Canon 24-105L f/4

Nostromo

Nostromo

Messages
5,921
Name
Dominic
Edit My Images
Yes
I've got a Canon 24-105L f/4 the first version. When I had this on my 50d it seemed fairly sharp, even at the long end. Now I'm using it on my 80d it doesn't seem as sharp and is (to my eyes) quite soft at the long end and around the edges.
I thought about micro adjustment, but it doesn't look too me like it's front or back focusing, it just looks soft. Could it just be a case of an old lens being used on a newer, higher pixel sensor, not producing the desired results. I use it mainly around the f/4-f/6.3 area.
 
Need to set it up on a tripod and take test shots focussing manually with live view and remote release with mirror up.

It's an L lens so should be good enough on the 80D.

I had one on a 6D and it was sharp right to the edges on full frame.
 
GreenNinja67 said:
Need to set it up on a tripod and take test shots focussing manually with live view and remote release with mirror up.

It's an L lens so should be good enough on the 80D.

I had one on a 6D and it was sharp right to the edges on full frame.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the advice, I shall give it a go.
 
So here are my test shots. All on a tripod, about 4.5m from the subject, at 105mm, in manual mode, ISO100. The first set are auto focus through the vf, using the centre focus point, focused on the T of ATORA. Starting at f/4, f/5, f/6.3 then f/8
The second set are manual focus in live view, again focused on the T and using the same f stops as before.
No adjustments have been made, i've just exported them to Flickr.

AF
1
untitled-2.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

2
untitled.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

3
untitled-4.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr
4
untitled-3.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

Manual focus
1
untitled-8.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

2
untitled-7.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

3
untitled-10.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

4
untitled-9.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

So in conclusion, f/4 isn't very sharp (i didn't expect it to be super sharp, but thought it might be a bit better than it is) and f/6.3 is where this lens starts to get better. I can live with that. It's just a bit strange how on my 50d f/4 seemed better, but maybe i wasn't expecting much from an old camera.
 
Last edited:
A few early batches of the mk i were faulty. It showed as soft images at f4 and to a lesser extent at f5.6.. A friend had one and found that the s/n was on a recall list. He returned it to Canon who replaced it. At the time I had a Mk i and there was a significant difference between his faulty item and mine. I actually have a Mk ii now. I wonder if that list of faulty serial numbers is still published?

Dave
 
Dave Canon said:
A few early batches of the mk i were faulty. It showed as soft images at f4 and to a lesser extent at f5.6.. A friend had one and found that the s/n was on a recall list. He returned it to Canon who replaced it. At the time I had a Mk i and there was a significant difference between his faulty item and mine. I actually have a Mk ii now. I wonder if that list of faulty serial numbers is still published?

Dave
Click to expand...
Thanks, I'm pretty sure they're not going to do anything about it now :ROFLMAO:. I'll just live with it. It's now my most used lens.
 
Nostromo said:
So here are my test shots. All on a tripod, about 4.5m from the subject, at 105mm, in manual mode, ISO100. The first set are auto focus through the vf, using the centre focus point, focused on the T of ATORA. Starting at f/4, f/5, f/6.3 then f/8
The second set are manual focus in live view, again focused on the T and using the same f stops as before.
No adjustments have been made, i've just exported them to Flickr.

AF
1
untitled-2.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

2
untitled.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

3
untitled-4.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr
4
untitled-3.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

Manual focus
1
untitled-8.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

2
untitled-7.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

3
untitled-10.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

4
untitled-9.jpg by Dominic Rodgers, on Flickr

So in conclusion, f/4 isn't very sharp (i didn't expect it to be super sharp, but thought it might be a bit better than it is) and f/6.3 is where this lens starts to get better. I can live with that. It's just a bit strange how on my 50d f/4 seemed better, but maybe i wasn't expecting much from an old camera.
Click to expand...
You've gone from 15mp to 24mp, the higher up you go the more any lens issues start showing up... sadly.
 
I'm pretty sure I'm seeing backfocus; but I'm seeing it in both sets... so maybe the printing on the box just isn't sharp? You should put a slanted rule next to your target...
 
TBH it looks good to me, only the first one loses just a tad of focus on the fine print on the Atora box but the rest look very good.

And that's on my Samsung 40" TV, not my editing monitor so on there it would look even sharper.
 
I've inherited my husband's 24-105 f/4 which he used to use on his 50D. I really love the colours I get from it and I've not noticed any issues with my 5Div, but then I haven't scrutinised them.
 
One question, was the IS switched off during the tripod test?
 
tijuana taxi said:
One question, was the IS switched off during the tripod test?
Click to expand...

This should not matter for this lens. In fact all my Canon L IS lenses can be used on a tripod switched on. The lenses senses no movement and disables it own IS. This is not necessarily true for other lenses and other brands. Of course this mechanism could be faulty but then this might have shown up in other apertures.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top