3 steps - the difference in 105mm and 70mm for me!

[canonclix]

Curious to hear others opinions, but in the several weeks I have been using the 24-70vii in place of the 24-105 - I have paid close attention to whether I would notice the long end focal range difference. At this point, it seems to be taking about 3 extra steps toward my subject (at 70mm vs 105mm to get the same frame). I am sure there is a scientific way to analyze that - so maybe I am missing something.

For my purposes the new 24-70 f/2.8vii is hands down better than the 24-105, and not in the same league as the 17-55 (which I could only endure for a few months when I was using the 60D). Maybe later I will notice some blurry shots due to no IS - but so far (about 650 pictures) I haven't missed it at all. The IQ, the tight zoom ring with a lock and the f/2.8 are worth the extra cost and 3 extra steps to me!

My shots have included; dance practice, indoor (active) kid shots around the house, outside family portraits, indoor car shows, birthday parties, etc. I have not noticed the extra weight or many of the other "complaints".

Of course if the price was lower I would be happier - but I am a satisfied customer.

[HDNitehawk]

If you took 3 steps forward, and your average step is 3' that would mean you are 18' feet from your subject.
Identical framing for 105mm would be 27'.

Not to scientific, the 105mm is 50% longer than the 70mm. You can be 50% farther away.

For most close shots under 20' away I don't think I would miss the extra 35mm.

[ham]

It'd be interesting to see some side-by side comparisons of framing on the two...