24-70mm vs 24-105mm

JoeJITSU

JoeJITSU

Veteran
Debating to go back to the 24-105mm to add back into my arsenal but now I am looking if I should get the 24-70mm, Any suggestions? Help me out DVX! :)
 
Joe,

I did this with just the 24-105. The stabilization and longer reach really helps in run and gun video work. You can still get "decent" shallow dof look.

 
Last edited:
Evaluate your shooting needs. I've used the 24-105 for years, but lately I find myself shooting indoors a lot and faster glass is a good thing. I use my 35/1.4 more and more because I try to stay at 3200 and below, this is with a 5d3. The extra stop I have with the 70-200/2.8 is always a help. I'm moving to the tamron 24-70 with IS or the new 24-70L. I love the 24-105, but I find myself pushing the ISO too much with it in poor light. If you have good light it's a gem, lots of new kit lenses selling around $650 and the IS works wonders. There's no better video lens for the money IMHO.
 
I love my 24-105. Having the extra reach helps a lot more than you might think. f/4 hasn't really been much of an issue for me. It might be for some, though. After all, it means the difference between iso 6400 and iso 12800!
 
I used to be worried about those high iso introducing so much noise but since I now can use raw video, noise is now manageable in high iso in raw 14bit than in h264.
 
If you do 50% photo, I'd take the 24-70 II over the 24-105 any day. Version II is a great deal better than the original lens.... I know the 24-105 IS is nice to have for run and gun videoing, but I've never missed it doing photo.
 
I've found barrel distortion to be pretty bad with the 24-105. That being said, if you shoot under well lit conditions then having IS is very nice.
 
egproductions said:
I've found barrel distortion to be pretty bad with the 24-105. That being said, if you shoot under well lit conditions then having IS is very nice.
Click to expand...
The distortion is the one reason I always use a prime it the shot really matters. The 24-105 is great for quick and fast but it does have its draw backs
 
My split between video and photo is about 75/25, and I've always found the 24-105 a gem of a lens on both my MarkIII and 6D. My current kit is that, a 70-200 f4 IS and 50 1.4; and I've never really encountered a situation where it was too harmful. Shooting concerts in dark nightclubs can be interesting though ;). Unless you're shooting in caves, and you're mostly in situations where you have control of the light, I think you should choose it. I do notice distortion and vignette at 24, which works in some shots where I want to really warp my scene. At 35 and above I find it sufficient.

Your medium of delivery should also be a factor. Unless you're printing large advertising or going for theatre distribution, you'll be fine (and even then you could probably get by). It sounds like your goal is a happy medium between affordability and quality, and for that I'm highly impressed with my 24-105.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top