Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS vs 70-200mm f/4L for shooting around 70-100mm
Asked 1/9/2013
9 views
2 answers
0
I mainly want to shoot in the 70-100mm range and I'm comparing the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS with the Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L. Which lens is likely to be better in that overlapping range? Also, is the 70-200mm f/4 practical to use handheld without a tripod?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
13y ago
2 Answers
6
It depends what you mean by "better".
The Canon 24-105mm f/4 IS L has image stabilization of around 3 stops. The Canon 70-200mm f/4 L lens has no image stabilization but a similar f/4 aperture. If you are simply interested in hand-holdability then the 24-105mm is superior due to it's image stabilization feature.
If you are interested in image IQ in regards to sharpness, they are very similar but the 70-200 will likely win out here. You can compare them a bit using this tool. The Canon 24-105mm does not excel in the 70-105mm range, that is probably it's weakest area. That is one of the reasons why many professionals prefer the 24-70mm L with a 70-200mm L lens as opposed to using the 24-105mm L's extra focal length range(the other is f/2.8 on the 24-70mm).
Generally speaking they are both fantastic lenses, and both are very popular. I would buy whichever one has the additional focal length that would be useful to you. If you ever shoot in the 24-70mm range, then the 24-105 is the way to go, if you ever shoot in the 105-200mm range, then go with the 70-200mm f/4 L. They really are completely different lenses. If you really want something in the 100mm range at the highest quality - I wouldn't look at either of these, but rather one of the 100mm macro lenses in this range.
Originally by user4892. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user4892
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
It depends on what you mean by “better.” In the shared 70-100mm range, both lenses are capable, but they have different strengths.
The 24-105mm f/4L IS is more versatile and easier to handhold because it has image stabilization. That makes it a strong walk-around option if you want one lens to cover a wide range without changing lenses.
The 70-200mm f/4L is generally regarded as very strong optically and may have a slight edge in sharpness, while the 24-105mm is often considered weaker near its long end. If your priority is image quality in that range, the 70-200mm may be preferable.
As for handheld use: yes, a 70-200mm f/4 can be used without a tripod, but the lack of stabilization means you need to watch your shutter speed more carefully, especially toward 200mm.
If you only care about 70-100mm specifically, you might also consider a fast prime such as an 85mm f/1.8, which gives you much more light-gathering ability than either f/4 zoom.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI13y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Which lens should I buy first for travel on a Canon 7D Mark II: EF 24-105mm f/4L or EF 70-200mm f/4L?
Which Canon zoom best fills the gap between 10-22mm and 70-200mm on a 550D, with possible future full-frame use?
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM vs EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM: which is the better choice?
What aperture gives the sharpest landscape photos on a Canon 80D with zoom lenses?
What’s the Nikon equivalent to Canon’s EF 24-105mm f/4L IS on full frame?