about | support
home
 

Search Used

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
524 919750 Jan 21, 2015
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $1,508.02
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.46
8.03
9.0
24-105lisusm

Specifications:
This easy-to-use standard zoom lens can cover a large zoom area ranging from 24mm wide-angle to 105mm portrait-length telephoto, and its Image Stabilizer Technology steadies camera shake up to three stops. Constructed with one Super-UD glass element and three aspherical lenses, this lens minimizes chromatic aberration and distortion. The result is excellent picture quality, even at wide apertures. Canon's ring-type USM gives silent but quick AF, along with full-time manual focus. Moreover, with dust- and moisture-resistant construction, this is a durable yet sophisticated lens that meets the demands of advanced amateur photographers and professional photographers alike.

Focal Length & Maximum Aperture: 24-105mm f/4

Lens Construction: 18 elements in 13 groups

Diagonal Angle of View: 84° - 23° 20' (with full-frame camera)

Focus Adjustment: Inner focusing system with focusing cam

Closest Focusing Distance: 1.48 ft./0.45m

Zoom System: 5-group helical zoom (front group moves: 32.5mm)

Filter Size: 77mm

Max. Diameter x Length, Weight: 3.3 in. x 4.2 in., 23.6 oz. / 83.5mm x 107mm, 670g (lens only)



 


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next
          
MX5NC
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 27, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 76
Review Date: Apr 11, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: IQ, Colour, Build Quality, 77mm filters, stealthy (even with lens hood), well balanced on 40D, IS effective even at silly shutter speeds (longer than 1/4), ... All round very good 'standard' (for me) lens now.
Cons:
Two mode IS would have been nice.



Apr 11, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add MX5NC to your Buddy List  
jfk03
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 20, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 463
Review Date: Apr 9, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $2,199.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent color, IQ and build. Relatively light weight; doesn't stand out as a "professional" camera; controls very intuitive; full frame at very reasonable price
Cons:
Lacks some features of "pro" cameras that cost thousands more.

This camera is a particularly good deal when purchased with "kit" EF 24-105 f/4L lens. I am very satisfied with the color and image quality. My 30D is better for sports and birds. I bought this as a landscape camera and for portraits. It is a bit heavier than the 30D but feels quite similar in my hands. About the same "heft." Controls are quite similar to those on a 30D, so the transition was quite easy. There was no big learning curve in getting up and running. This is a top notch camera at a reasonable price.

Apr 9, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add jfk03 to your Buddy List  
MY02_STI
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 11, 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Mar 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Stunning colour rendition. Amazingly fast AF. Build quality
Cons:
Slightly soft at 105 mm

I agonised over the choice to buy this lens as a replacement for the 28-135 on my 40D, as I was concerned about some of the quality issues raised affecting performance, given the rather high cost of the lens.

The 28-135 has proved to be a good reliable lens but had always left me wondering 'is it me or the lens'.

Straight out of the box, the 24-105 left me in no doubt that the 'softness' of my previous image where a thing of the past. At f4 and in fading light, a few random shots were just beautifully sharp with so much more colour and contrast than I had experienced before.

The build quality is what I would have expected from an L lens.

This lens will remain firmly fixed to my 40D for a long time to come


Mar 28, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add MY02_STI to your Buddy List  
webman06
Online
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 21, 2004
Location: France
Posts: 50
Review Date: Mar 7, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $960.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Wonderfull walkaround lens. The color rendition is splendid, as expected from an L series. The IS is great feature. Not too heavy either ;-)
Cons:
none so far

I brought this lens to replace the 28-135 IS for my 1DmkII.
(that lens will stay for my older and venerable 1D !)

The comparation between these two lenses taught me that having a constanst f/stop over the whole zoom range was a notch better, so was the bokeh. The manual focus overide is a plus.
The color rendition is indeed better and the focus speed is there too.
The IS is newer in generation.
The lens hood is included and it does its job quite well.
One can easely agree that the L series are overall better lenses, but the pricetag is also there...

On its first use, i captured a wonderfull child portrait. The skin texture and color were right on.
On second use, i caught breathtaking landscape/scenery...
Personally, a great lens and a superbe addition to my lensbag.
On conclusion, its a definite keeper !



Mar 7, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add webman06 to your Buddy List  
lextalionis
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 28, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1076
Review Date: Mar 6, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,060.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: IMHO I think this is Canon's best quality walk-around lens (on a full-frame sensor body). It's balanced nicely in build size/weight and f/4 throughout its zoom-range and IS is great.
Cons:
Slight vignetteing and the barrel distortion at 24mm but can be eaisly corrected.

Pros:
IMHO I think this is Canon's best quality walk-around lens (on a full-frame sensor body). It's balanced nicely in build size/weight and f/4 throughout its zoom-range and IS is great.

Cons:
Slight vignetteing and the barrel distortion at 24mm but can be eaisly corrected.

Here are some shots taken with a 5D and 40D:
Sample Photos

-Roy


Mar 6, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add lextalionis to your Buddy List  
MJH1
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 28, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 431
Review Date: Mar 1, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: My favorite choice as a walk-around lens. My copy is very sharp, gives wonderful image color. The IS gives the expected advantages. I especially like the added "reach" vs my 24-70mm f/2.8L, but you do sacrifice some stability when handheld under low light conditions.
Cons:
None.



Mar 1, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add MJH1 to your Buddy List  
Santoso
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Apr 23, 2007
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 27, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $800.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: It covers the needed length for candid and it lived up to its L brand.
Cons:
None so far.

This lens cant be seperated from my 5D. I sold my 24-70 because most of the time I find myself missing the moment in candid because of length limitation. For those who like to shoot stage, please get a 70-200. IMHO this lens did very well in wedding, church and family indoor candid.

Feb 27, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Santoso to your Buddy List  
richardshipp
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 7, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 3
Review Date: Feb 16, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: I rarely take this off my camera. From portraits to events...even basketball. It is compact but covers field of view I need. I like it on my 5D especially because the 24mm is really 24mm!
Cons:
none.



Feb 16, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add richardshipp to your Buddy List  
huntmimiu
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 8, 2008
Location: China
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 8, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Light with good image quality. IS is useful.
Cons:
a bit expensive

I enjoy using this product as it fits my needs. I traveled with it and took tons of photos and I am happy with their quality on the whole.

Feb 8, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add huntmimiu to your Buddy List  
toma7
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 31, 2007
Location: Austria
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 8, 2008 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: best walk around lens for the 5d, it really shines between 35 and 70mm, L colors & contrast, IS is a life saver
Cons:
some CA, waiting for a 24-70/2,8 IS with hopefully better sharpness & resolution

most of the shoots were taken with 1/20 until 1/40

www.pbase.com/toma7/gothic_i


Feb 8, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add toma7 to your Buddy List  
Memphis
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 15, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 769
Review Date: Feb 3, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Lighter then the 24-70L, Very Sharp even in the corners, IS works!, Great IQ, Build, Great colors and contrast.
Cons:
Slight flare when shooting at night but nothing to worry about.

It tried this lens when if first came out and hated it, the lens was unusable at night due to some heavy nasty flare. That was before the lens flare recall on the early models and since Canon fixed the problem and said they messed up I'll give this review on the copy I have now.

I own the 24-70L but in some low light shooting I really wish it had IS and since my wife and I are expecting our first child soon I thought I would give the 24-105L another go.

I tested the 24-105L side by side vs the 24-70L. I shot the focal lengths of 24, 28, 35, 50 and 70 and I used the f stops of 2.8 (on the 24-70L) f4, f5.6, f8, f11 and f16. The first thing I looked at was how the lenses fared wide open and I was shocked to see the the 24-105 won since it was sharp in the corners and the 24-70 fell off a touch, something I never noticed in the past. I then looked at the lenses at the same f stops and the 24-105 was sharper at each one until about f8 where the two lenses became equal.

Next was flare, I went out and did a little night shooting and both the 24-70 and 24-105 gave me about the same amount but it was nothing that I couldn't work around...

I'm now wondering if something has went wrong with my 24-70L so I'm sending it back to Canon for a re-cal and I will retest them when I get it back.

Over all I think this lens is a winner

Sorry if there are any typos with this review, my silly yellow lab has been trying to get on my lap.

My test were done on a 5D




Feb 3, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Memphis to your Buddy List  
barryhalifax
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 8, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 28, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp, fast & accurate focus, reasonably compact, good performer with 5D and 20D
Cons:
None so far

I was a bit hesitant about getting this lens for my 5D rather than the 24-70L having seen one or two rather negative reviews here. In the end I got a good deal on the lens from Jessops and have not been disappointed. I can't understand folks who buy a 24-105 then say they wish it was 150! You bought it knowing what it was so it's your fault, not the lens's.

Overall I was delighted with the performance of the lens.
Sharpness wide open at 24mm not quite up to my 70-200L f4 but, hey, you expect that for a wide optic zoom and it was still acceptably sharp & retained it's contrast at f4.
At 70mm and 100mm you can't tell the difference between the 2 lenses at any aperture, even on A3 prints. IS means more keepers, though, and I regularly shoot 1/25th or thereabouts at 105mm (which I couldn't do with the 70-200L where I'd be looking at at least 1/100th. or faster)

As a very subjective test I shot a scene at 50mm, f5.6 and ISO 100, and the same scene with Contax 35mm (Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.8) on ISO 100 film, again at f5.6. I had the film professionally scanned at high resolution (no, by a pro lab - not by a one-hour high street photo outlet!) and printed both at A4 (Epson R800 and Qimage) - absolutely no difference in sharpness, detail, contrast or smoothness of image that I (or any of my friends) could see. Some preferred the Zeiss/film colours, others the digital but I could have made them identical in DPP, DxO or PS had it been important. The bokeh was better with the Zeiss but I'm splitting hairs.

I have since revisited locations I shot in B&W with a Rollei 6004 (80mm Planar) and tried to replicate with 5D and 24-105 at 80mm.
It's pretty darn close but there's a subjective "niceness" about the Rollei images that are nothing to do with sharpness or detail.

I'm very happy with the lens but might get a 50mm 1.4 for carry-around.


Jan 28, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add barryhalifax to your Buddy List  
Etienne Otero
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 10, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 502
Review Date: Jan 25, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $960.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: every one of its characteristics
Cons:
none

Most previous reviews prety much say it all. I'm givin this lens a 10 as it is perfect for my needs. Combined with a 5D, a 14mm and a 100-400mm, I feel I don't need any of my primes (50mm, 100mm). The macro is esquisite and very sharp, just what I would expect. I guess I got a good copy. This lens is hooked to my camera 95% of the time now, unless condotions require the large zoom or are really, really, really dark where my primes shine.

Jan 25, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Etienne Otero to your Buddy List  
David Collomb
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 23, 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 110
Review Date: Jan 23, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Wide zoom range, colours, IS, quick AF, built quality, sharpness.
Cons:
A bit unbalanced on a 400d but that's the camera's fault not the lens'

I am new to photography as I bought my first SLR (a 400d) 10 months ago. I knew nothing about depth-of-field, aperture, composition, etc…

With the 18-55 of the pack I discovered all the basis of how to use the camera (background blur, composition rules, exposition, bracketing, etc…) .

I photograph landscapes, animals by the Thames (birds), family meetings, but my main subject is my very young daughter. That’s why I was feeling the need of a longer focal length (~85mm) for portraits.

What was the rationale for choosing the lens?
A prime lens was first considered for portrait but I realised that one lens to cover the majority of my shots was the goal.
I considered sigma 17-70 and canon 17-85 IS, the fact that they are specific to crop sensors was a hurdle for the future.

I looked back at the hundreds of pictures I took during the 5 first months and very few were shot with a focal length below 24mm. It was surprise to realise that.

So I looked at 24-** lens and finally I was left with the classical choice between 24-70 and 24-105. Note that the sigma 24-70 was a good option but as I was still making my mind, my budget was growing so I looked directly at L lenses.

The classical 24-70 and 24-105 choice?
What made the difference for me was the additional 35mm, for my portraits and the wild-(but used to be fed with bread)-life purpose. F/2.8 from 24-70 was important because quite a lot of pictures were taken indoor and because a baby is rarely steady. On the other hand IS allows you more creativity. So the 24-105 won.

What do I do with the 24-105 L IS now?
My needs for portraits are fulfilled; I can take pictures from further and less disturb my subject.
Close up are nice too, not exactly macro but still useful.
Landscape, the loss of wide angle has never bothered me so far but the colours depiction has always pleased me.
Sharpness and contrast are amazing; I have shot some swans and sea gulls and it is indeed nice to appreciate the detail of their plumages, the results again are very rewarding.
IS is really effective and allows more creativity.

So I hope my review will answer some of your questions. If your profile is similar to mine, you can’t be disappointed by this lens.



Jan 23, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add David Collomb to your Buddy List  
tmhuertas
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 21, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 21, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

 
Pros:
Cons:

Hi
I bought my first canon camera, it was the canon 5D with the 24-105L
I've been reading about the performance of the lense.
I've tried it for a bit only and it looks pretty cool to me, but looks like it distorts a bit when zooming especially when shooting people at close range.
my question is.

Is this lens good enough for weddings? or is there a better one for the same price range that I could go for?

I appreciate your advice in advance.


Jan 21, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add tmhuertas to your Buddy List  
tomoshi
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 9, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 20
Review Date: Jan 8, 2008 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp, good range, fast focus
Cons:
f/4

I got this lens with my 5D, and since 5D was my first canon dlsr, this lens was also the first canon lens i ever owned. I did try the 24-70 f/2.8 a couple of times, but I prefer the wider range of focal lenghts. The IS works very well on the lens and the build quality is pretty good too.

Jan 8, 2008
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add tomoshi to your Buddy List  

   



Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
524 919750 Jan 21, 2015
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $1,508.02
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.46
8.03
9.0
24-105lisusm


Page:  1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · 7 · 8 · 9 · 10 · 11>  next