After spending time on FM over the past year I realize I have much to learn, so please be patient. This is probably a basic question, but I am not clear on the answer and have not found it in the many threads I have read regarding comparisons of these two lenses. I understand the low light advantage if shooting at f/2.8, but what if any advantages does a f/2.8 lens have over the f/4 lens if you are shooting at f/4 or higher. In low light, can the IS make up for the f/4 with longer exposure compared to the f/2.8. I am deciding between these two lenses. My top priority is image quality. The reach of the 24-105 as a walk around is appealing, but the sense I get from reading threads is that the 24-70 produces better images in the same hands. I currently have the 40D with the kit lens(28-135 f/3.5-5.6), a 70-200 f/2.8L IS, and want to upgrade from the kit lens. Photographic interests at this point center around family, sports, travel and landscape.
Any input is appreaciated.
Dec 09, 2008 at 08:55 PM
Previous versions of Rick Ethuen's message #6469302 « 24-105 f/4L IS vs. 24-70 f/2.8L »
