24-70L or 24-105L (Travel Photography)

[Alex_B]

About half of my Landscapes which I show to audiences on the big screen are done with a 24-105L and the other half with the 17-40L, and some tiny fraction with my 300L f/4.
I do backpacking and prefer the slightly longer and lighter lens over the heavier 24-70. In particular on full frame the extra focal length at the end helps and I do not miss the gap from 105 to 300mm much.

The 24-105 needs a bit more corrections in postprocessing (e.g. chromatic aberration is more pronounced on the 24-105), but then again you need to do postprocessing anyway so it does not really mean extra effort.

 

[bratkinson]

Unless you're shooting for a magazine or have some overriding reason to get the top sharpness and top bokeh, save your arm/shoulder/back and go for the 24-105 and 5D3.

I had both the 24-70 (mark i) and 24-105 and found the 24-70 too heavy for 4-5 hours at a time as my only lens. I figured I needed the f2.8 as it was indoors and I had a 60D. I ultimately sold the 24-70. Since upgrading to a 5D3, when I want bokeh, I pop on my 135 f2L. The 24-105 does quite well at f4, 5.6, 8, and everywhere else in all kinds of low lighting when shooting at ISO 6400 and 1/160 shutter speed, no flash, indoors. I don't miss that extra f-stop at all.

 

[iolair]

You didn't ask about bodies, but have you considered the 6D? I imagine the built in GPS for tagging your image locations and WiFi for sharing on-the-hoof could be useful (Not sure the exact features of its WiFi).

I've done several trips just with the 28mm/2.8 (on crop) and didn't feel I missed out on many shots from a single focal length. If you're JUST getting the lens for travelling, I think I'd go for the 24-105; the slightly longer lens gives you options for more flattering shots of people you travel with or more subtle shots (due to the distance) of people you see around as you travel.

 

[Thanasis_gs]

Hmm. I own the 24-105 (and a full frame body). It isn't bad, actually it is my primary lens, because it is convenient and reliable. It is sharp, but not as sharp as the 24-70. IS is a good feature given the fact that the aperture is max 4 and you will definitely need it, if you go for the 5DmkII and want to shoot at night. Please note that the 24-105 has moderate distortion at 24mm so you will need to correct that in your pc. To be honest, i have never shot with a 24-70, so I cannot make a comparison, but if you go for the 24-105 you will not regret it, that's for sure.
Now as for the body. If you can afford it, buy the 5D mk III, if not go for the mkII, or consider the 6D as mister Iolair mentioned. But if you consider the 6D, do not take into account the GPS and the WiFi, I only see them as a parameter for higher price. I may be wrong, but I have this feeling that they are not useful.
P.S The USM that both lenses have, is awesome!!

 

[CanonJim]

OP, given your stated preferences and photo styles, I'm in the 24-105 camp. And, not surprisingly, in the 6D camp. As a kit from Amazon they are priced well. The 6D is aimed specifically at, among other uses, travel photography, as it is noticeably lighter than the 5D/III. As a pair, the 6D and 24-105, for about $2500US, is a pretty good deal.

 

[MLCIII]

Have you thought about doing a couple of primes? It's not a popular way to go, but they have many advantages. And very backpackable.

 

[table1349]

Download Exposure Plot or WegaII, check the focal length's you use the most and decide from there.

ExposurePlot jpg exif lens length analyzer for photographers