about | support
home
 

Search Used

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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
515 895176 Mar 11, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
86% of reviewers $1,515.98
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.48
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:  10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20>  next
      
Andro Lesaca
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 26, 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 0
Review Date: Nov 27, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: A good walkaround lens. IS works really well.
Cons:
f4 is tad bit too slow for some of my needs.

I was choosing between this lens and the 24-70 f2.8 (the "brick"). I chose this one for its extra reach and the IS. If the 24-70 had IS i would have gone that way. the EFS 18-55 f2.8 IS was also very attractive, what stopped me was the fact that it was an EFS. (I'm hoping to go full frame in the near future.) And also all the reviews I've read about it being a dust-sucker.

I'm not a pro, but I enjoy shooting events and weddings for friends. Most weddings take place indoors, and I really feel the limitation of f4. Often wish that I had gotten the f2.8, as I like to shoot in available light as much as I can. On second thought, available light shooting is still best done with a large apreture-d prime. So, a good two camera set up would be this lens on one body with a flash and a bright prime lens on the other body. Which is what I do. That brings my "brick"-envy to close to zero.

Don't get me wrong though, this lens is a beaut! Especially for outdoor photography in daylight. I've taken it on long drives to the countryside and the output I get is nothing less than spectacular. My walkaround used to be the 17-85 IS. I was satisfied with that lens for a long time, until I started using this one. Now my 17-85 IS hardly sees the light of day.



Nov 27, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Andro Lesaca to your Buddy List  
troutmask
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 22, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 23
Review Date: Nov 22, 2007 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 4 

Pros: large range, light and cheap (ish)
Cons:
Slow AF, f4, not very sharp,

I recently borrowed one of these to use for a few days as I required the extra range from my usual 28mm - 70mm and also thought it would be interesting to see what the IS was like. It was the worse L lens I have ever used. I ended up using a 100mm macro and swapping with my usual zoom. The IS is pretty pointless on a lens like this and the extra stop of light is really missed. I can see why this sort of lens would be popular on consumer cameras but giving it the L rating implies it is a pro lens, f4 is just not good enough on a 100mm lens.
Several of the pictures did not appear as sharp as I would expect and the AF was considerably slowed by the loss of light. In fact it was a lot slower AF than the 300mm f4..so it isn't just the loss of the stop.
Now this may have been a bad copy, but I would strong urge anyone considering this lens to think again. The 24mm - 70mm f2.8 is around the same price. If you need something longer then get a decent prime or save for the 70mm - 200mm f2.8 IS is very usful, but not as important as having a decent bit of glass that actually has a usable aperture.


Nov 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add troutmask to your Buddy List  
bill savitz
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 29, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 59
Review Date: Nov 5, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $954.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very useful range. Excellent build quality. Colors. Contrast. Sharp. IS
Cons:
None so far.

I struggled for months and months over whether to buy this lens or the Canon 17-55 f/2.8 or the Canon 24-70 f/2.8. In the end I felt the 24-105 had a more useful range for me than either of the other two, and that was more important to me than the wider aperture. I also felt the 24-105 had a much better build quality than the 17-55.
I don't regret my decision at all. I'm very pleased with the results I get with this lens on my 30D. When I first got it I took it into the city for the day and got lots of good street and candid shots. It works well for landscapes too. I think this is the most versatile lens you can buy for a Canon body. This and a fast prime make the ideal light weight travel kit, in my opinion, which is what I was looking for.
I also wanted a lens that could be used on a FF camera, should I ever get one. With the 5D replacement just around the corner, that could happen sooner rather than later.


Nov 5, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add bill savitz to your Buddy List  
woodburyb
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5
Review Date: Nov 5, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,050.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharpness, color, contrast, range, better IS, and fast, accurate focusing.
Cons:
Initially soft, I sent it to Canon who indicated there was a lens element out of alignment.

I bought this to replace my very good copy of the 28-135mm IS, and was initially unhappy the 24-105mm wasn't as sharp. After the fix all was right. I'm happy with the range at the wide end (my complaint with the 24-135) and it's sufficient at the long end for my needs. This coupled with my 10-22mm covers nearly all my normal shooting needs--and I have a 100-300mm for additional, and rarely used, reach.
I also like the heft and build quality, and am very happy with resulting images from this lens, I have less PS work to do. Other than landscape shooting, this lens is on my camera 90% of the time and overall I am very happy with this lens.


Nov 5, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add woodburyb to your Buddy List  
jeffschabowski
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 27, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 19
Review Date: Oct 23, 2007 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,059.00 | Rating: 4 

Pros: Good weight/IS/well made.
Cons:
Way too soft focus for a grand/AF hunts terribly in low light/F4 just too slow.

I bought this lens from B&H and spent the last two weeks shooting it against the 17-85EFS which it was to replace. It had better contrast and color, but the low light AF hunting and lack of tack-sharp wasn't 500.oo better than the 17-85EFS ( I must have the only 17-85 worth its salt).
B&H is changing it out for the 24-70 2.8 as I write this. We'll see how that one shoots out.
I have to admitt that I'm peeved about the hit or miss quality of the modern lens. It makes it hard to buy one. Do I spend the extra cash and buy locally, where I can test and reject on site, or take my chances and buy snailmail (shipping it back and forth for weeks) or forget the whole thing altogether and use what I have. I thought that manufs would have this lens building thing down pat by now! They're just glass,electronics and machined parts!



Oct 23, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add jeffschabowski to your Buddy List  
Jonno Walmsley
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 20, 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 21, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: great in so many ways
Cons:
f2.8 woud be nice, but hey, it has IS so that'll do i guess.

Great lens. Like everyone i tossed up between the 24-70 and this one. Eventually range won the debate for me.

Gets a little soft around the edges when it's wide open, but i can't really critisize it other than that. It's light, fast enough (for me) and all in all quite sharp in 99% of the things i use it for.

I would definitely recommend this lens, but the 24-70 f2.8 is worth considering also. Just figure out exactly which features you need and what you want to use it for and you should be able to choose between them....or buy both...


Oct 21, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Jonno Walmsley to your Buddy List  
Maury
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 22, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 126
Review Date: Oct 19, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Please delete any more reviews of this lens to my e-mai Thanks
Cons:
Please delete any more reviews of this lens to my e-mai Thanks

Please delete any more reviews of this lens to my e-mai
Thanks


Oct 19, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Maury to your Buddy List  
george malamis
Offline
Image Upload: On

Registered: Aug 9, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 781
Review Date: Oct 19, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $959.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Relatively light, nice focal length coverage for a general purpose zoom, nice color, contrast and very sharp, very useful IS.
Cons:
You could only make it better if it was a 2.8



Oct 19, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add george malamis to your Buddy List  
Maury
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Jan 22, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 126
Review Date: Oct 17, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros:
Cons:

No longer interested in reviews of this product.

Thanks


Oct 17, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Maury to your Buddy List  
Erwandy Ikram
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 6, 2007
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Oct 17, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $970.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp!, Built Like a Tank, IS That Works, Sharp Wide Open!
Cons:
f4 Limitation. Canon Quality Control - 24-105 copies suffered from sharpness variance

Finally I can give this lovely piece of glass a 10.

This is my second copy. The first one I purchased (brand new) was a total dissapointment. Sharpness was below my 1.8L 50mm f4 standard. So I traded that one off to finance a replacement.

I was about to pull the trigger on a 24-70 f2.8L but somehow managed to get myself enticed enough for a second look at 24-105mm. This time it's a used unit from ShutterBlade (eBay dealer).

True enough my faith has been rewarded. This copy is super sharp even wide open at f4. So sharp that I could hardly tell the difference when shot at f5.6 and f8 (of course f4 will be used when I need bokeh and f8 for wider DOF).

I was content enough that I didn't regret selling off my f1.8 50mm II because I do not see any need to keep it now that my 24-105 offers even sharper images.

(With my 40D, the 24-105 + Standard Picture Style (no enhancement with sharpness) is sharper than my 50mm + Sharpness Set at 6)

This copy is a keeper for sure.


PS:
I am still not happy with Canon Quality Control. They should have paid more attention when releasing lens copies to the market. Perhaps a re-calibration would help but it is still a major hassle for most users to send them back for that


Oct 17, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Erwandy Ikram to your Buddy List  
dan727
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Jan 31, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 721
Review Date: Oct 17, 2007 Recommend? | Price paid: $979.00

Pros: nice build quality, sharpness (expected of an L lense), color/saturationis excellent. Weighs just a tad bit more than the Tamron 28-75 I replaced.
Cons:
Not f/2.8... and for a $1000 lens I would expect something a little nicer that a pouch to store the lens in. I've bought $200 sigma lenses that have nice padded cases!

As yo will notice when you buy this lens... there is a struggle to decide between this and the 24-70L. Sorry I cannot help with that struggle, although I was in the same boat.

I don't do weddings but do a lot of outdoor portraits. So this lens made sense for me because of the range. The IS is handy but that is not what sold me on this lens. I like it because it is also a little smaller and lighter than the 24-70L.

After using it over the weekend and taking quite a few pictures for the local cheerleading squads... I think I made the right choice. Excellent color and saturation and very sharp pictures. This lens has definitely reduced the number of photos I need to post process.

So far I am really liking this lens. As usual with me I regretted ordering this lens over the 24-70L once I pushed the button. But not so much now I have it in my hands.


Oct 17, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dan727 to your Buddy List  
dan727
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Jan 31, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 721
Review Date: Oct 17, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $985.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Amazed at the sharpness and color/saturation. Build quality excellent. Not much heavier than my old Tamron 28-75.
Cons:
Not f/2.8. This is a $1000 lens... I paid $149 for a Sigma 70-300 that came with a very nice padded case. Instead you get a pouch.

I was torn between this lens and the slightly more expensive 24-70L. I finally decided I wanted the extra 35mm and IS (not to mention the slightly smaller size and lighter weight). So far I have not needed the f/2.8 but have taken advantage of the IS.

Check out google and you will see how many people cannot decide which is better for thier needs. I may end up buying a 24-70L F/2.8 as well!

I bought this lens for outdoor portraits. I don't do weddings so any indoor shooting I do would be with lights. From the shots I have taken, I can only say the colors and quality are amazing. I had a sharp copy of the tamron 28-75... but still that lens required a lot more post processing. I shot maybe 100 cheerleader photos this last weekend and I only had to touch about 3 or 4 photos.

I wish I could help you decide the 24-70L versus 28-105 conundrum. As you will google it comes down to f/2.8 versus f/4.0 and IS (plus the extra 35mm).

I am very pleased with this lens.


Oct 17, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dan727 to your Buddy List  
Chubbs
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 14, 2005
Location: Ireland
Posts: 2
Review Date: Oct 9, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Amazing sharpness and contrast/saturation and build quality.
Cons:
Would love it to be 2.8

This is my first day with this lens. Viewing the pics. in lightroom I am struck by the sharpness and contrast. This lens is outstanding. The pictures just jump out at you. This is my second L series lens my first being the 70-200 f/4 L (non-IS). The IS is brilliant, I take a lot of pics. of my kids indoors and really appreciate it.
BTW many thanks to the reviewers/posters here for the advice
kind regards
Chubbs


Oct 9, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Chubbs to your Buddy List  
carlsbadbum
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 13, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1985
Review Date: Oct 1, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $900.00 | Rating: 7 

Pros: Well build, IS, zoom ring is nice & tight, it doesn't creep like other cheap zoom.
Cons:
Soft wide open, any focal length... and it's pricey for an F4.

Finally I got a zoom added to my collection, it's an upgrade from 28-135IS I use to own. Since I've been shooting with 35L and 135L, this one just can't match the sharpness. I guess I'm asking too much, but overall I'm ok with the results. This lens is worth about $750-$850 on my book, I'm glad I waited and didn't paid $1250 when it first release in 2005.

Oct 1, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add carlsbadbum to your Buddy List  
mondas42
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 30, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7
Review Date: Sep 23, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fantastic Quality, Good Range, IS
Cons:
None

I Have just bought this lens to complete my line up of Lenses. This is a great lens to use on a everyday level. It has a great build quality, and produces some fantastically sharp images. I use it on a crop body, so not as wide as I would like, but it does mean that if/when I upgrade to a FF body, I do not need to change my lenses. The IS really works well and I do not find it to draining on my batteries. I complement to lens with my 17-40 L lens and find the 2 cover just about all my needs. Highly recommened

Sep 23, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mondas42 to your Buddy List  
Mark Kinsman
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 5, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Review Date: Sep 22, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,059.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: VERY sharp, excellent color and contrast, fast Autofocus. IS is sweet!
Cons:
Pricey, but worth it!

In the 3 short weeks I have had this lens it has become my primary lens. I am continuously amazed at the RAW image files quality. Unprocessed sharpness is stunning. Currentlyusing it on my XTi and older film 620. The zoom range is great for both full frame and 1.6. This is my second L lens and it has confirmed every good thing I have read about using L glass. It is worth the expense. IS has proven to be the asset reveiw claim, although you do have to remember to disable it when using a tripod (unlike the current 70-200 4L IS). If you've been debating the lens, you owe it to yourself to go try one.

Sep 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Mark Kinsman to your Buddy List  




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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
515 895176 Mar 11, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
86% of reviewers $1,515.98
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.48
8.03
9.0
24-105lisusm


Page:  10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 · 17 · 18 · 19 · 20>  next