28-135mm IS Canon Vs 24-105mm L IS Canon

captures.in.time

captures.in.time

Messages
1,764
Edit My Images
Yes
Can I please just open the forum to compaire these two lenses. Im thinking of upgrading from the 28-135 to the 24-105... but not totally convinced of the benefits against the spend...however my main thoughts for change areare I yern for the L series build quality especially for the walkabout lens that tends to live on my camera when I travel. I always want to turn that bit wider with the 28-135 and rarely want to zoom in much more than 100 anyway.

But please talk freely... these lenses your thoughts... compair, contrast, criticise, post pictures you have taken with each... just post whatever you think...

Thanks

Mark
 
Mark, i have the 28-135 is lens, and whilst it is a great lens, i dont think it comes anywhere near the quality of the 24-105 L lens, which i have tried,and loved...:love:
Dean:)
 
That article sort of sums up my thoughts so far about what i've got... but are there any other thoughts opinions from all... cant base it on one article!

More comparisons or peoples finding who have used both or indeed made the same upgrade would be good?

M
 
waspjunior said:
This article may help: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/24vs28.shtml

I upgraded from the 28-135mm to the 24-105mm purely because I found one at the right price (it was bundled as a kit lens with a 5D that was surplus to buyers requirements).

I'm not sure that there is a HUGE difference in IQ for the money but the build quality is quite noticeably better.
Click to expand...

I went from 28-135 too 24-105, and then swaped too the 24-70 2.8 much better imo.
 
I think the 24-105 would be my next lens i think it just looks so good for the range :).
 
I got one with my 5D, and despite hearing so many raves about it, was never more than satisfied with the results....as opposed to my Prime lenses, which frequently blow me away. I liked the convenience, but I'm so used to moving myself to get the shot rather than changing the focal length, that I never got used to the overall quality. Don't get me wrong, it's more than capable to producing the goods, but not as often, nor as well as a Prime.

So I'm getting rid of it, and I'm going to use the proceeds to fund a 100mm f2.8 macro and a 200mm f2.8.....with possibly an extender.....to complement my 35mm, 50mm & 85mm.....
 
So anyone anything bad to say about the 24-105mm... is there any third party alternatives which may out perform it? Would def have to cover at least 24mm to 90mm in range as a min.

Mark
 
Nope - the 24-105L IS, is the dogs ...

Siggy and Tamron do not one.

The closest I have seen is the Tokina 80-135 f2.8, not seen a review of it however.
 
will69 said:
the 24-105L IS, is the dogs ...
Click to expand...

:clap:

I got my 24-105 last year and am more than happy with it. It's sharp, produces great colours, well built and just feels very nice to use. The range and IS is great for a walkabout lens and produces great results. 2.8 would be nice on it but then it's gonna be heavy like a tank aka the 24-70 2.8!

Lucikly I got mine last year when the cashback was on and before the prices shot up so got a new one for £500. The cheapest price now from kerso is £770ish :puke:
 
I still have my 28-135mm sitting in my cupboard - you've just reminded me!
I upgraded to the 24-70 f2.8 rather than the 24-105mm after trying both in the shop - I find it's a sharper lens, but without IS and weighing the same as a small family car, it's not for everyone!
 
Hi all

Kinda sounds like it is the lens for me then... as I dont want a small car to carry....

Anyone else any thoughts?

Mark
 
I have the 28-135, not the lightest lens I have. Also (it may just be my lens) if you are intending it as a walkabout lens (the range is pretty useful) I find that if I walk with my camera attached with the strap around my neck, the lens extends and zooms in. It may just be that mine is a little loose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top