about | support
home
 

Search Used

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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
526 927840 May 20, 2015
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $1,504.28
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.44
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
      
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: 2718
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  
iplayazi
Offline
Image Upload: On



Registered: Aug 30, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 400
Review Date: Dec 16, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $969.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, Contrasty, Excellent range even on a 1.6 fov
Cons:
Man a whole lotta notta

Fantastic lens and range. I would recommend this lens to anybody. Just wide enough for most situations at 24mm with my 1.6 fov. Perfect for full frame.

Todd


Dec 16, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add iplayazi to your Buddy List  
Nick Leonard
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 16, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 16, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: Looks well built - good range, smooth operation
Cons:
F4 is restrictive, Soft focus and flares badly worst of all both copies I tried had dreadful CA on the edge

I have tried two lenses both with severe edge CA with a 400d.

Neither was lens was sharp, you keep trying to make yourself believe it is sharp - I compared 105 with 100 on the 100-400L and they don't compare.

Also the lens flare can be quite alarming.

I have written letter to Canon about this lens - which I doubt they will even respond to - Just had a full refund on the second lens after giving up on ever getting a good one - you waste too much time !

I will rethink my lens strategy without L lenses - if this is the quality they are not worth it.



Dec 16, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Nick Leonard to your Buddy List  
evisione
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 25, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 8
Review Date: Dec 14, 2006 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,150.00

Pros: IS, color, focal range
Cons:
price, a bit weighty

THis is my favorite walking around lens. Every picture I take with it is sharp and the color is superb.



Dec 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add evisione to your Buddy List  
blairware
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 10, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 10, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,000.00 | Rating: 5 

Pros: quiet, nice range on a full-frame body, focuses relatively closely, fast focussing, better than the kit lens but not 10X better
Cons:
not very sharp, IS doesn't work all that well, useless case, not sealed as well as other L lenses

Just purchased a 70-200mm F/4 L IS and it blows this lens out of the water (much sharper, higher contrast, and the IS works amazingly well). By comparison, the 24-105mm is a substandard lens. Maybe my copy is a dud.

Dec 10, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add blairware to your Buddy List  
stringbean11
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Nov 26, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 9, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,048.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Wow. Finally bought my first "L" glass and all I can say is "WOW". Didn't know what I was missing until this lense. Just bought yesterday with x-mas bonus and Couldn't be happier. Was torn between the 24-105 and the new 70-200 F4/ IS, but will wait on the F/4 until I can afford a 70-200 F/2.8. Highly recommend this lense as excellent walking around Lense.
Cons:
None......

"L" all the way....

Dec 9, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add stringbean11 to your Buddy List  
ryan aguas
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 7, 2006
Location: Philippines
Posts: 42
Review Date: Dec 7, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: very sharp starting at f4, excellent colors and contrast, good focal length range, bokeh is very pleasing, light yet well built, image stabilizer, quick AF
Cons:
prone to flare - creates unusual light halos, hood is not very effective extending front barrel with plastic material, severe barrel distortion, light fall-off on edges w FF camera

I find this lens very useful, specially for weddings and social events coverage because of the focal length range and IS capability.

Although many consider this as a GP standard lens, I think it is not suited for any other purposes other than weddings and social events for the following reasons:
1. severe barrel distortion and light fall-off makes it unsuitable for landscape and travel photography
2. unusual halos and light spots appear when used for night photography or when taking pictures with bright light sources in the frame such as sunsets and streetlamps(I'm using it with a 5D)
3. using the IS on while on tripod causes image blur ( i think the tripod-sensing IS thing isn't working)
4. weather sealing is dubious since the front element extends during zooming (i don't want to risk it)
5. quite softish at 105 (but still ok)
6. F/4 is not enough for action-stopping indoor shots, although IS is useful, subject motion blur is a problem

Having said the above reasons, I conclude that this lens is more of a specialist zoom lens designed for the purposes of shooting handheld photos of events. If you are doing social photography as a business or a photojournalist, this lens is a must-have. Otherwise you might be disappointed when used for other purposes. Results are good, sharp, and tacky --typical of L series lenses but then, Canon's attempt to make the package light and affordable has caused some major drawbacks in its performance. I'm waiting for an improved version of this lens. A wide angle L-series f/2.8 zoom with IS would be a nice replacement, for a start...


Dec 7, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ryan aguas to your Buddy List  
Hans im Glueck
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 6, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 17
Review Date: Dec 7, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Impressing quality fore a zoom lens. perfect walkaround lens on a 5D. IS very usefull in low light.
Cons:
None

This is my most used lense while travelling. Its sharp, versatile and solid built. With the zoomrange 24-105 it covers most of my needs while travelling. Especially with the 5D it is a perfect tool.

Dec 7, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Hans im Glueck to your Buddy List  
Rudy Kouw
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 3, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharpness up to 70 mm, fast focus, low weight.
Cons:
Soft borders from 70 mm and longer, no panning with active image stabilisation.

I choose this lens, as a companion of the Tokina 12-24 mm F/4, for the combination of good optical performence, at least on a APS-C size sensor, and relatively low weight. The image stabilisation comes as a partial compensation - moving subjects don't care about IS - in low-light photography.

This is a versatile lens, offering, up to 70 mm, very sharp images at full aperture, also at the borders. At 100 mm, which I use frequently for portraits, the performence is also very good, although for sharp borders one needs to stop down to F/8 or even F/11. The weight is favourable compared to any fast lens, say F/2,8, in the same focal range and compensates for the low-mass 350D. Using the 350D, the AF is very fast, also in low-light conditions. On a 30D body the AF appears to be even faster. The image stabilisation works very well, giving the opportunity to take low-light pictures or shooting with small apertures at 100 ISO to gain depth of field.

The only draw backs are the need to change lenses for wide-angle photography, at the risk of polluting the sensor. Further, one has to take care of an extra knob (for turning IS on or off). As only full IS mode is offered, panning is not possible.

Having this lens for more than four months, I was never tempted to use the kit lens.


Dec 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Rudy Kouw to your Buddy List  
mikesutherland
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 25, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 26
Review Date: Dec 3, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

Pros: Well built
Cons:
Poor sharpness at 24-35mm

I was disappointed with this lense. I use it with both a 5D and 20D and it is very soft at 24-35mm (it is essential for me to be able to use this range). I also have a 24-70 L and it is far superior, I had been hoping that the 24-105 would be a good, compact travel lense but it is too soft. I have had my bodies calibrated by canon.

Dec 3, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mikesutherland to your Buddy List  
dsundberg
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 12, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 300
Review Date: Dec 2, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,075.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: A well built lens with excellent IS and fast focus even in low light.
Cons:
Sharpness from 24mm to 35mm is poor to marginal, but comparable to my 17-40L in the same range. Canon really needs to work on short focal length zoom lens sharpness!

After much reading of others' evaluations here and published test reports, I finally decided to buy the lens hoping I would get a really sharp copy. Well I didn't get a copy that was sharp at short focal lengths. From 24 to 35mm, it is marginal at best. I tested it extensively on newsprint and found that until I got to f8, it was quite soft with my 20D. It is comparable to my 17-40L in the same focal range with the 17-40 being a little better at 35mm at f5.6. From 50mm to 105mm, it performed well in the sharpness testing. For scenics and landscape work using short focal lengeths, I will have to shoot at f8 to f11 when planning to make enlargements over 8 by 10".

In everyday shooting, the lens focusses fast and the IS is better than my older IS lenses. It appears to be well built and, hopefully, it will last a long time as my 'workhorse' lens. I hope when I buy a full frame body, I will still be happy with it.


Dec 2, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dsundberg to your Buddy List  




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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
526 927840 May 20, 2015
Recommended By Average Price
85% of reviewers $1,504.28
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.44
8.03
9.0
24-105lisusm


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