24-70

33 posts
25 Nov 2013
Catuaba
Photographer
Catuaba
24-70 2.8 OR 24-105 f4 is

After loads of consideration I was swaying towards 24-105 (price, is, etc)

However I then found all the info on error 01 or something?

How likely is this error.

Posted 25 Nov 2013
CliveLawrence
Photographer
CliveLawrenc..
Nikon or Canon and for what purpose are you using the lens?

Posted 25 Nov 2013
Edited by CliveLawrence 25 Nov 2013
Catuaba
Photographer
Catuaba
It's canon, I think im pretty set on the 24-105 but it's just that error that concerns me, wondered if anyone had experienced it.

Posted 25 Nov 2013
mantisphoto
Photographer
mantisphoto
I use a 24-105 f4 IS USM with a Canon 6D and to be honest I love it.... used this kit for a few months now and not experienced any errors whatsoever. The lens is sharp, quiet and well balanced... This lens is hardly ever off my camera as I find with the extra reach it offers over a 24-70 its more versatile for what I want to shoot. The 24-70 2.8 offers 1 stop more but its also more expensive. I would definitely recommend the lens based on my personal experience with it!

Posted 26 Nov 2013
mph
Photographer
mph
I have had the 24-105 since it came out. No errors lovely lens.
Posted 26 Nov 2013
Edited by mph 26 Nov 2013
RedChecker
Photographer
RedChecker
There are two main reasons for chosing a 24-70 over a 24-105: - faster/more accurate focussing due to Canon bodies having enhanced AF sensitivity when used with f2.8 or faster lenses - build quality is tougher on the 24-70 (I think the 24-105 is plastic, the 24-70 is metal, it's certainly a lot heavier anyway) I'm assuming the OP is talking about the old 24-70 (and not the new mk2), that being the case one other benefit is that the 24-70 has a lens hood that's connected to the lens body and not the zoom mechanism. So, if you were to accidentally bash the lens against something while the hood is on it is the lens body that takes the shock from the impact, not the zoom mechanism (for some reason however the mk2 didn't do this). On the plus side for the 24-105 it has IS and a greater reach (giving some overlap if you have a 70-200), and it's a lighter lens (although some would argue this means it isn't as good). It's a horrible choice and IMO would be a no brainer if the 24-70 had IS (which sadly it doesn't). I personally went for the 24-70 when getting a standard 'L' zoom, primarily for the f2.8 focussing ability but also that a friend of mine who owns both claimed the image quality of the 24-105 wasn't as good.
Posted 26 Nov 2013
grahamwhite
Photographer
grahamwhite
I spent about a month researching this very question; the answer seems to be that you will be happy with either, for slightly different reasons! In the end I went for a 24-70, and I love it. I bet I would have loved the 24-105 too
Posted 26 Nov 2013
jpv
Photographer
jpv
I have both and I use (on full frame 1Ds mk111) the 24-105 a lot more than the 24-70. Why? reach and lighter weight. I agree with Red Checker that the 24-70 appears better built when comparing them but in use there is nothing "wrong" with the 24-105, it feels great. I have never felt that I have a focussing problem due to the lack of a stop.

As regards image quality with my copies I would say the 24-105 just edges a victory but in practice the difference is not noticeable for my usage. However I have an acquaintance who also has both and rates these lenses the other way round.

I have never had any errors with the lens. Be aware that very early copies had a fault and were "fixed" free of charge by Canon (I believe that replaced part of the optics).

If something happened to mine I would replace it as soon as I could. I would not be in such a hurry with the 24-70.

Posted 26 Nov 2013
Edited by jpv 26 Nov 2013
nige_nw
Photographer
nige_nw
I have both the 24-105 f4 ISM & the 24-70 f2.8 mk 1 (only afforded the 2.8 after getting a long service award a couple of years or so ago where I had to get something tangible).

I love them both & have never had any errors that you mention.

I find them both similar but with subtle differences such as the 2.8 being heavier. The 2.8 has a slightly smaller minimum focus as well. I have not noticed any discernible differences in the image quality - but I am not a tester or photograph graphs & calibration stuff !

Like redchecker says the 2.8 has the edge for focusing and is slightly easier to use in low light & of course has the 1 stop dof difference should you wish it. As I like doing natural light shots I sometimes find this useful.

It all depends on your photography but if I had to push for just the one I would probably still go for the 24-105 ISM but I think it really is a close call.

Posted 26 Nov 2013
eosfan
Photographer
eosfan
I too have both theses lenses and have had the 24-105 for something like seven years and never had an error. It does now suffer from mild "droop" if i hold it front element down, then the zoom mechanism tends to extend slightly but in practical use its no problem. The IS is useful as is the extra reach.
That said the 24-70 has its own advantages, primarily wider aperture but they are both excellent lenses and value wise the 24-105 is hard to beat.

Dave

Posted 26 Nov 2013
Catuaba
Photographer
Catuaba
Thanks, I think the 24-105 would be the choice. With lighting, high iso options and getting everything in focus nicely I don't think i'd need the 2.8. But then again maybe it's a little sharper. With the depth of field for say a group of 10 people I wouldn't use 2.8 anyway but then again I suppose as you go through the stops it would be better at F8, F11 anyway. Hopefully one day canon will put everything into one lens, it's seems at the moment we just get lenses that do different functions, but no permanent all rounder. But then again I suppose that's the fun in creating images and what the tog can do. For price as well I think it's useable over the extra 1k, it was the new version Mk2 I was comparing. I know plenty are using it for wedding work. I don't think the low light would be greatly different if it was on a higher end camera with less noise on high iso. Tis a tricky one.
Posted 26 Nov 2013
MG
Photographer
MG
I have the 24 105 and had the fault. It was caused from the flexible cable inside the lens wearing. It cost £150 to repair. Its a very good lens but i have done like for like tests using a 24 70 too and in low light the 24 70 is much better but it doesnt have is so much the same as everyone else says. Until Canon bring out a 24 105 2.8 is lens then you wont go far wrong with one!

Posted 26 Nov 2013
Kiboko
Photographer
Kiboko
I probably use the 24-105 f4L more than any other lens. It's my day-to-day work-horse. Might change to Nikon in the near future and without wishing to go off-topic a Nikon buff might care to advise re. the equivalent Nikon 24-120 f4? The price has everything to do with not choosing the f2.8, focal length is of secondary importance as I also have a 70-200mm. No errors to date.

Posted 26 Nov 2013
Catuaba
Photographer
Catuaba
Not sure on Nikon gear. Not my specialty but at the moment Its a nifty fifty 1.8 (great for effects and video, cheap as chips) and a 70-200 F4 but no is. Which means low light difficulties and tripod as an extra baggage.

Used to enjoy the simple 18-55 kit lens on aps c but with full frame now I think the 24-105 will be a much more usable workhorse in a house than a tele!

The 70-200 has been awesome on full frame with a tripod and beauty dish set up. Can't fault it for build but again the 2.8 was an extra fortune so I settled for that.

Posted 26 Nov 2013
mph
Photographer
mph
Catuaba
Not sure on Nikon gear. Not my specialty but at the moment Its a nifty fifty 1.8 (great for effects and video, cheap as chips) and a 70-200 F4 but no is. Which means low light difficulties and tripod as an extra baggage. Used to enjoy the simple 18-55 kit lens on aps c but with full frame now I think the 24-105 will be a much more usable workhorse in a house than a tele! The 70-200 has been awesome on full frame with a tripod and beauty dish set up. Can't fault it for build but again the 2.8 was an extra fortune so I settled for that.
Lucky he is asking about Canon then!
Posted 26 Nov 2013
To reply to this thread you must be a member. Click here to join