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.
My Lightroom Presets:
My full gear list:
My written reviews:
My website:
RAW Files Download –
*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 –
Canon R6 MKII –
RF 24-105 F4 –
RF 24-70 2.8 –
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:
Follow me on Instagram:
My Favourite Conversion LUTS:
Best CLOG/CLOG3 to Rec709 LUTS for R5, R6 and R7 –
Best CLOG 2 to Rec709 LUT for C70 –
My Favourite Creative LUTS:
606 LUTS –
Kinetic LUTS –
Get the cinematic look with Dehancer:
Get 10% off your purchase of Dehancer using JAMESREADER at checkout –
All My Gear
Camera Setup:
Main Camera:
Backup Camera:
Travel Camera:
Favourite Lens:
Best Portrait Lens:
Favourite Video Lens:
Wide Angle Zoom:
Telephoto Zoom:
Best Budget Prime:
Action Camera –
Drone –
Accessories
Best Dreamy Lens Filter (Not pro mist!) –
Best Travel Tripod:
On Camera Monitor:
CF Express Card:
Best Vari ND Filter:
SD Card:
My New Favourite Camera Backpack:
Travel Camera Bag:
Camera Sling Bag:
Tech Pouch:
My Favourite Camera Strap:
Gimbal:
Lighting Setup
Key light:
Panel Light:
Tube Light:
Mini Light:
Studio Strobe:
Audio Setup
Studio Mic:
On Camera Mic:
Shotgun Mic:
Lav Mic:
Audio Interface:
*** 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:
For business enquiries: me@jamesreader.uk
Comments
41 responses to “24-105 F4 vs 24-70 2.8 Compared for Portraits and Travel – (Canon RF – Free RAW Files)”
James you’ve quickly become one of my favorite photography channels on YouTube. Thanks for always providing great value in your videos with the in depth comparisons. Keep inspiring my man!
Now is it just me or do the close up headshots look sharper on the 24-70? I've seen a few other videos comparing these two lenses and I see the same thing in all of them. I'm considering selling my 24-70 for the 105. The image quality is incredible but I've found the 24-70 is just too bulky. Getting more into travel content, it's not ideal at all.
Depends on what you want to prove. If you want the 24-70 to be better, you can say that f4 gives 2x ISO than f2.8. and the 24-70 is optically better than 24-105. I love the 24-240 as well, but everything depends on the situation where you want to use it… If you travel with 24-105 you'll miss the f2.8 sometimes while if you bring the 24-70 with you, you'll miss the 70-105 range… (many times you can zoom from 70 to '105' by foot… So it's not an easy decision.
so you thik the 24 – 105 is better for video?
The best video I’ve watched on this topic. Clearly shows differences and what you can do to mitigate those differences.
You need to move your model farther away from the background to check the true difference in depth of field.
It’s pretty obvious to me which shots are with the 2.8. It’s obviously a better aperture for portraits and it shows here.
What a great survey of these 2 lenses. Surprisingly similar results. Since we are no longer in the film era – can bump iso to
very high levels with little noise, the 24-105 gets my vote, considering it’s portability, lower weight, and longer reach, at a considerably lower price. Many thanks for this superb review! 👍👍👍
Which camera you have used
Pleased I found your review video. I'm seriously looking at the 24-105mm II for my 2000D, but then I was tempted in the 24-70mm because of the f/2.8, but now I've made my mind up and will be purchasing the 24-105mm.
Knaresborough is beautiful by the way, great shots you've captured there
I never message on youtube but your video was fantastic. Thankyou
Depends on the use case. The 24-105 could be more versatile but if I were to choose now based on my experience, I will choose the faster 24-70. Why? There were very special circumstances wherein I need a full stop of aperture in the evening when I was traveling. Once example is the F1 race in Singapore, and the main races are usually in the evening. The f4 aperture can't cut it and the noise levels were off the charts (iso6400) even at a minimum shutter speed of 1/20. So all of the pictures I had for the F1 racing were either a blurry mess or very grainy. And the processed raw files were not great as well. That was my only opportunity to travel for the F1 and I may not be able to do it again.
Here’s my 2 cents based on being trained by a master portrait photographer and shooting portraits for over fifty years:
1) It is shooting distance not focal length that controls near-far, nose size vs ear size, perspective. Shooting from the range of 8-10 feet produces the most flattering normal looking size relationship in oblique poses which are the most flattering angle for average people who don’t have the type of slender perfectly symmetrical faces models are selected to be models for. Try different distances until proportions look ‘right’ (subjectively) keeping lens above eye level (top down view of nostrils is better than lower and looking up the nose holes) THEN select the FL which produces the desired in camera crop.
2) If you plan on doing a lot of tight cropped at neck headshot for actors, etc. 105mm on the long end will be the better choice, or do what I did starting in 2004 when switching to Cannon DSLR, by the 24-70mm and the 70-200mm as 2/3 of a “Holy Trinity” the other third of mine was the EF-S 10-22mm an amazingly good lens for the price. I was using APS-C bodies then so all the effective FL were 1.6x the numbers on the lens but, per pt. 1 that only affects the in camera crop not the perspective. I now use the RF 10-20mm f/4 as my wide lens on my pair of R6Mkii bodies, still using the circa 2004 EF 24-70mm f/2.8 and EF 70-200mm. When you buy good glass it lasts 😊
3) f/2.8 vs f/4 – If you want the entire head in focus on in a portrait you’ll want to be shooting at f/8. That’s why for studio portraits backgrounds if not plain are painted to look fuzzy and out of focus. Wide open Bokeh is awesome outdoors but it is ALWAYS a distraction from the star of the show, the face of the subject if people looking at the portrait comment “WOW! what great Bokeh!” The less more the front of the face contrasts with everything else in the frame — tone, color, texture, pattern — the faster the viewer will be drawn there and long their eyes will dwell before even wondering what is in the background how how great the Bokeh is.
That said it’s nice to have the 2.8 vs 4 aperture when wanting very narrow DOF. Back in the day when film was slow and digital sensors had shorter DR resulting in more shadow noise when ETTR paying for super fast lens a necessity. I paid dearly for my Nikor f/1.8 85mm and f/2 35mm I used for available light PJ work with ASA 400 Tri-X Nowadays I shoot mostly wildlife and rarely go below f/5.6 unless it’s a static subject on a similar tone / color background and I need contrasting sharpness to differentiate it.
I actually very much prefer the head-and-shoulders portrait shot at 70mm. I think it does a better job of depicting the depth of the subject matter.
👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
Please skip the music. So hard to follow you with the distraction.
I am staying on my 24-70/2.8 for travel purposes – i shoot lot of indoor photography especially in churches and palaces. My worst nightmare is the high iso noise, so i need that 1 stop plus of the f2.8.
That was very helpful. Thanks. It would have been great if you had included low light performance of the f/4 . Although it obviously falls behind but knowing how far f/4 can go in low lights would have been great for them who can not afford larger aperture.
Hello! The video turned out really great; thank you for everything. Could you give some final advice on usage? I’m shooting food and product photos—bokeh isn’t important for food shots, but it is for product photos. I’m also shooting videos with my Canon R8. If you were to choose again, which lens would you go for: the 24-70mm f/2.8 or the 24-105mm f/4 L?
Beautiful model, guess she's your gf 🙂
If I had to travel with one lens I'd go for the 24-105 but I don't travel with just one lens, I want some primes with me especially for portraits and I use a 70-300 L when I go for landscapes and horses. So I definitely prefer one stop wider zoom 24-70 than a longer zoom at f/4 and being able to have a little more isolation when needed – for having the same short depth of field on a lens one stop closer it should be double the focal length than the other so 140mm –
Dayum Im torren their both so goooood!
Really want to see the 24-105 F4 vs the new 28-70 F2.8. What's more important, the L glass and extra range or the faster aperture but non L lens.
Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM 👍👍👍
12:19
Práve sa prehráva
Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS: Final Review | 4K
163 tis. zhliadnutí
pred 5 rokmi
Dustin Abbott
DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I'll …
4K
Počet kapitol: 6
Intro | Design | Autofocus | Image Quality | Image Stabilizer | Conclusion
10:52
Práve sa prehráva
24-105 F4 vs 24-70 2.8 Compared for Portraits and Travel – (Canon RF – Free RAW Files)
287 tis. zhliadnutí
pred 1 rokom
Maybe time to redo with both F4 and F2.8 as 24-105mm?
F2.8 price range is such a waste unless you have a huge wad of cash to burn. I’ve owned the F4 and do all of my professional work with it. Never really had an issue. Do I wish I had more bokeh at times? Eh, yeah. But spending literally $1.5-$2K more for only an extra stop of light and sometimes better bokeh is just insanity.
An absolutely awesome comparison, thank you James!
I was contemplating upgrading my old EF 24-105 F4 to the newly announced RF 28-70 F2.8 IS for my R8 body, and was wondering exactly that – would I get similar background blur for portraits just by using the longest 105mm end of the EF instead of 70mm@f2.8! Considering the new non-L RF 28-70 F2.8 costs basically exactly as much as RF 24-105 F4, and both of these lenses are 2- 3x more expensive than used EF 24-105 F4 or EF 24-70 F2.8, the main upside for the new RF 28-70 F2.8 is its light weight for travel. But then you pay ~1k USD/Eur/GBP for slashing only 300g from the old EF 24-105 F4 + EF-RF adapter combo by going to RF 28-70 F2.8.
Awesome explanation.
Hi James, you really saved me! I've been stuck between the two for weeks and, thanks to your great video, I now have a really clear idea. For my use, the 24-105 f4 is perfect! Thank you so much!
Thank you for your video! 👌🏻
Hi.What do you think, is the picture quality with 24mm f2.8 is the same as canon ef 24-105 f4l IS?
I have this 24mm lens and thinking about one more. I consider 50mm 1.4 usm or 24-105. Body is canon 70d.
Which one can you recommend fo landscape and traveling? The most important thing is quality and sharpness. Thank you
Thank you!😊
You video has huge chromatic aberration and fringing with brunches over bright sky. What lens did you use?
Thanks
Compare in low light situation.
6:18 the color grading on the b-rolls is marvelous!
just add 70-200 2.8 and done. 24-105 there is no reason to be
How can you take portraits with a lens that opens to F4? It's stupid and ridiculous. Even the 2.8 is limited.
Keep in mind that 28-70F2.8 is way better lens then 24-105 F4 ! It goes farther then just F2.8,Its about the Glass its self.
Images would never be the same .I did use two 24-104F4 before i went to 24-70F2.8 and would never go back.
Night shoot , which lense will win?
nice review I was hoping for. this channel really under rated.