Lens Suggestion, 24-105 f/4L IS vs. 24-70 f/2.8L to Compliment 70-200 f/2.8?

[MattHira]

Hello,
I've read many comparisons for the two lenses but I wanted to see what everyone thought. I'm an independent filmmaker but also love wildlife and general photography for vacations. I love the 70-200 f/2.8L lens, but it's quite cumbersome as a "walk around" lens, and for some vacations shots/film shots, 70mm is just too close. I'd like a really nice lens to fill the gap under 70 and it is between the 24-105 f/4L or the 24-70 f/2.8L. Here's what I've thought are the pros of each:
24-105:
-Can get for about $750
-Image Stabilization (for video especially)
-Little more reach

24-70:
-Faster
-Smaller
-Lighter

What would you do? This is all on a 60D and battery grip which I'm considering replacing with a 6D or used 5DII. I'd like any feedback on that as well. And in the long run I think I'd like to close the "bottom" with a 14mm Rectilinear. But when considering price difference, videography, and personal experience, I'm interested to know what everyone thinks in that context, because all the other discussions on this lens are general. Is the faster lens worth the IS sacrifice and less reach?
Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated, thanks!
Matt

 

[ronlane]

24-70 just for the faster glass.

 

[Gsomej]

I agree with ronlane, plus if you already have the 70-200mm f/2.8 it will compliment it well and your total range with the two lenses are better than that one lens. You also have to consider if you want more versatility in one lens vs. better speeds with two different lenses. (the battle is between casual shooting and serious shooting, in my opinion)

Though if for videos I must say that it would make more sense to stick to the other lens for the IS. I'd personally go for the f/2.8 though.

 

[eswebster]

you'll always wish you went with the faster lens if you get the f4.... you'll never wish you had a slower lens.

 

[David444]

.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

the first generation of 24-70 really isnt that great.

 

[David444]

.

 

[Robin_Usagani]

^
Mine was very good, IQ was about equally to the very sharp 24-105 that my brother owned.

Try the Mk2 .

 

[David444]

.

 

[Derrel]

24-105-L IS USM + 70-200 2.8-L IS USM was my go-to zoom lens kit for almost three years on Canon FF. Decent weight on the 24-105...I'm pretty sure that it weighs less than the 24-70/2.8, which is kind of a pig. The 24-105 feels reasonably light, to me...and makes a good wide-normal-short tele with stabilizer, all in one nice package. PLus, as you pointed out, these are available for $750-$800 ALL of the time; keep in mind, these were kitted with the Canon 5D, 5D-II, and 5D-III, so there are loads of these on the used market, many with light amateur use.

 

[Juga]

^
Mine was very good, IQ was about equally to the very sharp 24-105 that my brother owned.

Try the Mk2 .

Very hefty price tag too. You suggest the lens as if it is extremely affordable.

 

[usayit]

I found the 24-105L more usable in more situations... often with a 50mm f1.4 in my pocket. The 24-70mm often sat collecting dust especially when a set of prime lenses were also available.

 

[o hey tyler]

I found the 24-105L more usable in more situations... often with a 50mm f1.4 in my pocket. The 24-70mm often sat collecting dust especially when a set of prime lenses were also available.

^^^^ especially regarding primes.

 

[eswebster]

I have the same gap in my focal length, have a 16-28 and a 70-200.... It seems like the tamron 24-70 2.8 with VC has been reviewed well.... was considering that since the canon 24-70 MK II is over the top expensive for a hobbyist. Either that or a few primes, but that route seems like it would be a pain since you would be forced to change lenses more often. No means trying to hijack just sharing what I have found in the research I have done being in the same boat.

 

[MattHira]

Thanks for all the replies! It helps a lot! Eswebster, you're not high jacking. I really value other people's opinions on purchases like this because specs can't tell you enough. I've considered third party lenses, but even to my non professional eye the L glass is unmatchable. But if someone thinks otherwise I'd love to hear why! I'd love to keep hearing suggestions! You're all so helpful! Thanks!