Gen 2 much better. The RF 24-105 has IS, is light and portable, your mirrorless has much better low light noise control. I have pics in LR from the EF 24-70 Gen 1, the Gen 2, the RF 24-70 F2.8, and the RF 24-105 F4.0 (plus a lot of other lenses.) The RF 24-105 lives on the camera almost as much as the RF 100-500.
The rf 24-70 f2.8 for me would be ~2400€ (minus ~800 for selling your 24-105) (gonna list kind of fair second hand prices to still get the glas in good condition) canon ef 70-200l f4~ 400€ (tamron g2 70-200 f2.8 ~800€) canon ef 16-35l is f4 ~ 650€. A new canon adapter is ~320€ (couldnt find a used one).
f/2.8, f/8 and f/22 1:1 crops of analysed regions for 5Dmk3/24-70L . EF 24-70 vs EF 24-70 II Comparison – Aperture Sharpness Results. The above information shows the sort of results you can expect from the test with a single lens, but I wanted to show some comparative data from 20-30 copies of both the 24-70 Mark I and the 24-70 Mark II.
Another is that the latest EF version of the 24-70 f/2.8 (the Mk II) can be had for about half the price of the RF version (where I am at least), so there's probably a good $1000 to be saved at the outset if they go with the EF Mk II.
I've owned both at the same time previously. Image quality is hard to distinguish unless you pixel peep. The RF 24-105 is significantly better than the EF version, which made choosing the 24-70 easier betweenthe EF versions. But as others have mentioned, which one you choose depends on your needs.
Tamron’s image stabilization (VC) works exceptionally good. The Tamron had serious vignetting issues at 2.8 (along the whole zoom range). At F4 and above vignetting was no longer an issue. In the center of the frame Canon’s lens is always slightly sharper and at 24mm the edges were significantly sharper than the Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 DI
. 343 392 74 73 239 288 389 304 260
canon ef 24 70 f2 8 vs f4
