24-105 F4 vs 24-70 2.8 Compared for Portraits and Travel - (Canon RF - Free RAW Files)
In this video I compare two of the most versatile zoom lenses - the Canon RF 24-105 F4 and the Canon RF 24-70 2.8 for both portraits and travel. I cover a few things including difference in background blur, focal lengths, reach and handling.
Free RAW Files Download: files.jamesreader.uk
DISCLAIMER If you post these files online and/or to social media, please link back to this channel or my instagram. The RAW files must not be used for any commercial purposes.
Gear in this video -
Cameras
Canon R5 - geni.us/TfEW
Canon R6 MKII - geni.us/RcTJ
RF 24-105 F4 - geni.us/xjwLu
RF 24-70 2.8 - geni.us/fGKWOBw
VIDEO CHAPTERS
00:00 - Intro
0:44 - Focal Lengths Compared
3:40 - Can you tell the difference? 2.8 vs f4
6:00 - Travel Comparison
7:45 - 70mm vs 105mm Headshots
8:31 - Handling
9:47 - Outro
Model Instagram:
/ rach.reader
Follow me on Instagram:
/ james.reader
My Favourite Conversion LUTS:
Best CLOG/CLOG3 to Rec709 LUTS for R5, R6 and R7 - geni.us/CLOG3LUT
Best CLOG 2 to Rec709 LUT for C70 - geni.us/CLOG2LUT
My Favourite Creative LUTS:
606 LUTS - geni.us/606LUTS
Kinetic LUTS - geni.us/KINETICLUTS
Get the cinematic look with Dehancer:
Get 10% off your purchase of Dehancer using JAMESREADER at checkout - www.dehancer.com/
All My Gear
Camera Setup:
Main Camera: geni.us/TfEW
Backup Camera: geni.us/jn9XS
Travel Camera: geni.us/vVtw
Favourite Lens: geni.us/nl45
Best Portrait Lens: geni.us/f3LlvrT
Favourite Video Lens: geni.us/fGKWOBw
Wide Angle Zoom: geni.us/Gf9se
Telephoto Zoom: geni.us/KKu0gJX
Best Budget Prime: geni.us/wMjtBXg
Action Camera - geni.us/qSlY
Drone - geni.us/GAgpbbi
Accessories
Best Dreamy Lens Filter (Not pro mist!) - geni.us/RM98X
Best Travel Tripod: geni.us/QnVaZ0
On Camera Monitor: geni.us/IDfvo6
CF Express Card: geni.us/J3aI
Best Vari ND Filter: geni.us/Ohm1nqQ
SD Card: geni.us/8aHess
My New Favourite Camera Backpack: geni.us/rpXQwz
Travel Camera Bag: geni.us/dCAcv
Camera Sling Bag: geni.us/bQSHA3B
Tech Pouch: geni.us/SFQ7
My Favourite Camera Strap: geni.us/1SqH2M
Gimbal: geni.us/PGPkW
Lighting Setup
Key light: geni.us/KhtpOfm
Panel Light: geni.us/VyJGO
Tube Light: geni.us/vaLB8x
Mini Light: geni.us/qCZt44
Studio Strobe: geni.us/Olwk
Audio Setup
Studio Mic: geni.us/1KEWY
On Camera Mic: geni.us/FPX0ij
Shotgun Mic: geni.us/AeWAo
Lav Mic: geni.us/W6MBr
Audio Interface: geni.us/CeBPEOe
** Please note, clicking any of these links above and buying from Amazon helps support my channel as I get a little commission from each order at no extra cost to you. Thank you for your support. **
My Website: www.jamesreader.uk
For business enquiries: me@jamesreader.uk
Simply buy 24-105 + 50mm 1.8 and 85 1.8 for portrait. for the price of 24-70 2.8.
Never thought of that 😂😂😂
RF 35 1.8
Not the same image quality... there is no free lunch...
For the price of 24-70 f/2.8, I got the RF 24-105 F/4 , RF 16mm F/2.8, RF 35mm F/1.8, RF 50mm F/1.8, RF 85mm F/2 . I bought them all used in like new condition.
@@aristosmichael9749 Exactly what I mean.
James you’re my favorite KZheadr right now , Appreciate your videos and work! Been debating these two and I’d definitely be getting the 24-105 now that i’ve seen them compared so eloquently. I wish you 10k+ subs this year
Thank you so much Shaquille, that's really encouraging to hear!
Thank you James for your very best voice comparison of this two lenses, I was able to follow every word you said.😊😊😊
Thank you James for another great comparison video. I have opted for the RF 24-70 F4 as my standard lens due to wanting a bit of extra background separation compared with the F4 and then also bought the RF 70-200 F4 based on the excellent results from your portrait lens comparison video which I think does a fantastic job for the price and size. Keep up the great work!
Thank you for watching Mark, I really appreciate the kind feedback 🙏
Maybe the best comparison of this kind I’ve seen, congratulations for the video!
Wow, thanks so much!
Hi, another great informative video James. With the comparisons in the green house the window in the background was the giveaway. I had the RF24-105 for four years before "upgrading" to the RF24-70. I agree the 24-105 is more versatile for travel and recently like you state the 70mm was just quite not enough and the RF70-200 needed to come out. I do enjoy the extra separation the 24-70 gives
Great video man, I am not a professional photographer just an enthusiast, but I have been undecided between these two specific lenses for weeks, your video specially your side-by-side photo comparison and how the extra reach of the 24-105mm made a real difference in your portrait mode has finally allowed me to make a decision, 24-105mm it is. Thanks again, cheers. 🍻
In sunny outdoor or well-lit environments where both options are available, it should be difficult to tell the difference unless compared side by side. However, if the goal is to increase shooting variations, I believe the brighter aperture of the 24-70 lens would be more advantageous.
I love your the way how you compare lenses! It is really unique. Thank you and keep it up please! ❤
Thanks for this video. I enjoyed. I think this video is the only one out there which compares the images from these 2 lenses, including comparing them up to their longest focal lengths. Nice.
Thank you for the kind words. Glad you liked the video!
Thanks for a great comparison!
5:55 cemented my decision. Thanks so much for this comparison, so useful!!
one of the most helpful reviews ive ever seeeen thank youuu
Thank you!
Thank you so much. This is the video I am looking for. You include the distance between you and the subject for every focal length so I can get the idea for how far you shot from the subject for every focal length. A lot of KZheadrs I have seen don't show that.
Thank you Ken! I’m really glad the video helped.
Thank you so much for all the effort you’ve made to show the performance of each lens in that comparison. I like you’re calm way with beautiful images that we can enjoy, hope you keep on doing these videos and support the canon shooters over the over dominant Sony world on KZhead cheers
Thank you so much! I really appreciate the kind words.
Thank you, James. I just got this lens and I'm really enjoying it so far.
You’re welcome! Congrats on the new lens. It’s an amazing one
Great comparison most awaited....
Thank you!
A very helpful video thank you. Went for the 24-70 in the end its great.
5:54 WOW you caught me with that one! Great comparison!
The best comparison and very informative 👍👍👍
Thank you !
Super helpful James!
Thank you!
Great review, so we’ll executed, helpful, no nonsense. Thanks James.
Thank you so much!
It was one of the best video that i have seen already about comparation of those lenses. Thank you so much God Bless you and your way.
Thank you so much!
Great video, good job!
I actually searched your channel for this comparison earlier in the week, you must have read my mind. Loving your comparison work, keep up the great work on your channel! p.s I figured there'd be a bigger difference in background blur, guess I'm keeping my 24-105 :)
That's great to hear Andrew! Thank you for watching
I photograph lots of kids doing lots of activities, and the 24-105 is hands down the better option for me.....70mm sometimes wouldn't be long enough. One thing people don't speak much about is the F4 gives you a bit more depth of field around the focus area. I find I have more usable images, because for subjects that are active like kids, I don't have the luxury of focusing on their eyes, so I need a bit more depth of field because I sometimes I only have time to focus on an ear or a shoulder. If I really need a blurry background, I just use the longer focal length. When I was taught to shoot weddings, we shot mostly at F8, and we had to learn composition techniques to eliminate distracting backgrounds. I feel that skill is being lost these days. Thanks for posting!
Thanks James, this one was a pleasure to watch once more! I decided for the 24-105mm when I switched to the R system, as it is much more versatile and lighter, and thus a great travel companion. If maximum background blur is required, I use primes anyway (or my 70-200). And I like the way the 24-105 renders colours, too.
Thank you for watching Tom. Completely agree with you, 24-105 plus a few primes is a great setup. Really wish I could keep the 24-105 for travel too.
If you are not a pro the 24-105 is good enough. 2.8 is better in low light without flash. For critical work pros are going to use faster primes for the most part. I have both and use the 24-105 for travel. For events I switched to RF28-70 f2. WOW!
Thanks for this! I was considering taking my 24-70 F2.8 L on a trip over my 24-105 F4 L for better portraits of my fellow travelers, but this really helped me see how I can better use my 24-105 for portraits. I just subscribed.
This is exactly the review what I wanted.👍👍👍Good job😄
Thank you!!
Great comparison as usual!
Thank you!
This video was incredibly helpful. Thank you
Thank you Bailey!
Finally this video helps me to select RF24-105 f4 but RF35 f1.8 will be the next.
Thank you for your excellent video. Well planned out and presented. Switching over to mirrorless & full frame, from Canon 90D APSC.. Awaiting arrival of R6 Mark 2 + 24-105. Your video assured me I made the right choice of lens. Really good examples from both f4 & 2.8. Have a small channel & looking fwd to upping the visual quality of my videos. Thanks again and all the Best from Fremantle West Aus 🙂
Love this video 🙌🌟
Thank you!
Thank you so much my friend!
Great video, James! RF 24-105 at 105 f4 is really nice for portrait!
Thank you Gustavo! Totally agree
Great vid, James
Thank you!
Hi. nice video. My favorite is the RF 24-105MMM F4. As for travel, portrait. I personally use the 15-35mm f2.8 at night. But for landscape, 24-105mm.
Great comparison here. I use the EF versions of both lenses, love em!
Thank you!
loved this comparison!
Thank you so much!
I have both. Both excellent lens. The 24-105 is my go to travel and landscape lens. The 24-70 is my go to event lens, as well as part of my portrait kit. You can’t go wrong with either.
Nice ❤ Is a much difference in sharpness between those 2?
@@cosmindanes9435 F2.8 is crisper on higher resolution bodies. I see no difference on R6 between the two.
@@Sergei__vi got an R with 30 , you think the difference is noticeable?
Awesome mate
Awesome comparison and breakdown between the two lenses James, and a really good video layout. Definitely earned a Sub here!
Thank you so much!
Excellent video - really useful
Thank you Garry!
Outside, the 24-105 is a clear winner. Sadly most events I’ve worked professionally are indoors with the worst lighting imaginable. The 2.8 can save you in situations like that, and the extra stops of light is what makes that lens a good option for people. Yes I use a flash as well, and have used a flash indoors with the 24-105, but always found indoor lighting to be that lens’s biggest opponent. 24-105 is my favorite lens in any other shooting condition.
Love the colors.
Thank you!
Great comparison! It opend my eyes for composition diferences. I shoot with 24-70 and my taste of background blur can take them apart quite easily, bit i realized i want longer focal lenght too. Especialy the comparison of the face shape and background magnification was enlightening to me.
Thank you Johnny! Really glad the video helped.
My purchased lens 24-105mm will be delivered to the Philippines from Japan. This video provides me a clear insight.
very clearly analysis Thanks a Lot 🥰🥰
thanks for another great video! 🎉
Thank you!
I bought the RF 24-105 because the RF 24-70 was more than I wanted to spend. In hindsight, after watching your video, Im glad I picked up the 24-105. It's just as sharp and more versatile. Thanks for the content!
I am using 105 lens and you have told all I can say. Thank you for that great comparison.
Thank you Serkan!
Really interesting review, thanks. I have the 24-105 F4 and was researching whether the 24-70 F2.8 was worth the upgrade. I think you have convinced me it's not, especially at my level!! Especially as I'm more likely to use it in a landscape environment.
great review
Thank you !
great comparison
Thank you!
Great review, well done! I decided for the RF 24-70f2.8 because of the better corner image quality. Not important for portraits, but with the R6 and 20Mpx is not really room for cropping and soft corners are just another issue, especially printed
how about corner darkness (vignetting) of 24-70 F2.8, some reviews says it was darker than 24-105
Excellent video. Now I need to know if I should get the 24-105 or the 24-240...
Great video. From my experience: if you can only afford ONE lens for everything, including low light situations, and you want to be able to have a shallower dof in some photos - 24-70. If you own some prime lenses - 24-105 will be better in every scenario. Studio - it's the most favourite lens of many renown photographers, like Lindsey Adler, Eli Infante, Sue Bruce, etc. Hikes and travel - weight, more reach. The old, EF version was pretty bad but RF is one of the best lenses Iv'e ever used on a Canon camera for sure. All the best!
Very sound advice Jack, completely agree. Thank you for watching!
I traded in my 24-105 F4 for the 24-70 F2.8. I miss the extra 35mm but I shoot college sports so I'll always have a 70-200 2.8 with me on another body. And in most other situations I'll have two bodies with me, an R7 and R6 so if I need the reach, I can pop it on the R7. But as a travel general purpose lens the 24-105 is probably the better choice for most folks.
thank you for this! cheers from Malaysia, subbed📿☺️
Thank you!
Just came back from 2weeks oversea roadtrip. Brought 24-105f4 with me. Initially, I though that I might not enough background blur for portrait & might not bring subject close enough when I need tele. But after all, this len can do everything I needed, while giving me lightweight & versatility.
Really glad to hear the lens worked well for you. It really is so useful when travelling
I have both and could easily live with just one. That said I don’t use them interchangeably. I prefer the 24-105 for street and travel photography. Also as a second or third lens for wildlife. The 24-70 seventy I prefer for events, any basically interior photography involving people. It’s just my a personal taste. You could easily do it all with either lens and get great results as the video clearly shows.
Thank you for this video🥰
Thank you for watching!
brilliant, thanks
I’ve owned the EF version 24-105 I and II and when I upgraded to the R5c I didn’t even look at the 24-70. I went straight to the 24-105. In video it looses a bit in light but with the R5c duel ISO 3200 low light isn’t a huge deal breaker. I’d much rather have the extra reach. I use this lens everywhere and with even F4 shot properly with subject to background distance you really can’t tell for the most part. Now I want the 135mm 1.8 and I’d be happy
Excellent comparison. One small correction though. At about 3:20 you credit background separation to the increased working distance. It’s actually the longer focal length that improves the background separation. Indeed, increasing your working distance has the opposite effect - it increases the DOF, thus reducing background separation. However, the longer focal length of 105mm more than compensates for this, thus providing a shower DOF.
I bought the RF 24-70 f/2.8 and the extra stop is ESSENTIAL in low-light situations. Do yourself a favor and just get the 24-70. Need a bit extra reach, zoom in with your feet or with cropping.
I had the 24-70mm, compared to the 24-105mm for a bit, and then immediately put it back in the box and sold it. The only difference I could tell was the 24-105mm had a bit more distortion and vignetting, but otherwise it was about as sharp as the 24-70mm. I realised I'd rather the extra zoom, more compact size, and lower weight (And price) than the 1 stop of light difference and slight extra bokeh. There are definitely times where 1 stop would help me, like when I'm shooting at 3200 ISO, but those times are a lot more rare than the versatility I get from the 24-105mm. I bought the 15-35mm f/2.8, so I can still get the bokeh/extra stop at shorter focal lengths, but also get a wider lens too. I think the 15-35mm coupled with the 24-105mm is so much more versatile. Next is which 70-200mm to get, I'm leaning on the f/4 for the same reasons (It's so much smaller, lighter, cheaper) but I would really like f/2.8, just not sure about the bulk.
Another well executed video James. I have both zooms the RF 24-105mm f4L IS USM sits on my R6 MKII because its a great video as well as stills lens given the extra reach. I do however prefer the RF 24-70mm f2.8L IS USM on the Canon R5 which is my go too camera for portraits. Both are improved lenses over the previous EF counter-parts.
Thank you Jeff! That's a great combo, really wish I could keep the 24-105, for video alone it's so versatile on full frame.
I just saw the 24-70 2.8 going on a cashback "sale" so i started to look up reviews, i currently own the R5 with the 24-105 f4 and thanks to your video i will keep the 24-105. If i really need the background separation, i have the 50 1.2 and the 85 f2 or the 100mm 2.8 (tehe macro lense) so i feel like i have more than enough options. And if i (rarely) are asked for some portrait shots i can easily controll the situation and dont need flexibility, hence i can easily work with a prime. Since i do mostly landscapes, the 24-105 is a rally neat compantion on hikes. Going to iceland in summer, i will probably take my trinity with me (15-35 2.8, 24-105 f4, 70-200 f2.8) since we will mostly travel by car and those three lenses fit in my shimoda x30 just so. But i expect the 24-105 to be on the camera for most of the time. I noticed that i get much more stressed if i constantly have to change lenses on travels and thus mess up shots because i have too many options. The 24-70 2.8 is definitely a good option for someone doing lots of event shoots, but those people might even go for the 28-80 f2, although that beast is a whole other weight class - litteraly :D - I just feel i would waste the 2.8s potential as i mostly shoot around f8 anyway
Your comparison work is always outstanding! I'd suggest branching out and comparing 2 new things each day: M: 2 raindrops; T: 2 salad forks; W: 2 toothbrushes; etc., etc. I would tune in daily!
Haha 😂 thank you so much!
Good I bought the 24-105 for video content.
Thank you so much for this , I was struggling to choose but I think for the price difference I’ll go with 24-195
Thank you for watching!
thank you!!!
Thanks! GREAT CONTENT, I just picked up a R5....
Thank you so much Jeff! I really appreciate the support. You’ll love the R5. It’s the best camera I’ve ever used.
bro your photos very unique super cool cinematic - fairytale - deep + your model ❤
Thank you so much!
Awesome Video ! i can´t dicide if i wanna buy a 24-105 or a 24-70 (panasonic) so this video comes very handy with the comparison, even its canon i will awesome at some point all the brands kinda work in the same way. The 24-70mm at 24mm 2.8 is the clear winner no doubt in my opinion BUT i am shocked how awesome the 24-105 performce the further you zoom out until the point at 70mm when it beats the 24-70mm and then has even 35mm more to spare.
For my style of shooting and what I shoot most of the time, I prefer the versatility of the 24-105 over the 24-70 2.8. I actually do have a 28-70 f2/8 but it's an older FD mount lens that I use an adaptor with. Also, I have to use manual focus as it doesn't have AF. It still yields great images believe it or not.
The RF 24-105mm F4L lives on my R6ii most of the time. I do have a couple of primes, plus the rest of the F4L trinity to cover other situations when needed, but the 24-105 is my goto lens when I have no idea what I will need. On a related note, I have the RF 100-400mm that lives almost exclusively on my R7.
Your videos are great. I think you can expect explosive growth for your channel this year. I'd be interested in a comparison between this 24-105 f/4 and the EF version with the EF-RF adapter.
Thank you so much Justin. That’s very encouraging. I’ll definitely add that video to the list.
@@JamesReader Oh that'd be great! I'm currently debating upgrading from a 6D to an R6m2. I was hoping for noticeable size and weight savings, but it seems they really aren't all that different. Video improvements would be a benefit, but the most appealing feature is the autofocus that is worlds better than on the 6D. I shoot mostly landscapes/travel and family. Just not sure the upgrade is worth the cost.
Best comparison, thank you, I will go for 24-105 because my camera handle low light pretty well and having more extra reach works better to me
Thank you so much! Great choice, you’ll love the lens!
Thank you for the great info. I actually have both lens, the series ii in the 24-70. Love both lens. I usually travel with one of them and the 70-200 series ii or the 100-400. I a lot of times still think about which one to take with me. Heading for a cruise in Alaska. Any input from you or anyone else here?
What presets are you using for editing these photos? I love the colours.
Thanks James great review! Have you tested both lenses in low light situations?
Thank you! I’ve done a little testing but in general the 2.8 is superior but most new Canon mirrorless has very good ISO performance so I wouldn’t worry too much.
the 24-70 is so much sharper as you can see in the close ups. both lenses are very cool. the price difference is the sharpeness difference. thanks for the comparison... :)
Great video. How does it do in low light indoors?
I just sold my Sigma 24-70 f2.8 with the Canon EF-RF control ring mount after a 10-day trip. It was heavy (1.2kg, I know RF24-70 f2.8L is lighter at 900g, but I can't afford it); I didn't go faster than f4 at all, since I was only out during the day; there was at least a handful of time everyday when I wished to have further reach. I have a set of cheap primes (16, 24, 28, 35, 50 and 85. I started learning with primes and I'm letting my kids play with them), I can take one or two of them in my bag if I ever need faster lenses. As you've said, I would rather go with the lighter, with longer reach and save a few bucks. Also, most people start shooting with f1.8 (the cheaper primes), the 28-70 f2 seems to be the better upgrade when speed is the concern. F4 for daylight and f2 for lowlight if money isn't a problem.😂
Hi James, great comparison. I have the 24- 105 4L and for travel it’s outstanding . It’s all I took on a six week trip all over China and all I really needed. If I repeated the trip I’d toss in the RF 16mm and RF 24mm as they weigh nothing and would have given me a bit more scope for my indoor shots. Cheers , BTW here in NZ the RF 24-105 4L is NZ $2000 and the 24 -70 2.8 L is NZ$ 4200 so not being a portrait shooter for me the choice was obvious 😀
Thank you Chris! It really is a stunning lens. Super versatile and glad to hear it served you well on your travels. I keep meaning to try the 16mm prime. Let me know how you like it if you get chance
@@JamesReader Hi James, to be honest I haven’t really given the 16mm a lot of work, my original thoughts were “street” when attached to the R5 as it doesn’t have that intimidating look to it . I have the RF 14-35 which I have found incredibly useful and it’s surprising how much extra the difference between 14 and 16 makes even though some reviewers, I think, have given it a bit of flak at the 14 end. Of Canons “cheaper” primes I found their newer RF24 1.8 to be really the most useful especially indoors . This entire video kzhead.info/sun/icuznK5roH-AdWg/bejne.html at the Len Lye Gallery in New Plymouth was filmed exclusively with the 24. Being retired Canon’s L series primes for me are just impossible to justify in terms $$ for my usage especially not being a portrait photog. Sorry I couldn’t be more helpful.😀
I have rf24-105 f4L(rf16 f2.8,rf35 f1.8) for travel,walk around and general purpose.And i have rf28-70 f2L and rf85 f1.2L for my portrait work.
This is a very good vs. I am considering which lens to buy. The F2.8 is twice as expensive, but the difference in effect is not that big.
This is a great comparison of the two popular lenses. I really appreciate your great work. May I ask how do you think about getting both of them. I currently own 24-70 2.8 and thinking about buying 24-105 for overseas travels. Thank you!
I have both. I bought the RF 24-105mm f4L first and I’ve used it for travel, landscape and portraiture. Then I bought the RF 24-70mm f2.8L primarily for portraiture because I already had the EF 85mm f1.4L which works seamlessly on the R series cameras with the adaptor for portraiture. The RF 24-105mm f4L doesn’t render as well as the 85mm prime in portraiture but none the less it still gets the job done and is a favourite studio lens of Lindsey Adler.
Thank you! Absolutely - I think you can justify having both. The 24-105 F4 would be the perfect travel lens and the 24-70 has you covered for scenarios where you need that faster aperture.
I've recently picked up the 24-105mm 2.8 Z, which is a beast along with the R5C. But I think I'll pick up the 24-105 f4 as a smaller version for light travel-it seems nice.
Still waiting for mine to arrive, how are you liking it?
I just took the plunge into the Canon R ecosystem (from an old 7D+EF-S 17-55 f/2.8). I was debating between these two lenses. I ended up going with the 24-70 f/2.8. I think it's clear if I were only going to have one lens ever, the 24-105 would be the better lens for the extra reach. But I think most of us who go with the 24-70 f/2.8 are going for the "holy trinity" with the 70-200 f/2.8 and 15-35 f/2.8 in mind for future purchases. I knew the 24-105 would, for me, need to be supplemented with other lenses (wide and tele) and I didn't want to buy those other two lenses and then wonder if I should have spent a little more in the middle zoom lens range.
A good and helpful comparison. My takeaway from this video is that you can fudge the background blur with the slower lens *if* able to back up a bit and *if* you're OK with the flatter perspective. The older considerations about low light just don't apply to modern cameras under normal lighting scenarios because of how well they perform at high ISO. It was not mentioned, but we're assuming here that both perform well at their extremes of 24mm and 70/105mm in terms of vignetting or chromatic aberrations or barrel distortions?? I like the idea of the 24-105 for versatility and then use a prime once you've discovered your favorite focal length for whatever you frequently shoot with. I'm also tempted by the 85, not because of its macro or IS or even because it's faster than either of these, but because it's a safe bet I'd likely prefer 85 for most portraits anyway.
Again, great video James! Last year I sold my 24 105 F4 and bought the 28 70 F2, but sometimes regret the sell (not the buy) because of the handling, travel capability, versatility and weight. But having both is also a little to much… Thanks again for your work, creating these videos and helping people making their decisions!
Thank you so much Erik!
Hi. As always, a great video review. I would like to see how they shoot in poor lighting. Is there a big difference?
Thank you Alex! Its depends mostly on how well your camera handles high ISO. The Canon R cameras do such a good job I wouldn't worry too much. However if we are talking really poor lighting, I would suggest a versatile prime like the 50mm 1.8 .
I tried the Tamron G2 2.8 from Canon EF mount but it couldn’t not compete with the 24-105mm. The 24-105 is my used lens in the studio and the quality is amazing. The rendering of the 24-70 is slightly better but no when you try to justify the price.
I can't decide between these two Tamron 24-70 or RF 24-105. I love talking portraits and want the longer focal length.
Great comparison!! I am looking for a travel lens. I will go with 24-105 F4 🙂
Thank you! Great choice
I've owned the EF version of both lenses 24-70mm F2.8 / 24-105mm F4is when I had my 1dxii and Now that I own my R5c... I own the 24-105mm F4 and I have to say I could really ever notice the difference for the PRICE difference and the extra reach the 105 gives me over the 70mm you can pretty much neglect any difference in out of focus area at 70mm 2.8 or 105mm F4 "IF You know what you are doing" with relation to subject to background distance. I only loose bit of light with the F4 but shooting at ISO 3200 esp for C-log and having duel ISO makes things easy and photo with editing and de-noise it's really no big deal. IF you want to have the 24-70 and 70-200 then that is a fantastic combo, however.... I have the 24-105 and plan to get the 100-500 RF lens which will be insane coverage and then toss in my 50mm 1.8 and potentially a 135mm 1.8 RF lens that should cover A LOT of ground. The 70-200 is a fantastic lens too but paired with the 24-105 it's almost a waste and becomes essentially a 105-200 F2.8 IMO. Just some food for thought and my experience.
Great video! Which lens did you mainly use to film the video? There's really hardly any difference when taking photos, but what about filming? Which lens would you prefer for travel videos?
Thank you! For travel video I would go for the 24-105. I would much rather the extra reach over the faster aperture generally for travelling. The video was shot with a mix of a 28mm prime and the RF 15-35.
@@JamesReader Great! Thank you for your advice. I think I will buy the rf 24-105. It is also much cheaper