about | support
home
 

Search Used

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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
520 909092 Sep 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $1,512.56
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.47
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
          
dpanicc1
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 21, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 205
Review Date: Jan 22, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,300.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: This is a great lens and it replaced my 24-70L. Good color and the pictures and focus seem always right on the money. I use it primarily on the Mark 1DII but occassionally on the 5D and 20D. Never any issues. Good contrast and the bottom line is it produces great photographs.
Cons:
2.8 would have made this a fantastic lens. Even with the hood you can get really bad flare. You can send it in for the problem; I never bothered because it's not frequent.

I am a wedding photographer and this lens is a workhorse for me--my "money lens" if you will. If you don't need the speed this is a great lens.

Jan 22, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dpanicc1 to your Buddy List  
kzaret
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 6, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 10
Review Date: Jan 20, 2007 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: IS, range, and finally... sharpness
Cons:

As you can see from my post a few weeks ago, I bought this lens and felt that the sharpness wasn't close to what it should be, especially after doing careful comparisons against a 24-85 mm EF-S lens (at one-third the price). I finally returned the lens to B&H photo (who were very accomodating) and they sent me a new one. I tested the replacement lens against the same 24-85 mm EF-S lens, as seen here:

http://www.pbase.com/kzaret/replacement_24105l_lens_test

Verdict: the replacement 24-105/L lens is nice and sharp, and at various settings is sharper than the 24-85 lens (as I would hope). I know from using the original 24-105/L that the IS, color, and brightness are great.

Moral: test your lenses and Canon: improve your Q/C!

I am now happy with this lens.


Jan 20, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add kzaret to your Buddy List  
Lochai
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 18, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Jan 18, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Solid Build, good looking ;)
Cons:

Just got my lens today.

Well I have been reading all the revews here in the forums & reviews section & I feel really bad for everyone who did not like this lens.

I own & use all L series lenses with my 5D & this is just as sharp & beautiful as my 16-35 2.8L & my 70-200 2.8L IS. I was using the Tamrom 28-70 2.8 DI lens & LOVED it. Very sharp with great colours. Well, I find that the new Canon lens just blows the Tamron away even with the difference in F stop. The IS is a godsend for me on this lens. I do a lot of low light shooting & I at first was going to go for the 24-70 2.8 but decided that the IS and 5D noise handeling would take care of my low light needs. So far, after shooting about 50 images in all situations & am VERY pleased.

Sharp edges handheld @ 1/15 sec @ 800 ISO. The 5D's ability to shoot in low light is outstanding. This lens may not be for every camera body but on a 5D it is a perfect match. IMHO

I still have a lot of paces to put this lens thru but for now, I am very happy with my purchase.


Jan 18, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Lochai to your Buddy List  
lechos
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 18, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 18, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,149.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: size, weight, build, sharpnes, zoom
Cons:
price

got it instead of 24-70 f2.8. After long research and analysing reviews decided that both lenses are excellent products but 24-105 is more versatile, more walk around rather that 24-70 which gives me too limited zoom. I didn't get convinced that i can carry heavy glass for hours and feel OK. Very rarely i need f2.8, i will get a good prime for that. IS works great in dim light. Lens fits great my 30D, size, weight and balance wise. I did test the lens and imagas are really sharp, of course at f4 are tiny soft but as expected. Short post processing fixes it.
this is my second L glass and i'm very pleased with Canon.
My first was 70-200 L f 4.0, both copies are great and don't have any flaws. Contrast and accuracy of the colors are outstanding. Maybe I have been lucky so far or shoping at Newegg really helps in getting a great product.
good luck


Jan 18, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add lechos to your Buddy List  
LeoJan
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 26, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 14, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Small and light compare to the 24-70L. Fantastic IS, f4 is already very very good. Very nice allround lens, range is very nice.
Cons:
Distortion at 24mm, but not a big issue for me, PT lens corrects it.

I already had the 24-70L, the weigth did not bother me that much, but it atract attention. The 24-105L is much smaller,lighter, the IS is só good, very nice to use in musea etc. The perfect walkaround lens. I use it one a eos 1 markII.

Jan 14, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add LeoJan to your Buddy List  
ed rader
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 9, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Review Date: Jan 10, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: extended range and IS
Cons:
poor bokeh, softness @ f4, not sharp from 90-105mm

i used this lens for about 8 months and found that wide open it was softer than any L lens that i had used before. bokeh was mediocre to terrible.

on my 20d i felt that the shortcomings of the ambitious design allowed for very little creativity.

i.e., i wasn't comfortable using this lens wide open or for portraits.

after 8 months i sold the 24-105L and bought the 24-70L, which i had rented previously.

both lenses have their drawbacks but the 24-70L has better IQ, better bokeh and better DOF control.

i was given another 24-105L for xmas with my 5d and i returned it for the 300L f4 IS and am still using the 24-70L.


Jan 10, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add ed rader to your Buddy List  
terminator
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 276
Review Date: Jan 10, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: sharpness, color, build quality
Cons:
expensive, a little bulky, f/4, quality control

This is my first L zoom lens. Having owned 135L/200L, 50U/85U/100MU, and Tamron 28-75, I am still quite surprised at the sharpness of this lens throughout its focal range. As other L lens, the build quality is outstanding.

Hope it is f/3.2 or f/3.5 if not f/2.8, and smaller. The worst thing about this lens is that I can see many white dots (dusts?) inside the lens. I feel more and more disappointed at canon's quality control.


Jan 10, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add terminator to your Buddy List  
Doug Wright
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Oct 29, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 9, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Tack sharp lens! Great color, image stabilization, good color and perfect range to meet my needs.
Cons:
None so far.

I thought long and hard before I traded in my Canon 28-135 IS for this lens. The 28-135 gave me some very good results when stopped down to f8. However, after my first outing with the 24-105L, all buyer’s remorse was gone. This lens is a ture joy to use!

Jan 9, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Doug Wright to your Buddy List  
kzaret
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 6, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 10
Review Date: Jan 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,059.00 | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Image stabilization, bright, colorful images, not too heavy.
Cons:
Soft images

I bought this lens 2 weeks ago with excitement and trepidation. Excitement because it was exactly what I was looking for and it would be my first L lens. Trepidation because of the reviews about the versions that were not sharp straight from the factory. After a week of shooting I enjoyed the color and IS, on my Canon 30D:

http://www.pbase.com/kzaret/24104_f4l_tests

but I felt that I had to use more unsharp mask than I have ever done to get a very sharp image. Finally bit the bullet and did my first side-by-side comparison with the previous lens I was using in this range, the 24-85mm EF-S USM, at one-third the price:

http://www.pbase.com/kzaret/2485_vs_24105

My verdict is that the new 24-105/L that I have is simply not calibrated properly. I called B&H today, where I purchased it, and they were very good about me exchanging the lens. I haven't yet done that because I wanted to get feedback from others on my analysis. Any comments you care to make on my site would be helpful. My main query is whether it is better to exchange the lens or send this one to Canon for calibration. Again, the focal length and IS are sweet spots for me, and would like to make this work. Thanks.



Jan 4, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add kzaret to your Buddy List  
forestmage
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 9, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 986
Review Date: Jan 4, 2007 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,059.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Excellent color, sharpness and contrast. Nice size and feel to lens construction. Definitely an L.
Cons:
None that I can see. Performs as I expect it to.

I have been consistently pleased with the results from this lens. Very nice color, contrast and sharpness. The size and weight are just about perfect to use as a general purpose walk-around lens. Overall I could not be happier with the lens.

Jan 4, 2007
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add forestmage to your Buddy List  
PK Wong
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 25, 2006
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 26, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Nearly the best "walk around" lens - very sharp, good contrast, relatively light, IS works as advertised, solidly built with weather seals, non-white L lens makes for an inconspicuous lens to carry around.
Cons:
Price (ouch!), on my 20D, it is just wide enough but wouldn't mind a lens going down to maybe 18-20 mm.

I wanted a walkabout lens to take with us for a recent tour of the Yangtze 3 gorges in China, and I couldn't decide which to get, either 24-105 or the 24-70. The differences were: F4 or F2.8; IS or no-IS. Price was not a major consideration as in Malaysia, the difference between the 2 lenses wasn't significant. After many times returning to the shop to try the 2 lenses out, I eventually settled on the 24-105, the winning features being the weight of the lens and the IS.

We have just returned and this lens was used 95+% of the time. We took approximately 800 shots over the week we were there. The images were brilliant, contrasty with vibrant colours and sharp. The images were very comparable with the ones from the other lenses we used (EFS 10-22 & EF 70-300 DO IS). Let me just say that my wife and I aren't expert nor professional photographers, just enthusiastic ones. To our eyes, the images we took were fantastic straight out of the camera, no need for photoshop at all. The IS came in very handily in the limestone caves we visited-using available illumination the stalactites and 'mites were sharply focus in a lot more shots than we had thought, even handheld. I'm not sure we would have managed that with the 24-70.

There is no major drawback with this lens, just a couple of minor ones. At the telephoto end, the lens extends. The focusing element is internal, so the outermost element does not rotate. Why can't Canon design it so that the zoom element is internal too. The second thing is I wish the lens would extend further on the wide angle part (for 1.6x cameras, this would just be the perfect lens otherwise).

All in all, I'm glad I bought this lens and I see myself not parting with it for a good many years!


Dec 26, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add PK Wong to your Buddy List  
pupsikus
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 3, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 22, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: good range, full frame, IS
Cons:
quality control problems

still seeking for the best "allways on" lens for a 20D, I tried a 24-70 and this 24-105.
Receiving 2 times 24-70 and one 24-105, all of them showed poor calibration, hence unsharp fotos.
Correctly manually focussed, I saw the 24-70 being superior in sharpness for some cases. However for the majority of situations, this difference is hardly noticeable (for me).
I decided to go with the 24-105 and send this for calibration. After the second calibration, the lens is really sharp and fulfills my expectations.
I also own a 17-85 and compared to this, the 24-105 has slightly nicer color and better sharpness on the borders. Center sharpness is similar. I was astonished, how close the 17-85 is. Obviously I have a very very good one of those.
Hence upgrade from a 17-85 for picture quality reasons? No.
I see the 24-105 as a step towards full frame and may trade my 17-85 for a wide angle (10-22?).
Once full-frame is affordable, I would trade the wide angle probably for a 17-40 or whatever is available then.
Go for a 24-70 instead? Well, that depends. It is a tradeoff on weight, reach, expected light conditions, habits ... .
For me, I thought weight is not that an issue. But holding both in my hands, I quickly recognized it is. As amateur photographer, I want to be flexible and 24-105 gives me most of that. And the 24-70 did not fit into my photo bag. Hence the decision was easy. 2.8 is really nice (especially also for the viewfinder image). However if I really need it, I take a prime.
The 24-105 now is my outdoor walkaround (weather sealing could be an advantage, is it with the 20D?). The 17-85 currently is my indoor walkaround especially in combination with a flash.
I am very satisfied with this solution. Hope this helps someone.


Dec 22, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add pupsikus to your Buddy List  
qosaimi
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 20, 2006
Location: Saudi Arabia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 21, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,085.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: The Focal length is a in good range. A 24mm on the 30D, with the 1.6X crop factor, is just wide enough where I can travel with one single lens. Image Stablization.sharp vibrant images.Solid construction
Cons:
Noticed distortion at 24mm.Price

I purchased this lens two weeks ago with my new 30D. I can say this is my favorite Canon lens of all time.The 24-105mm f/4L IS has the solid, well built look and feel as all of Canons L series lenses. The autofocus is seemingly instantaneous and silent.

Dec 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add qosaimi to your Buddy List  
unsharpmask
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 18, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 149
Review Date: Dec 19, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Wide range, good construction, IS and quick focusing.
Cons:
Could be sharper at wide-angle in the corners with full-frame camera.

I bought this lens for my 5d. A solid lens but I wish it was sharper on the wide end, the 5d is a very demanding camera on lenses. I've used the bigger 28-70mm 2.8 lenses and hated them because of their size and construction. I need the extra length of the 105mm and this is a perfect lens for environmental portraits with lighting where I don't have to change lenses. For available light, I put on either the 16-35 2.8, 50 1.4, 85 1.8 or 70-200 2.8 lenses.

Dec 19, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add unsharpmask to your Buddy List  
juberisk2
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 406
Review Date: Dec 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $970.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp - even wide open, versatile
Cons:
extending front element

finally had to add this one to my collection, and I'm very glad that I did.

i guess the 17-40 has spoiled me, but I don't like the front element extending when zooming in, so that takes some getting used to, especially if you're largely a prime lens user. but i can't mark it down for that, as I knew it did that when I bought it, and I've always found it curious when reviewers say things like, "it's only f4." the product is the product, and you should review it for what it is...there's a big difference between design limitation and design defect.

Anyhoo, i used my 100mm macro to test the sharpness of the 24-105 at the long end, and I was floored by the results, which clearly demonstrated the 24-105 was sharper (with better color/contrast too) until f/8! As for the wide end, I have to admit that the 24-105 just inched out my beloved 17-40 in sharpness and contrast. I suppose I'm surprised with the results because of some of the reviews I've read about this lens, but I'm a true believer now. It'll get a lot of use for travel and weddings, so even the price seems fair to me.



Dec 18, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add juberisk2 to your Buddy List  
jchin
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 1, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2706
Review Date: Dec 17, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $970.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: focal lengh range is perfect for an "all-in-one" everyday lens, image quality is awesome, and IS (image stablizer)
Cons:
none ... except maybe cost ... but well worth it after a few "nicer" photos

Finally ... my first L-lens. I was debating between this (24-105L) and the famous (24-70L). I went with the 24-105L because of two things. It is the longer reach (something I wanted upgrading from the 17-85 IS USM lens) and it has IS (image stablizer). The final factor was that the 24-105L is not as "big" as the 24-70L. The trade-off is that I lose the f/2.8 opening of the 24-70L. Now if they only had a 24-105L that was f/2.8 and not weigh a ton ... that would be the ultimate!

The first few comparison photos I took ... it basically blew my 17-85 IS USM lens away. The sharpness and bohek is so much better. I was comparing at f/5.6 just to be fair.

Taking photos of a family babyshower in a restaurant, I had to go back to my 17-85mm to get the group picture, I still need something wider than 24mm (given on my 20D it is like a 38mm).

Otherwise ... the f/4 opening at 105mm is awesome for those across the room candid shots.

Great lens!


Dec 17, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jchin to your Buddy List  

   



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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
520 909092 Sep 12, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $1,512.56
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.47
8.03
9.0
24-105lisusm


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