24-70mm vs 24-105mm at DVinfo.net

Peter Damo · August 21st, 2009, 09:15 PM

I've been using the 24-70mm lens for sometime now in my photography and also appreciate its low light capabilities with video. More recently I used the 100-400mm IS and really liked the result from the IS. So I'm considering forgoing the low light advantages as I can also use other lenses for this and getting the 24-105mm IS instead. As I will be using a shoulder rig quite often I was wondering firstly whether others out there had compared results from these two lenses in a 'handheld' situation and found big pluses from the IS factor?
Any sample shots to show? Thanks heaps.
Peter.

Hannu Korpinen · August 22nd, 2009, 01:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Damo

More recently I used the 100-400mm IS and really liked the result from the IS. So I'm considering forgoing the low light advantages as I can also use other lenses for this and getting the 24-105mm IS instead.
Peter.

IS is working fine with both of lenses but you will have a problem with IS noise if you have mic on a camera. Internal mic is worse.
Also my EF 200/1.8 is a problem with a noise of focusing motor. I using AT 875R mic mounted on the top of camera.
I use 100-400 and 24-105 but normally IS turned off and using tripod. Anyway 400 mm on a shoulder sounds quite demanding.

Peter Damo · August 22nd, 2009, 07:06 AM

Thanks Hannu – My sound is via Zoom so no problem there. I'm mostly thinking of the 24-105 for the shoulder unit.

Charles W. Hull · August 22nd, 2009, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Damo

I've been using the 24-70mm lens for sometime now in my photography and also appreciate its low light capabilities with video. More recently I used the 100-400mm IS and really liked the result from the IS. So I'm considering forgoing the low light advantages as I can also use other lenses for this and getting the 24-105mm IS instead. As I will be using a shoulder rig quite often I was wondering firstly whether others out there had compared results from these two lenses in a 'handheld' situation and found big pluses from the IS factor?

I have and use both the 24-70 and 24-105. The 24-105 has the stability advantage with handheld, as well as a problem. You can't pan very fast with the 24-105, otherwise it stutters. The issue is it can reach the limit of it's adjustment range and flip back. But for shots without panning, or for very slow pans it works very well.

The 24-105 is an outstanding lens for stills and great for video if you know its limits. I picked one up from someone who bought it as a kit lens but already had another one; it is on my 5DII most of the time. If you do end up with some stutter it can be fixed with deshaker but this is an added step in post.

Hannu Korpinen · August 22nd, 2009, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charles W. Hull

The 24-105 has the stability advantage with handheld, as well as a problem. You can't pan very fast with the 24-105, otherwise it stutters.

I have not had any problems when panning. Probably I have been panning too slow.
I do use IS mode 2 for panning.

Chris Hurd · August 22nd, 2009, 10:27 AM

Just to clarify for those who may not be aware, there is no IS mode 2 on the 24-105mm L IS lens.
Hannu is instead referring to his 100-400mm L IS lens, which has an IS mode selector switch.

Hannu Korpinen · August 22nd, 2009, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Just to clarify for those who may not be aware, there is no IS mode 2 on the 24-105mm L IS lens.
Hannu is instead referring to his 100-400mm L IS lens, which has an IS mode selector switch.

Yes you are right I am mixing old and new setups.

Tim Polster · August 22nd, 2009, 06:17 PM

I have the 24-105 and it is quite a workhorse lens. It really is the most versitle lens one can find with a lot of image quality.

This lens is very sharp, great color and detail as well.

It is really useful to have a wide and a portrait FL in one lens.

Unless you need shallow DOF, I can not see needing to use a different lens for all but the most demanding work (big bucks), then go rent the fast primes.

Peter Damo · August 22nd, 2009, 06:32 PM

I agree with all of the above. My main concern was the panning aspect and at what point it becomes a problem. I know from the 100-400 how it reframes the image after moving but I'm considering the 24-105 for just minor movement adjustments on shoulder rig during say an interview with head and shoulders and occasionally a little longer. Hmm... another trip to eBay.
Thanks everyone for your input. I still wouldn't mind seeing some examples if you know of any.

Peter Berg · August 22nd, 2009, 08:00 PM

peter, I tried some side-by-side tests with both lenses earlier this year. I didn't keep the footage however (sorry)... but - I can tell you that for handheld video work - the 24-105 was far more superior in image stability. I reckon it's worth about 3 to 4 f-stops. So much so, I don't even bother trying to hand-hold the 24-70 at 70mm - and can only just get away with it at 24mm. Also - the 24-105 is cheaper and lighter. That being said - I went with the 24-70 as I'm a sucker for shallow depth of field, and happy to use a tripod where needed. For handheld I use the 70-200IS and the 17-40.
cheers

Peter Damo · August 22nd, 2009, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Berg

but - I can tell you that for handheld video work - the 24-105 was far more superior in image stability. I reckon it's worth about 3 to 4 f-stops. So much so, I don't even bother trying to hand-hold the 24-70 at 70mm - and can only just get away with it at 24mm.

I don't think I can justify having both so I may just have to part with my 24-70 after some very good service (still work). As an added plus, an extra 35mm reach makes it very versatile. I'm grateful for the info. Thanks.

Peter Damo · August 23rd, 2009, 07:07 AM

One more thing before I call it quits on this topic: how does the stabilizer respond to forward motion as opposed to panning?

Charles W. Hull · August 23rd, 2009, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Damo

One more thing before I call it quits on this topic: how does the stabilizer respond to forward motion as opposed to panning?

The sensors are just left-right and up-down so there is no response forward (or zoom).

Don Miller · August 23rd, 2009, 10:14 AM

I don't think the IS on the 24-105 works well for handheld video. It holds and then jerks. I would rather shoot without IS and deshake with software.

What I think we really want is in-camera IS that is video aware.

I do like the extra reach of the 24-105. However, the IQ of the 24-70 is a bit better. The 24-70 is also sharper at f4.

I have the 24-105, 70-200 f4 IS, and the 100-400 to compliment my fast primes. Without fast primes I would choose the 2.8 zooms instead.

Added note to those unfamiliar with Canon lenses:

Some of the bigger Canon IS lenses have a panning mode that only corrects for up/down movement. But there no certainty that any Canon IS lense with IS on won't introduce a jerk (sudden reframing) due to lens movement.

Peter Damo · August 23rd, 2009, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Don Miller

I don't think the IS on the 24-105 works well for handheld video. It holds and then jerks.

Don,
Would this be evident in say switching from one subject to another standing next to each other?

August 21st, 2009, 09:15 PM	#1
Peter Damo Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Sydney, NSW Posts: 90	24-70mm vs 24-105mm I've been using the 24-70mm lens for sometime now in my photography and also appreciate its low light capabilities with video. More recently I used the 100-400mm IS and really liked the result from the IS. So I'm considering forgoing the low light advantages as I can also use other lenses for this and getting the 24-105mm IS instead. As I will be using a shoulder rig quite often I was wondering firstly whether others out there had compared results from these two lenses in a 'handheld' situation and found big pluses from the IS factor? Any sample shots to show? Thanks heaps. Peter.

August 22nd, 2009, 10:27 AM	#6
Chris Hurd Obstreperous Rex Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: San Marcos, TX Posts: 27,369 Images: 513	Just to clarify for those who may not be aware, there is no IS mode 2 on the 24-105mm L IS lens. Hannu is instead referring to his 100-400mm L IS lens, which has an IS mode selector switch. __________________ CH Search DV Info Net \| 20 years of DVi \| ...Tuesday is Soylent Green Day!

August 22nd, 2009, 08:00 PM	#10
Peter Berg Regular Crew Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Melbourne Australia Posts: 31	peter, I tried some side-by-side tests with both lenses earlier this year. I didn't keep the footage however (sorry)... but - I can tell you that for handheld video work - the 24-105 was far more superior in image stability. I reckon it's worth about 3 to 4 f-stops. So much so, I don't even bother trying to hand-hold the 24-70 at 70mm - and can only just get away with it at 24mm. Also - the 24-105 is cheaper and lighter. That being said - I went with the 24-70 as I'm a sucker for shallow depth of field, and happy to use a tripod where needed. For handheld I use the 70-200IS and the 17-40. cheers __________________ ------- peter berg

August 22nd, 2009, 07:06 AM	#3
Peter Damo Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Sydney, NSW Posts: 90	Thanks Hannu – My sound is via Zoom so no problem there. I'm mostly thinking of the 24-105 for the shoulder unit.

August 22nd, 2009, 06:17 PM	#8
Tim Polster Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Arlington, TX Posts: 2,231	I have the 24-105 and it is quite a workhorse lens. It really is the most versitle lens one can find with a lot of image quality. This lens is very sharp, great color and detail as well. It is really useful to have a wide and a portrait FL in one lens. Unless you need shallow DOF, I can not see needing to use a different lens for all but the most demanding work (big bucks), then go rent the fast primes.

August 22nd, 2009, 06:32 PM	#9
Peter Damo Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Sydney, NSW Posts: 90	I agree with all of the above. My main concern was the panning aspect and at what point it becomes a problem. I know from the 100-400 how it reframes the image after moving but I'm considering the 24-105 for just minor movement adjustments on shoulder rig during say an interview with head and shoulders and occasionally a little longer. Hmm... another trip to eBay. Thanks everyone for your input. I still wouldn't mind seeing some examples if you know of any.

August 23rd, 2009, 07:07 AM	#12
Peter Damo Regular Crew Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Sydney, NSW Posts: 90	One more thing before I call it quits on this topic: how does the stabilizer respond to forward motion as opposed to panning?

August 23rd, 2009, 10:14 AM	#14
Don Miller Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Chicago Posts: 706	I don't think the IS on the 24-105 works well for handheld video. It holds and then jerks. I would rather shoot without IS and deshake with software. What I think we really want is in-camera IS that is video aware. I do like the extra reach of the 24-105. However, the IQ of the 24-70 is a bit better. The 24-70 is also sharper at f4. I have the 24-105, 70-200 f4 IS, and the 100-400 to compliment my fast primes. Without fast primes I would choose the 2.8 zooms instead. Added note to those unfamiliar with Canon lenses: Some of the bigger Canon IS lenses have a panning mode that only corrects for up/down movement. But there no certainty that any Canon IS lense with IS on won't introduce a jerk (sudden reframing) due to lens movement.