Canon 24-70/2.8L & 24-105/4L IS, which one would you prefer?

[Keith B]

I think you summed up the tradeoffs well. With the new high-ISO sensors, an f/4 lens seems to be OK for general purpose shots, even indoors. I worried about the sheer size and weight of the 24-70/2.8, since the mid-zoom is my principal lens for travel. I like shooting at f/2 for shallow DoF, so I use primes if the f/4 lens isn't fast enough.

YES!


That is why I have 24 1.4L and 50 1.4 in my bag. Actually my 2 favorite lenses, but for practicality the 24-105 is on my camera most of the time.


I think my next major purchase will be the 85 1.2L.





Please, please no debates on the 85 1.2L.

[Benjamin]

In all honesty, I highly doubt this. Even with better ISO performance, photographers will always want to push the limits on how little light they would like to shoot in. And IS will always help them push the limits. Also remember that the longer the focal length the more important (and desirable) IS is.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Maybe I didn't really say that well... By saying "say goodbye to IS" I just mean that the functionality of IS can be replaced identically with excellent highISO performance. However, theeffect deliveredby a wide aperture like f2.8 can hardly be simulated in any other way. IS is and will always be highly appriciated by all users, this i agree.

[Keith B]

The IS on my 24-105 is almost never on (battery conservation). I think the 24-105 with the 50 1.4-$300 lens is a great cover most of the bases set up.

[Benjamin]

Yah, the 24-105L + 50/1.4 will be a good approach. []

The IS on my 24-105 is almost never on (battery conservation).

If you don't mind me asking, do you feel any difference in battery life between IS on and off? I have never experienced any noticeable difference in battery life myself; I know the IS should affect battery life, just don't know how great.

[Keith B]

I haven't really noticed much on the 24-105 (it is a relatively new lens to me 12/08) but I did notice a little bit with my 100-400. I couldn't tell you exactly how much. It is probably negligible but when you take into battery cycle life spans and such and being $90 a pop.


I also get a little tripped out when the IS enables (noise, vibrations) especially in the 100-400 so I don't like to have it on when I don't absolutely need it.

[Colin]

I usually don't think about whether I should have it on or off, but it's usually on because of my habit of not having enough light to get by without it.


When it's off, sometimes THAT weirds me out. I find the sound reassuring. When I use my 400mm, with no IS, and I watch the image bounce around in the viewfinder, my first impulse is to look for the switch to turn it on. I wish I had such a mechanism for my compound bow []

[Benjamin]

I also get a little tripped out when the IS enables (noise, vibrations) especially in the 100-400 so I don't like to have it on when I don't absolutely need it.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

Ahh, feel the same actually. The only IS lens I have is the 70-200/4L IS. Because I use film, it usually takes me time to compose or just lookinginto the view finder for quite some timebefore actually taking a picture. When IS's switching on and off frequently I do feel disturbing a bit. So when I need time tocompose and focusI just turn off the IS, and when I'm shooting I'll put it on, no matter what speed I'm using. The image shake is not that bad at 200mm, but I can imagine it will be hard to handle when it's 400mm...


It will be hard to live w/o IS for the 70-200mm, the 24-105L should still be reasonably handy.

[Colin]

Please, please no debates on the 85 1.2L.
<div style="CLEAR: both"]</div>

My only bitch with the 85 1.2L is that I can't get in close. Minimum focus distance is way beyond reach range. Can't even take a picture of somebody across a short table.


That, and I'd prefer a different manual focus mechanism. It's kind of neat, but not that neat.

[SupraSonic]

Our 24-105 was use on wedding ceremony in some case there is indoor shooting but when peformance of 24-105 was sluggish then we have to make adjustment i.e. increase iso. And we always wish that we had 24-70 F2.8 where iso setting can be universal.I know the 24-70 has extended barrel but the F2.8 has the edge.


The 24-105 was used outdoor i have no issue.Indoor no issues too if there is enough room lighting.

[atticusdsf]

i'm a fan of the 105.. i was nervous going in (i bought the kit with my 5dmkII), but it has far exceeded my expectations. my previous general purpose combo was the 40d + 17-55, and i haven't missed the f/2.8 near as much as i thought i would.