24-70F4 or 24-105F4??


TPF Noob!
Sep 20, 2015
Reaction score
Can others edit my Photos
Photos OK to edit
Since I am making the switch to full frame, the efs lenses have to go! Or maybe just stay on the crop factor body for backups. Either way, I am having a very difficult time finding any real head to head details that will help me decide between the two. They are the same price, they have the same wide angle, and they are both IS USM setups. I have the newer nifty fifty, the 100-400, and for the time being, a Quantaray 28-90 that needs to be replaced as it is damaged. If it helps, I will be adding the 70-200F4 IS model to my bag as well. I just need to know from someone that has experience with these two, which is the better "walk around" lens? There is a similar thread from back in the spring, but it was comparing a non IS model of the 24-70 if I read it correctly.
Most who own the 24-70 say its better, I had the 24-105 and found it to be excellent, its range being so handy for many types of shot, and ff cameras can do shallow dof with f4, and have iso in reserve if required, and it has IS
I guess the biggest deciding factor would be how good the IQ is at the 70-105 range when compared to the 70-200 at those same focal lengths.
Well I wouldn't worry about doubling up on 30mm, a 24-70f2.8 is worth it maybe because its fast, the 24-70 f4 probably great but its not to fast and range s limited. I must be honest though I misread your original post and thought it was the 24-70 f2.8 vs 24-105 f4, now I've re-read there's no way id go the shorter one, even though it has a good macro ability
Definitely going with one of the f4 models, can't justify the extra cost of the 2.8 unless someone makes a very convincing argument. Would these be suitable for landscapes?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
24-105 is amazing and highly underrated. I have a ton of lenses and this has become my go-to lens for traveling because the range is so damn useful.
I have both the 24-105 and the 24-70f2.8 version. The 24-105 lives on my camera. I seldom need the speed of the shorter lens and the extra reach of the 105 is invaluable. Between two f4 versions I would go with the 24-105 hands down.
Not ever using or owning the 24-70, I chose to go with the 24-105 as my every day lens. Doesn't seem to be a quality difference between the two and you get the increased zoom range with the 105.... The 24-105 can do what the 24-70 can do, but not the other way around....
Sounds like that will be my next purchase then. Thank you all for your input, it's always appreciated.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I thought I read it somewhere that the Canon EF 24-70mm f/4 lenses have issue and people are not too happy about it.

Edit: Just did a quick search. Some people claim the lens has focus shift issue.

And this lens review site did talk about the issue a little bit. The bottom line is, the issue may not affect your photos. It all depends.

Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS USM Lens Focus Shift
Last edited:
The biggest issue I see is that the 24-70 means you always need to switch to the 70-200 whenever the top end of 70mm is not telephoto enough. While it is a short tele, 70mm is a far cry from 85mm, and even more different than 105mm is...so if your other zoom is a 70-200mm lens, then the 24-105mm would mean you could use that lens without needing to swap out to the longer tele-zoom quite so often.

I owned a 24-105 L IS USM for a number of years, and found it was a VERY convenient one-lens solution for many things on a 5D, although I also found that the 70-200 was a very wonderful, handy lens too.
Thanks again for all the great info, it looks like the only reason to ever get the 24-70 would be if I needed the 2.8 which I already decided against. Glad I joined this site!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Most reactions

New Topics