skibum5 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
Daan B wrote:
I didn't give an advice, just an opinion. Even so, when checking the resolution charts@ f/8 of both lenses at Photozone, the differences are minimal. So, it isn't all about resolution. But even the CA's, distortions and vignetting are pretty similar, except for 24mm. At 24mm the 24-70L II is a better performer. However, at 105mm the 24-105L is better. I guess it depends on your needs and what you shoot. The 24-105L still costs one third of the 24-70L II...
Any yeah it certainly depends upon what you shoot, your needs, how picky, etc. nothing wrong if you love the 24-105L.
(I do have to say that the PZ results do not really show a minimal difference between the 24-105 and 24-70 II, they are often 200-500 points apart! which is VERY easily noticeable in real world, trivially easy to spot, consider that you can tell even just 50-100 points apart and that much of time people argue about lenses differing by only 50-200 apart. Again it depends upon your needs, but many, especially for landscape, do pay a special attention to the near 24mm zone since they have plenty of other options to sharply cover higher ranges anyway, getting a top 24mm is often key in this case, this was the first zoom to every truly pull that off to prime-like levels for the picky photographers.)
|