Canon 24-70 vs 24-105

Archived Thread
Our site is currently being changed over to the new version. Everything you see is currently in read-only mode. Additionally, the layout and UI will not be complete until all sections have been re-enabled, so please ignore any layout issues (or bland-ness) at this time.
#1 WookieeGunner on 4 years ago

I just side-graded from a m4/3's to a Canon 6D. I'm curious if anyone could compare/contrast the 24-70 vs. 24-105 for convention photography. My primary convention is Dragoncon for an idea of the environment I expect to be taking pictures in.

#2 nathancarter on 4 years ago

The original 24-70 is getting a little long in the tooth. Mine's in desperate need of repair - there's a [URL=""][U]little plastic spacer that can wear out and cause issues[/U][/URL].

The new 24-70 v2 is pretty pricey, but great performance.

The 24-105 can be had used for a little more than a song. Since they come as a "kit" lens with many full-frame bodies, there are a ton of them out there, and many people buy the kit and immediately sell the lens for peanuts. You're getting some extra reach on the long end, and only losing a stop of aperture.

If lighting is good (or you're supplying your own lighting), they'll all perform equally well, not counting if you get a 24-70 V1 that's wore-out.

Given the top-notch high-ISO performance of the 6D, for a walkabout convention lens I would probably go for the 24-105. You won't miss that extra stop of aperture since you can just boost the ISO a stop without a significant loss in image quality.

#3 Av4rice on 4 years ago

What's your style? Do you like to get closer / take wider shots? Or do you like more reach from further away? I'm not sure how crowded Dragon*Con gets, but that's a factor as well. Ideally, take a look at the EXIF data of your keepers from that con and see what focal length range you prefer. If you're looking at actual focal lengths, multiply by 2 to get the equivalent on a full frame 6D.

Personally I favor the long end and I loved the 24-105... on APS-C. It's sharp, well-built, focuses quickly, and the stabilization works well. It gave me the extra reach I wanted over a 24-70. But now I use a 70-200/2.8 on full frame. So if you're like me and your con has the space for you to back up enough, don't rule out something longer.

A 24-70/2.8 would be sharper and a stop wider compared to the 24-105, which are great things to have if you're good with that focal length range. But I would avoid Canon's version I at this point. Canon's version II is the best of its kind if you don't mind paying a lot of money. Otherwise, Tamron's VC version is almost as good for much cheaper, and it's stabilized; I'd say that's a better value per dollar.

#4 WonJohnSoup on 4 years ago

I have the Canon 6D and 24-105 combo. I came from the 7D and 18-200IS and several lenses. The 24-105 on full frame covers 85% of all my shots, and for hallshots, 100%. It's also very very good for motion picture work, where it seems closeups are often literally closer to the subject than in still photography, so you can literally shoot an entire narrative piece on just that lens and camera combo. I would say it comprises 99% of my motion picture work.

I say go with this combo for your given scenario.

#5 WookieeGunner on 4 years ago

Thanks for the suggestions. For walking around I tend to like to get full body.

As far as how crowded Dragon Con can get, there were times last year where I had trouble getting a full body portrait shot with a Panasonic 25mm (50mm equivalent) prime.

#6 nathancarter on 4 years ago

I'm not a fan of full-body shots using a very short focal length; if you're standing that close you'll get some perspective distortion which is usually unflattering. You can mitigate the effect somewhat by squatting down and shooting from approximately waist-level, but even then it's not an ideal situation.

When it's really crowded and there's not room to step back for a full-length shot, I just try to get a head or torso shot.

#7 WookieeGunner on 4 years ago

Thanjs for the tip. I just noticed that you have Dragoncon in your sig. My big concern is the Marriott at night.

#8 Patcave on 4 years ago

MY advice will be most unhelpful:

If you're in non-controlled space (in terms of lighting and distance to subject), like the various Marriott levels, I'm not as concerned about the distortion from using a shorter focal length anymore. Most people realize it's a "hallway" photo, and are forgiving of such distortions that can show up. You'll drive yourself nuts trying to use a longer focal length to get full-length body shots for hallway photos (since you need a lot of distance between you and the subject to fit their whole body in the frame of the shot). Not only that, your lighting requirements go up a little the further away you are from the subject too.

I'm gotten really lazy for the late night roaming shots at the Marriott with simply a off-camera flash light-stick, and a small EOS M camera with the EF-M 22mm lens (roughly 35mm FF FOV after crop factor).

But if you have a bit more space to shoot in, by all means try to shoot with a longer focal length to reduce the distortion for a more pleasing shot.

#9 TykeJack on 4 years ago

24-70, hands down.

#10 brucer007 on 4 years ago

I am loving my 24- 105mm lens. I rarely take it off, even if I have a backpack full of other choices. my 5D Mk3 can handle ISOs above 3200, so the f4 minimum aperture does hinder me much, especially when I mix a flash into darker environments. The stabilizer has been helpful to slow down my shutter speed, to bring in more ambient light with my flash. The longer focal length helps me to not need to switch lenses much at all, unless I need more speed, or wider, or longer focal lengths. 70mm is a bit short for me when I do vertical head shots. 105mm is perfect for that.

#11 Av4rice on 4 years ago

[QUOTE=WookieeGunner;4902644]My big concern is the Marriott at night.[/QUOTE]

Between the ISO performance of your camera and the stabilization in the lens, f/4 should be fine.