Which RF lens to sell ... 24-70 f2.8 or 24-105 f4 ...

[SO8]

Ok, I've mentioned this before but maybe not quite like this.

I am in the lucky (or stupid some may say) position of having an R5 with 24-70 f2.8, 24-105 f4 and 28-70 f2 lenses. At least one has to go as the expense was crazy even though funded by retiring and they obviously cover the same range 'ish.

I originally got the 24-105 f4 lens as a 'holiday' or general purpose lens at the time I got my R5. I then found I wanted the effect of f2.8 for photos more as I was used to that when I helped my wife shoot weddings (Ef 24-70 f2.8 on a 5D III - both long sold) ... thus got the RF 24-70 f2.8.

OK so far ... at this point I have used both and knew both were incredibly sharp and not heavy.

My wife then secured the loan of an ex rental RF 28-70 f2 from her employer to try. I stupidly said I'd have a go as everyone raves about it but I know it is ££££, large and heavy. The result was not what I expected (I thought I would find it too big / heavy) and I fell in love with the rendering and sharpness of the f2 lens which IMO (and that of my wife who is a pro) gave images a more 'alive' and sharper render than the other two lenses. The result was I ended up buying one, just not the ex rental one ...

Now, on the basis I take amateur photos for fun these days, love shallow depth of field effects and just walking around with the camera / days out .... if I keep the f2 lens which of the other two, or both, do I get rid of ?

I am finding the RF 28-70 spends most time on my R5, not either of the other two, despite the weight of the big lens... That said, I have not been out for more than a few hours and am not too keen on having the RF 28-70 f2 on the camera visible walking around central London as IMO it sticks out, even though not white.

I favour keeping the f2.8 lens as well as the f2 beast, but realise it has not seen the camera since the arrival of the RF 28-70 lens and would get me double roughly the RF 24-105's value. I am torn as I know probably selling the f2.8 lens is the way forward ... I just don't want to !

What would people do ? Sell the 24-70, sell the 24-105 or what about selling both ?

 

[Jake Shoots Birds]

Having the 2.0 and 2.8 don't make a ton of sense to me if you love the 2.0. I'm trying to come up with times I would want to use the 2.8 instead of the 2.0 and the 4.0 just wouldn't work and it's a tough one to shoehorn in. Were it me, and I loved the 2.0, I'd get rid of the 2.8. You're losing 24-28mm at wide apertures, but I can't think of the times you wouldn't be able to step back just a bit.

 

[SO8]

Having the 2.0 and 2.8 don't make a ton of sense to me if you love the 2.0. I'm trying to come up with times I would want to use the 2.8 instead of the 2.0 and the 4.0 just wouldn't work and it's a tough one to shoehorn in. Were it me, and I loved the 2.0, I'd get rid of the 2.8. You're losing 24-28mm at wide apertures, but I can't think of the times you wouldn't be able to step back just a bit.

Thanks, much as I love the RF 24-70 I do, in fact, think you are right. I am not bothered for 24-28mm for what I now take and the 28-70 is staying anyway.

I have just tried a very unscientific test of static subjects for sharpness and clarity between the 24-105 and 24-70 ... and the 24-105 f4 gives a better, sharper images than the far dearer f2.8 lens at f4.

Guess the RF 24-70 f2.8 gets sold ... oh well. It has taken maybe all of 20 images. Oops ...

 

[PhotoJim58]

I find the 24-105 to be a most useful lens for everyday. The 28-70 is just magic to me. I rented it and plan on buying it. The 24-70 is top notch but would be the one I would sell if it was me with the problem, but would try to keep all three.

 

[SO8]

I find the 24-105 to be a most useful lens for everyday. The 28-70 is just magic to me. I rented it and plan on buying it. The 24-70 is top notch but would be the one I would sell if it was me with the problem, but would try to keep all three.

Haha, I have tried keeping them all ... on the basis the 24-105 is a general purpose lens, the 24-70 more specialist but not big and heavy ... with the 28-70 at the top of the tree but big and heavy (and tbh the unintended but not regretted purchase I tend to keep using most).

My wife who is a professional photographer sadly knows what they have cost and is not happy with the 'collection' remaining

 

[SO8]

24-70 f2.8 now boxed ready to trade in ... I am keeping my 50mm f1.2 though ... wife wanted that to go too but there are limits

 

[PhotoJim58]

24-70 f2.8 now boxed ready to trade in ... I am keeping my 50mm f1.2 though ... wife wanted that to go too but there are limits

little bit of a bummer but we have to keep them happy.

 

[Michelle Sampson]

Actually, I think you have already reached your own conclusion but just needed some support. The 24-105 is always the starting point and a mandatory lens in ones arsenal. You LOVE the 28-70, F2.0 and while its a beast you haven't complained about an inability to carry it around. It's been your go-to lens since you got it. Sell the 24-70, 2.8 because to sell the lens you love to keep the lens you don't use just doesn't make any sense...

 

[SO8]

Actually, I think you have already reached your own conclusion but just needed some support. The 24-105 is always the starting point and a mandatory lens in ones arsenal. You LOVE the 28-70, F2.0 and while its a beast you haven't complained about an inability to carry it around. It's been your go-to lens since you got it. Sell the 24-70, 2.8 because to sell the lens you love to keep the lens you don't use just doesn't make any sense...

You are very much right

 

[goju00]

As many have said, sell the 24-70. It doesn’t matter sense to keep it if you are ok with the weight of the 28-70. Keep the 24-105 in case you need the reach