I got this lens yesterday and took it to a brick old building and did some comparisons against the Canon 24-70L, 35/1.4L, canon 70-200L IS, canon 70-300DO. I also did some comparisons against the tamron 28-75 but have not looked at those. I have a sharp 24-70 that I got from Mike Hatam about 6 months ago. All testing done on with 1Dsmk2, tripod, IS OFF, leveled. SInce i was shooting all canon glass, I used large jpg mode with default settings. I concentrated on 24,35,50,70, and 105mm focal lengths and shot at f4,5.6,8 and 11. Here is a summary of my findings. If i get a chance I can try to organize some examples to support my claim.
The strength of the new canon zoom is between 35-70mm. At these focal lengths, this lens did pretty well even wide open. The contrast was slightly less good compared to the 24-70L but not so different that I was concerned.There may have been a tad more CA with the new zoom but not significant.
At 24mm, there was significant vignetting. It was worse at f4 but there all the way through f8 when i stoped looking. THe canon 24-70 was sharper at the edges and corners at 24mm. THere was a significant difference here. THe center part of the images were close and any differences were not concerning.
At 35-50mm, I became impressed that the the 24-105 was sharper than the canon 24-70 at f4-8 especially at the edges. Infact, the zoom was almost as sharp as my canon 35mm/1.4 prime. THe prime had better contrast and still a bit better.
At 70mm, the new canon was much better than the 24-70. I always felt the 24-70 was weak on the tele end anyway. The corners and edges were substantially better with the new canon. In fact, the 24-105 at 70mm was better than my 70-300DO and close to the 70-200L IS but again the 70-200 is still the best zoom I have used in the tele end.
At 105mm is where things fell apart again. The 70-300DO was much better especially at the edges. THe center was not as sharp but the differences here were not as significant. THe 70-200 was the best especially a the corners.
So once again there are a bunch of tradeoffs, f4vs2.8, weight, IS etc etc. This is not a perfect lens as most zooms are not. There are clearly weaknesses and strengths. I think this lens would be great on the 1.6x crop sensor cameras and perhaps even the 1.3x crop cameras. It is not outstanding on the full frame except in the 35 to 70mm range. So i am not that estactic about this lens but will use it a bit before I feel like I can make a final decision on its value in the lens stable. Mark
Edited by mark1958 on Sep 03, 2005 at 11:35 AM GMT
If your experience is representative, the dream combo of 5D plus 24-105IS will come up short. Will be interesting to hear some user reviews on the 1.6 crop cameras, thanks Mark.
Thanks Mark for the excellent report. From the samples in DPReview, the shots at 24 and 28 have weak corners. So your analysis further confirmed it. A 35-70 f4 lens is not that interesting though. Thanks Canon I saved some money!
Happy to report. I think Mike Hatam got one of these as well and it will be of interest to see his thoughts and also see if there is some lens to lens variation.
Thanks for the excellent info. Have you tested your 16-35 at 24mm against either the 24-105 or 24-70? I am still looking for the best possible 24mm lens before I consider returning to the world of Canon FF.
Thank you, Mark. Your report makes me feel a bit better as I ordered mine before having a chance to see your report.
Yes, a zoom lens offers the convenience that a prime cannot. But, usually there is a price to pay, likely in terms of image quality, speed, size/weight. If the 35-70 range of this new lens is so good, I can definitely live with it. I have never been a big fan of my 28-70f2.8L as I find it feels heavy and off balance on both my D60 and 1D series bodies. I only use my 28-70 for events.
I have been very happy with Canon's 'little' f4 zoom lenes (e.g. 70-200f4 & 17-40f4), and hopefully I will be as happy with the 24-105IS too. I will be most likely using the 24-105 on my 1D and/or 1DMk2 for walk-around or traveling.
If my lens arrives in time before starting my one week vacation, I may have a chance to share my real world experience using this lens. Get my fingers crossed .
Mark1958, did you notice any difference in apparent focal length between the 24-70 and 24-105 when set at the same indicated focal length?
I did some brick wall tests between my two lenses this afternoon and found the 24-105 was wider at 24 than the 24-70. It was also wider at 70mm. My test was done using a 20D. I did notice (after the fact) my test was slightly flawed because I didn't have the camera exactly perpendicular to the wall. I made sure it was level and eyeballed the alignment, but it was off slightly. However, this flaw would not cause the difference in apparent focal length. I should add that this difference was first noticed earlier today when comparing the lenses while shooting a flower.
I am finding the 24-105 to be very sharp on my 20D - even wide open. It is a little early to reach any firm conclusions, but so far I'm happy. I am trying to get some samples organized and uploaded so others can form their opinions.
I am contemplating the 5D so I am very interested in your comparison results.
Canonfan wrote:
So basically, if you don't need the 70-105 range, you're better off saving a little money and getting a 24-70 2.8L?
Richard
Not necessarily, say you want to shoot 70mm f5.6 in low light. The IS allows you to go 3 stops slower on the shutter. For shooting stage performances when you need significant dof IS is a big advantage.
Mark, thanks for the review. I'm surprised and disappointed with the wide end. I thought the first feature they would improve with this lens is wide performance on FF sensors. I normally shoot wide stopped down (landscape) so maybe it will still work for me.
Yes i did notice the same thing. I know from vast testing of the non canon lenses that this was not uncommon but had not seen that mcuh difference on two canon lenses before. My shots were perpendicular and leveled.
c5gowin wrote:
Mark1958, did you notice any difference in apparent focal length between the 24-70 and 24-105 when set at the same indicated focal length?
I did some brick wall tests between my two lenses this afternoon and found the 24-105 was wider at 24 than the 24-70. It was also wider at 70mm. My test was done using a 20D. I did notice (after the fact) my test was slightly flawed because I didn't have the camera exactly perpendicular to the wall. I made sure it was level and eyeballed the alignment, but it was off slightly. However, this flaw would not cause the difference in apparent focal length. I should add that this difference was first noticed earlier today when comparing the lenses while shooting a flower.
I am finding the 24-105 to be very sharp on my 20D - even wide open. It is a little early to reach any firm conclusions, but so far I'm happy. I am trying to get some samples organized and uploaded so others can form their opinions.
I am contemplating the 5D so I am very interested in your comparison results....Show more →
One thing of interest and positive I can say is the IS works very well. On the 20D, I took some shots at 105mm or about 160mm at 1/15 and they came out tack sharp.
.