Which to keep....

Flats

Flats

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,285
Name
Jonathan
Edit My Images
Yes
I have 2 lenses with a very similar focal length, I need to cash one in, not sure which to keep.

28-70 f2.8
24-105 f4.0

Both take great pics. Absolute image quality and the 28-70 is better, but in real world use, both are excellent. The former is 11 years old, the latter 3 years old. Both take the same filter size.

The former has a stop over the latter, the latter has IS and is weather-sealed. The former is no longer repairable, the latter is. The latter is wider at the wide end, longer at the long end. It is lighter, but not by much, not enough for it to matter at any rate.

I could get £600ish for the latter, perhaps £450ish for the former. If I changed my mind, I could likely get the 24-105 again very easily, whereas I might struggle to get the 28-70 back. I am slightly attached to it, it was the first quality lens I ever bought, and it has never let me down. Then again, I could go for the replacement 24-70 lens which is also excellent.

I have 2 other lenses in the same range, a very fast 35mm, and a 100mm macro. I don't use 24mm very often, but I do find it useful.

Which one would you keep, and why?

Rgds
Jonathan
 
I'd keep the faster aperture lens as both lenses have similar ranges and I'd live without the longer reach for the f2.8. The f2.8 can do f4 whilst the f4 can't do f2.8.
 
If I wanted a landscape/general purpose walk about it would be the 24-105 L IS because of the extra range and IS, if I was looking for a portrait lens or for shooting moving things in low light it would be the 28-70 f/2.8
 
I have been looking to buy either a 24-70mm F/2.8 or 24-105mm IS F/4. And found that this is a hotly debated topic.

Both serve different purposes and hence why its a hot topic as people use them for different things. Assuming they are in good nick you can likely get more than £450 for the 24-70mm and probably more around £650 for the 24-105mm on ebay, even though it can be brought new in the UK for £699.

I've never used them but many people stated the want 2.8 for the blur, yet f/2.8 at 70mm has less blue than f/4 at 105mm, given the right background. The 24-70mm is also stated to have better image quality.

Personally I want both, but the way I see it is, I want a walkabout lens, and so given the lower weight, most shots taken outside (f/4 is enough), longer focal range and IS. I want the 24-105mm. So long as a subject is stationary the IS will be better indoors in low light than the 24-70mm, however if a subject is moving you really do need f/2.8 or greater. The way I see it, is for low light performance I will get a prime lens at around f/1.4 and sacrifice the zoom.

It depends on what you want to shoot, but personally for me, the 24-105mm is the right choice.
 
I have just sold my 24-105 to buy the 24-70 I shoot mainly portraits so want the extra stop since I bought it I am very happy with it although I did love the 24-105 mm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top