Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L USM vs 24-105: Ultimate Zoom Battle

Hey friends, today I’m diving into a comparison of two lenses I’ve used extensively: the Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L USM and the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. These are both fantastic lenses, but they serve different purposes, and I want to share my experiences to help you decide which one might be right for you. As a photographer who shoots everything from portraits to landscapes, having a versatile zoom lens is crucial. Let’s break it down and see how they compare.

Both lenses belong to Canon’s L-series, known for their top-notch optics and durability. The 24-70mm is a favorite for its fast aperture, perfect for low-light and creative shots. The 24-105mm, with its longer reach and stabilization, is a go-to for travel and video. Each has its strengths, so let’s explore them.

Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L USM vs 24-105 Comparison

Zoom Range and Focal Lengths

The 24-70mm covers a standard zoom range, from wide-angle to short telephoto. It’s perfect for landscapes, architecture, or portraits. I love its versatility for everyday shooting. The 24-105mm extends to 105mm, great for tighter shots like headshots or distant landscapes.

That extra reach is handy when you can’t get closer, like in wildlife or street photography. Both start at 24mm, offering a wide field of view. The 24-105mm’s longer range makes it more flexible for varied scenarios.

Aperture and Low-Light Performance

The biggest difference is the aperture. The 24-70mm boasts a constant f/2.8, letting in twice as much light as the 24-105mm’s f/4. This is a game-changer in low-light, like indoor events or sunset shoots. I can use faster shutter speeds, reducing camera shake.

The f/2.8 also creates a shallower depth of field, ideal for isolating subjects in portraits. The 24-105mm performs well at f/4, but I often need higher ISO in dim conditions. Its stabilization helps, which we’ll cover next.

Image Quality and Sharpness

Both lenses deliver exceptional image quality, as expected from Canon’s L-series. The 24-70mm is slightly sharper, especially at f/2.8. I’ve used it for critical shots like product photography, and it’s razor-sharp. Its optics include one ultra-low dispersion element and two aspherical elements.

The 24-105mm is also very sharp, though slightly less so at the zoom extremes. In real-world use, the difference is negligible unless you’re printing large. Both handle flare and ghosting well, thanks to advanced coatings.

Image Stabilization

The 24-105mm shines with image stabilization, offering up to three stops. This is a lifesaver for handheld video or low-light stills. I’ve shot at 1/30s at 70mm and got sharp images. It’s ideal for dynamic situations.

The 24-70mm lacks stabilization, so I rely on faster shutter speeds. Its f/2.8 aperture helps, but I miss IS in video or shaky conditions. For videographers, the 24-105mm’s stabilization is a clear win.

Build Quality and Durability

Both lenses are built for professional use, with metal barrels and weather sealing. The 24-70mm feels incredibly solid and is fully weather-sealed. I’ve used it in rain and dust without issues. Its premium build is evident in its smooth focus ring.

The 24-105mm is also weather-resistant but feels slightly less robust. It’s still durable for outdoor shoots. Both are reliable, but the 24-70mm has a more premium feel.

Size and Weight

Size and weight matter when carrying gear all day. The 24-70mm is heavier at 950g and longer at 123mm. The 24-105mm is lighter at 670g and more compact at 107mm. This makes a difference for travel or hiking.

On a trip to Europe, I chose the 24-105mm for its portability. The 24-70mm felt bulky in my bag. For studio work, weight is less of an issue.

Handling and Focus

Both lenses handle beautifully, with smooth focus and zoom rings. The 24-70mm uses a ring-type Ultrasonic Motor for fast, silent autofocus. Its 0.38m minimum focus distance allows close-up work. It’s great for stills and video.

The 24-105mm also uses a ring-type USM, with quick, quiet autofocus. Its zoom ring is smoother, making one-handed adjustments easier. The 24-70mm’s stiffer zoom ring prevents accidental zooms.

Optical Design

The 24-70mm has 13 elements in 9 groups, including one UD element and two aspherical elements. These reduce chromatic aberration and distortion. Canon’s Subwavelength Structure Coating minimizes flare. Images are sharp and accurate.

The 24-105mm features 17 elements in 12 groups, with one fluorite element, two UD elements, and three aspherical elements. The fluorite tackles chromatic aberration. Both show slight distortion, easily corrected in post-processing.

Vignetting and Distortion

Vignetting is minimal with both lenses, but the 24-70mm handles it slightly better. At 24mm, both show barrel distortion, and at the telephoto end, pincushion distortion appears. These are minor and correctable in software. I rarely notice them in real-world shooting.

The 24-70mm’s wider aperture helps reduce vignetting in low-light shots. The 24-105mm’s coatings also manage light falloff well. Both perform admirably in challenging lighting.

Autofocus Performance

Autofocus on both lenses is fast and reliable, thanks to Canon’s USM technology. The 24-70mm locks focus quickly, even in dim conditions, making it ideal for fast-paced events. I’ve used it for action shots with no issues. The 24-105mm is equally responsive, with smooth transitions for video.

Both support full-time manual focus override, which I find useful for fine-tuning. In low light, the 24-70mm’s f/2.8 aperture aids autofocus accuracy. The 24-105mm’s IS helps maintain focus stability.

Color Rendition and Bokeh

The 24-70mm produces vibrant colors and smooth bokeh, especially at f/2.8. It’s perfect for portraits where background blur is key. Skin tones look natural, and highlights are well-controlled. I’ve used it for client work with stunning results.

The 24-105mm also renders colors accurately, though its f/4 aperture produces less pronounced bokeh. It’s still pleasing for environmental portraits. Both lenses benefit from Canon’s advanced coatings for consistent color.

Versatility Across Genres

These lenses shine in different genres. The 24-70mm is my go-to for portraits, events, and low-light work. Its aperture and sharpness make it versatile. The 24-105mm excels in travel, street, and video due to its range and stabilization.

I’ve used both for landscapes, but the 24-105mm’s longer reach is great for compressing scenes. For weddings, the 24-70mm’s low-light performance is unmatched. Each lens adapts to various styles, depending on your priorities.

Real-World Usage Scenarios

Let’s dive into specific scenarios where these lenses shine.

Portraits

For portraits, the 24-70mm is my top pick. Its f/2.8 aperture creates creamy bokeh, isolating subjects beautifully. At 70mm, it flatters facial features with natural compression. I’ve shot countless client sessions with it, and the results are always stunning.

The 24-105mm can handle portraits, but its f/4 aperture produces less background blur. It’s better for environmental portraits where context matters. For pure portrait work, the 24-70mm wins.

Landscapes

Both lenses are great for landscapes, but the 24-105mm’s 105mm end helps compress distant elements like mountains. Since landscapes often use smaller apertures, the f/4 isn’t a drawback. The IS aids handheld shots in windy conditions. I’ve captured sharp, detailed scenes with it.

The 24-70mm is excellent for wide-angle landscapes or low-light scenes like sunsets. Its f/2.8 aperture allows faster shutter speeds to freeze motion. Both are capable, but the 24-105mm’s range gives it an edge.

Weddings

Weddings demand versatility, and the 24-70mm delivers. I can shoot wide ceremony shots at 24mm and zoom to 70mm for portraits without changing lenses. Its f/2.8 aperture is crucial for dim venues, keeping ISO low. It’s a wedding photographer’s dream.

The 24-105mm works, but I miss the extra light in low-lit receptions. Its stabilization helps with handheld shots, but the 24-70mm’s aperture makes it more reliable. For weddings, the 24-70mm is my choice.

Travel and Street Photography

For travel, the 24-105mm is my go-to. Its lighter weight and longer reach let me capture candid moments from a distance. The IS is a lifesaver for handheld shots while walking. I’ve used it in bustling cities and remote trails with great results.

The 24-70mm is heavier, making it less ideal for long travel days. Its aperture is great for low-light street shots, but the bulk is noticeable. The 24-105mm’s portability wins here.

Video

For video, the 24-105mm’s stabilization is a game-changer. It ensures smooth footage, even when shooting handheld. I’ve used it for travel vlogs and event coverage with excellent results. The longer range is also versatile for framing.

The 24-70mm’s f/2.8 aperture is great for low-light video, but without IS, it requires steadier hands or a gimbal. For most video work, the 24-105mm’s stabilization makes it the better choice.

Compatibility with Cameras

Both lenses are EF-mount, compatible with Canon’s full-frame and APS-C DSLRs. On APS-C cameras, the focal length is multiplied by 1.6x, so the 24-70mm becomes 38.4-112mm, and the 24-105mm becomes 38.4-168mm. This makes them versatile across Canon’s DSLR lineup.

With an EF-to-RF adapter, both work seamlessly on Canon’s EOS R mirrorless cameras. I’ve used them on my EOS R5 with no issues. Canon also offers RF versions for mirrorless systems.

Comparison with Third-Party Lenses

Third-party options like the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 Art or Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 are competitive. They often match the 24-70mm’s performance at a lower cost. However, Canon’s L-series lenses have a slight edge in build quality and autofocus reliability.

For the 24-105mm, third-party alternatives are less common, but Sigma and Tamron offer similar zooms. Canon’s stabilization and optics make the 24-105mm stand out. I prefer Canon for consistency, but third-party lenses are worth considering.

Maintenance and Care

Both lenses require minimal maintenance but benefit from proper care. I clean the front element with a microfiber cloth and lens solution to avoid smudges. The weather sealing means I don’t worry about dust or moisture, but I store them in a dry bag. Regular checks for lens mount tightness ensure optimal performance.

The 24-70mm’s heavier build feels more durable, but both have held up in tough conditions. I’ve dropped the 24-105mm once, and it survived without a scratch. Canon’s L-series is built for longevity.

Future-Proofing and Upgrades

Canon has released updated versions: the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM and EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM. These offer improved optics and coatings but are pricier. The original versions remain excellent choices for most photographers. I’ve stuck with the originals for their reliability.

For mirrorless users, Canon’s RF 24-70mm f/2.8L IS USM and RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM add stabilization and modern optics. If you’re upgrading to mirrorless, consider these. For DSLR users, the EF versions are still top-tier.

Comparison Table

Here’s a table summarizing the key differences between the Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L USM vs 24-105:

Aspect	Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM	Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Zoom Range	24-70mm	24-105mm
Maximum Aperture	f/2.8	f/4
Image Stabilization	No	Yes (up to 3 stops)
Weight	950g	670g
Length	123mm	107mm
Minimum Focus Distance	0.38m	0.38m
Weather Sealing	Full weather-sealing	Weather-resistant
Sharpness	Excellent, slightly better	Excellent, slightly less
Low-Light Performance	Better	Good, with IS
Best For	Portraits, events, low-light	Travel, video, wider range

Decision-Making: Which Lens Should You Choose?

When choosing between the Canon EF 24-70mm F/2.8 L USM vs 24-105, consider your primary needs. If you shoot in low light or want shallow depth of field, the 24-70mm is the better choice. I reach for it when I need top image quality in challenging conditions, like indoor events or night shoots. Its f/2.8 aperture keeps ISO low and delivers sharp results.

If versatility, a longer zoom range, and image stabilization are priorities, the 24-105mm is excellent. It’s lighter, more compact, and ideal for travel or video, where IS reduces shake. Both lenses are outstanding, so think about your shooting style and what features matter most.

Final Thoughts

As a seasoned photographer, I’ve learned no lens is perfect for every situation. Both the 24-70mm and 24-105mm are incredible tools, and your choice depends on your shooting style. Whether you’re chasing light in dim conditions or need versatility for travel, these lenses won’t disappoint. If you can, having both gives you the best of both worlds!

FAQ: Common Questions About These Lenses

Q: Which lens is sharper?
The 24-70mm is slightly sharper, especially wide open, but the difference is minimal in real-world use.

Q: Does the 24-105mm have image stabilization?
Yes, it offers up to three stops of stabilization, great for video and handheld shooting.

Q: Can these lenses be used on crop sensor cameras?
Yes, both are EF-mount and work on full-frame and APS-C cameras. On APS-C, the focal length is multiplied by 1.6x.

Q: Are there newer versions of these lenses?
Yes, the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM and EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM offer improved optics and features.

Q: Which is better for video?
The 24-105mm’s stabilization makes it better for video, reducing shake during handheld shooting. The 24-70mm’s f/2.8 aperture is useful for low-light video, though.

Q: Do these lenses work with Canon’s EOS R mirrorless cameras?
Yes, with an EF-to-RF adapter, they function well on EOS R cameras. Canon also offers RF versions for mirrorless systems.

Q: How do these compare to third-party lenses?
Third-party options like the Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 Art or Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 G2 are competitive, but Canon’s L-series lenses have a slight edge in build and optics.