Upload & Sell: Off
Granted, there is copy to copy variation in every manufactured product. And granted, some people have bad experiences with bad samples. But your statements are so broadly general in their negative comment that I have to wonder how much experience you have with this particular lens.
I've tried it (24-105L) multiple times and been less than impressed multiple times. I tried a 24 1.4 II and was instantly fine with it and I tried the 24-70 II and 24-70 f/4 IS and was fine with those too (although the second 24-70 f/4 IS was definitely better than the first copy which got returned). I primarily focused my attention at the near 24mm zone for particular types of landscape work where crisp details to the edges mattered and where resistance to purple fringing of branches against clouds also counted.
I say this because it runs completely contrary to my experience. Sorry if I sound miffed, but according to you, I just used this lens for an assignment -- and that was a total dumbass mistake!
Hah, I wouldn't put it that way at all.
I used to be very cautious about this lens, and avoided it completely due to such widespread comments as yours, and knowing that in its introductory period it had a mini-recall for flare/internal baffle issues.
Only last year did I give it a chance after renewing my acquaintance (positively) with the "ancient" 28-135 IS.
I wasn't impressed with the 28-135 IS either, even much less so than with the 24-105. My Tamron 28-75 wiped it ever which way at 28mm and even on APS-C my Tamron 17-50 and 18-55 IS kit were much better.
Either I'm getting nothing but radically bad luck with these or you are getting the best luck in the world or we are shooting very different subjects and one of us is much less picky?
Here are a couple examples of shots from this lens from a few days ago. Most of the assignment was shot with the 17 TSE for interiors. I had brought the 24 TSE II and the 16-35L II as well. But my choice for the exterior twilight shots was the 24-105L -- I could have chosen otherwise. It wasn't my only option.
It's impossible to tell anything from 1MP images. And are you sure those crops are 100% crops? They seem too close in size to the original image?? The 24mm crops also don't seem to include the long edges either.
And the only "defect" of the lens works in its favor for this boring building -- the colorful ghosts around the strong light sources.
Well I counted all that longitudinal CA stuff as a big minus. Maybe it's fine to spruce up a dull building but it's ugly when it's wrapped around branches in the natural world IMO.