I'm just curious about two Canon lenses: Who owns both the Canon 24-105mm f/4 is II and the Canon 24-70 f2.8 iii? I purchased the 24-105 f4 for landscape photography when I got my 5D...

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Who owns both the Canon 24-105mm f/4 is II and the Canon 24-70 f2.8 iii? I purchased the 24-105 f4 for landscape photography when I got my 5D Mark IV. I have several lenses also. 16-35, 35 f/1.4, 50mm, 85mm, 70-200 f/2.8. I wanted a better, more convenient (as in zoom) for protraits. So I purchased the 24-70 f/2.8. I'm just wondering if I should sell the 24-105? I've already purchased the 24-70 so I don't need advice on protrait lenses. I just wanted to get opinions on whether to keep both lenses.

Sidwalkastronomy Loc: New Jersey Shore

I always thought 100mm was the sweet spot for portrait photos. I never like to sell stuff and get 50-70% of what I paid. I don't need the money and try to keep GAS attacks to a minimum which sometimes doesn't work

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Sidwalkastronomy wrote:

I always thought 100mm was the sweet spot for portrait photos. I never like to sell stuff and get 50-70% of what I paid. I don't need the money and try to keep GAS attacks to a minimum which sometimes doesn't work

I thank you for your opinion, however the 24-70 is what I wanted for protraits. I had the 100mmL and sold it. I just wanted to know about have the two lenses.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

We have many of the same lenses, including both the 24-105L II IS and the 24-70 f/2.8L II.

The EF 24-70 f/2.8L II is one of Canon's top all-time zoom lenses. The 24-105L II IS is a great lens, improved from the older original, but not in the same image quality class as the 24-70.

I've thought to unload the 24-105, but I find I like the longer focal length and the IS support for working ad-hoc without a tripod support or less than full light. Personally, I like the 50L and / or any EF 85 model for portraits, but I'm also working from a tripod or using the EF 85 f/1.4L IS version and leveraging the IS support without a tripod.

You kind of have to look at your own usage and see if the 24-105 has a need to fill. For me, it does, although it's not always the first choice of lenses. Really, he comes off the bench as a second stringer when the 1st team isn't the right choice.

Haydon

I can't readily make a comparison but you will be more than happy with the 24-70 2.8L II. It's one of the few lenses that I mostly don't need to sharpen in post.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Thank you so much for your reply. That is what I'm thinking also. I'll keep the 24-105 and see if I will use both. I'm thinking I will.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Great! I'm glad to hear that.

baygolf Loc: DMV

I have both with one difference my 24-70 is a Tamron unit. For me when we take vacations, I like to use the 24-105 (focal length) also the 24-70 is a lot heavier than 24-105. I use 24-70 for home events, e.g., birthday parties, weddings, etc.

Sidebar: for vacations I will all ways include either 50mm, 85, or 100mm with 24-105.

Ava'sPapa Loc: Cheshire, Ct.

A helpful hint Tracy. If you hit "Quote Reply" before you respond to someone,everyone will know who you're responding to.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

Ava'sPapa wrote:

A helpful hint Tracy. If you hit "Quote Reply" before you respond to someone,everyone will know who you're responding to.

Oops. I forgot about that.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

baygolf wrote:

I have both with one difference my 24-70 is a Tamron unit. For me when we take vacations, I like to use the 24-105 (focal length) also the 24-70 is a lot heavier than 24-105. I use 24-70 for home events, e.g., birthday parties, weddings, etc.

Sidebar: for vacations I will all ways include either 50mm, 85, or 100mm with 24-105.

That is what I was originally thinking. 24-105 f4 for landscape. I really don't need f/2.8 for that. The 24-70 for protraits and home events.

davidrb Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel

Tracy B. wrote:

Who owns both the Canon 24-105mm f/4 is II and the... (show quote)

While these two lenses have similar range they are entirely different in applications. Your 24-105 is a great lens for landscapes. The other lacks 35mms of reach, a lot for the application. But, the 24-70 is still an important piece for your kit. From what you have told us the answer is NO, do not sell a valuable lens as the 24-105 is, unless you need the cash for ......................... whatever reason.

mikegreenwald Loc: Illinois

davidrb wrote:

While these two lenses have similar range they are entirely different in applications. Your 24-105 is a great lens for landscapes. The other lacks 35mms of reach, a lot for the application. But, the 24-70 is still an important piece for your kit. From what you have told us the answer is NO, do not sell a valuable lens as the 24-105 is, unless you need the cash for ......................... whatever reason.

I agree. The EF 28-70 is the better lens, but the 24-105 is more versatile, and thus much the better walk-around lens. It is also much lighter. The same is true of the RF lenses (28-70 vs 24-105), but with the RF's the wide end and weight differences are even greater.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

davidrb wrote:

While these two lenses have similar range they are entirely different in applications. Your 24-105 is a great lens for landscapes. The other lacks 35mms of reach, a lot for the application. But, the 24-70 is still an important piece for your kit. From what you have told us the answer is NO, do not sell a valuable lens as the 24-105 is, unless you need the cash for ......................... whatever reason.

I am liking your advice! I will keep it. Thanks.

Tracy B. Loc: Indiana

mikegreenwald wrote:

I agree. The EF 28-70 is the better lens, but the 24-105 is more versatile, and thus much the better walk-around lens. It is also much lighter. The same is true of the RF lenses (28-70 vs 24-105), but with the RF's the wide end and weight differences are even greater.

Thanks for your input. I appreciate it.