yet another lense question

[jarrodeu]

Which would you guys choose, Canon 24-105 f/4L with IS or 24-70 f/2.8L without IS? They are both the same price.

Thanks,
Jarrod

[ignomini]

Re: yet another lense question

Jarrod,

I recently bought the 24-105 to replace my 24-70. Unless you are ultra critical of image quality, or want the most possible bokeh (sp?) in your wide open shots, the 24-105 is the way to go. Its smaller, lighter, has those few extra mm for long shots, and the IS more than makes up for the extra light gathering of the 24-70. I don't have a very steady hand, but have gotten very pleasing results with exposures up to 1/2 second, hand held.

If you've got an e-mail account which can accept multi-meg files, PM me with an e-mail address and I'll send a couple full size samples.

Robert

[T. Adams]

Re: yet another lense question

I'd go for the extra stop and the 2.8L, but that may be because I have one.

Also depends on your other lenses. I have the 70-200 f/2.8L, so the 24-105 would overlap. I don't need overlap when I have to spend that much money!! Now my 100-400 overlaps the 70-200, but I would never use the 100-400 between 100-200mm.

[Kilo Hotel]

Re: yet another lense question

Which would you guys choose, Canon 24-105 f/4L with IS or 24-70 f/2.8L without IS? They are both the same price.

Thanks,
Jarrod

The 24-105 f/4L IS is the walking-around lens on my 5D. It's very good (but not great, in my opinion; c.f. my recent post about the 70-200 f/2.8L IS USM) and the IS saves my bacon over and over again, since I rarely shoot on a tripod. I've never shot with the 24-70, so factor that in.