Canon EF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM Lens

Canon Bob said:
IF the 24-105 is pin sharp and has fantastic IQ then the 24-70 is unlikely to have been a better investment.

I do however believe that the 24-105 has attained some mythical status that really is beyond its place in the Canon line-up. It's not stunningly sharp until it's stopped down a few stops, it vignettes a fair bit, there's a little distortion at both ends of the range.
In its favour it has a useful range on any body style and is very affordable...an L class kit lens in simple parlance.
In footballing terms, it's not the flashy winger or brick wall centre half...it's a journeyman midfielder that gets off the bench for the last 15 minutes to steady the ship.

Bob
Click to expand...

Hmmm, what I meant was that the 24-70mm would have served me better indoors where flash photography is limited. Comparing the 24-105 to a kit lens is ridiculous - having previously been using a Canon 17-85mm IS there is absolutley NO comparison!

Correct me if im wrong but isnt it usual practice to stop down to get the max IQ from a lens, effectively finding its "sweet spot"?
 
I get the impression that there are lots of soft copies of this lens in circulation. Some reviews rave about it completely, and some complain that it's just not what people expected.

I have experienced a copy of this lens that was not as sharp as I'd have expected, but my friend has one which is tack sharp all the way through. I've since exchanged and am waiting for a new copy to see if there's improvement.

I've also heard of people sending their softer copies back to Canon for calibration/adjustment, and things improving a great deal after they receive them back.

This leads me to think that Canon's quality control is to blame here, and it's actually quite a good lens if you get a decent copy?

What do people think?

Rob
 
Matt989 said:
Comparing the 24-105 to a kit lens is ridiculous - having previously been using a Canon 17-85mm IS there is absolutley NO comparison!
Click to expand...
The 24-105 was routinely sold and delivered with the 5D body as a kit....hence my term "L kit lens". I made no comparisons with any other lenses in my post. :shrug:

Matt989 said:
Correct me if im wrong but isnt it usual practice to stop down to get the max IQ from a lens, effectively finding its "sweet spot"?
Click to expand...
With very few exceptions, that is the case. However, fast wide to medium lenses usually achieve this at f/2.8 to f/4 whilst the 24-105 is down at f/8 with a similar two stop reduction.
Check out the charts here comparing the 24-105 to the 24-70 at 24mm and f/4.....they're chalk and cheese.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Bob
 
Canon Bob said:
The 24-105 was routinely sold and delivered with the 5D body as a kit....hence my term "L kit lens". I made no comparisons with any other lenses in my post. :shrug:


With very few exceptions, that is the case. However, fast wide to medium lenses usually achieve this at f/2.8 to f/4 whilst the 24-105 is down at f/8 with a similar two stop reduction.
Check out the charts here comparing the 24-105 to the 24-70 at 24mm and f/4.....they're chalk and cheese.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...CameraComp=9&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2

Bob
Click to expand...

Beat me to it.

:D
 
crikey!

according to those charts the 24-70 is quite a bit sharper.

hmmm!!!:thinking:

perhaps is isnt all its cracked up to be and the general better optical quality is overall a better option rather than a IS system....


Gpc
 
OK, the 24-70 is sharper. And it's f/2.8.

But the 24-105 is longer. And it has IS. And it's a bit cheaper.

Which is best for you depends on your circumstances.
 
I do like IS, I think I may just hire them both off you, and decide that way.
 
StewartR said:
OK, the 24-70 is sharper. And it's f/2.8.

But the 24-105 is longer. And it has IS. And it's a bit cheaper.

Which is best for you depends on your circumstances.
Click to expand...

Thats the way I seen it...I just didnt realise HOW much sharper the 24-70mm was! Id also add if your into indoor photography the 24 -70mm would be the better option!

At the moment im happy with the 24-105mm as it gives me that extra reach which I like!
 
Talk to Matt at MPB Photographic. One hardly used might be coming up for sale soon.
 
Considering the variability of the exact focus point when testing my very limited selection of lenses, including the 24..105 which is one of the worst I'll add, it's always a bit dissapointing that these tests oftendon't include a focus point test.
 
Matt989 said:
Flower

Hawk 1

Hawk 2

Your not that far from myself....im just up in Hamilton
Click to expand...

Thanks for that mate, great shots!

If you're up for it, we should start arranging Scottish meets, there's loads of us up this way!! I know a few other posters who are up for this!

Dave
 
StewartR said:
OK, the 24-70 is sharper. And it's f/2.8.

But the 24-105 is longer. And it has IS. And it's a bit cheaper.

Which is best for you depends on your circumstances.
Click to expand...

Having used both, I found that for portrait work the 24-105 was a better length, but at f5.6, the 24-70 was very, very sharp, and the 24-105 not so.

I so wanted the 24-70 but couldn't really afford it, so bought the Sigma version, although the 24-105 is very much on my want list right now.... I don't regret buying the Sigma, because I also wanted the speed, but the 24-105 has a lot going for it, especially as an everyday lens.

Steve
 
I have pretty much decided to go for the 24 - 105 as I have just been loaned one. If I get one for the right price :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top