]

Hello OiCecil,


We use both the 24-70 &amp; 70-200 2.8 and find them to be quite up to the demands we put on them. I hope you will not be disappointed with either should you purchase a 70-200 2.8. Both lens are used on 1DMK11 bodies.


We find on our Xti/grip combo that each of the lens's render the combination to front heavy for extended shooting.


Have fun and be safe...

[sunny501501]

I went through the same process 2 years ago when I purchased a Canon 30D. I was considering between exactly the same 2 lenses and I went for the 24-105 since it has a better coverage and I don't like changing lens so this works better for me. Now I have upgraded to a 5D Mark II and I am using this lens with the full frame sensor has proven my decision was good.


If you are going to keep the XSi or in the future upgrading to a 50d, I would like to suggest you look at the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. This is a good lens with a better wide angle coverage. Excellent for traveling and a walkaround lens. If I have extra money, I definitely will go for this lens for my 30D and use it for travel.

[luck101]

im just curious about the IS.


it says its good for 3 stops of correction. i might have gotten the answer to this a while ago but forgot lol, but i prolly might have answered it already


the stops are implied to the shutter speed or full aperture stops?





wanted to bring this up because yes, one is f/4 and the other is f/2.8, but since f/4 has IS, wouldn't it be better to get the 24-105, sacrificing some DOF and some shutter speed possibilities of course?

[peety3]

it says its good for 3 stops of correction. i might have gotten the answer to this a while ago but forgot lol, but i prolly might have answered it already. the stops are implied to the shutter speed or full aperture stops?


wanted to bring this up because yes, one is f/4 and the other is f/2.8, but since f/4 has IS, wouldn't it be better to get the 24-105, sacrificing some DOF and some shutter speed possibilities of course?
<div style="clear: both;"]</div>

Normal rule of thumb is lenses for 35mm format can be handheld to 1/focal-length. On crop cameras, it's normally 1/(focal-length x crop-factor). Hence, for a 50mm lens on a 50D body, handhold threshold is usually 1/80th of a second. 3 stops of IS means you can likely handhold reasonably to three stops slower, or 1/10th of a second.


If you're shooting still items, the 24-105 has an advantage of 2 stops of handholdability (3 stops IS - 1 stop of native aperture). However, if you're shooting moving objects and want the ability to freeze the objects' motion, the 24-70 has an advantage of 1 stop (aperture is 1 stop larger, twice as much light, half the shutter time, half as much motion will be captured).


Hence the reason I always say, "look at your pictures". If the whole picture is blurry, IS might help (you're possibly beyond the limits of handholdability). If your subject is blurry but the background is crisp, aperture is more likely the better fix (need more light to speed up that shutter).

[Colin]

<span style="font-size: small; font-family: Times New Roman;"]I've got both, and I would say that, overall, I would heavily prefer the 24-105 as a walk around lens. Focal length, and IS...


<span style="font-size: small; font-family: Times New Roman;"]The 24-70 is superb, and faster, but it's also bulkier, and far less versatile.


Even though I have the 70-200 f/2.8 IS, I'd still lean twoard the 24-105 if i could only have one. If I was talking indoor event photography, like weddings, I'd swing back to the 24-70 f/2.8... The speed is worth it. Otherwise, I much prefer the 24-105.