 |
|
|
SilkyStrings
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 1, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sharp. Great colour, good range. IS is well worth having. Lighter than my 24-70. Works well on my 20d and 400d bodies. I can do a wedding with this on one body and my 17-40 on the other.
|
|
Cons:
|
None, it's a great lens.
|
|
|
A sharp, contrasty lens that delivers the goods. The IS is a valuable asset. I shot a wedding for a friend a few years back and by word of mouth seem to do 4 or 5 now through the summer months. There is one shot at weddings, the signing of the register where I normally leave the tripod and hand hold. It's nice to know that when shooting at lower speeds I will not suffer camera shake. No excuses at a wedding, you simply HAVE to get all the shots required. IS is a welcome insurance. I know a lot of people see the 24-105 and the 24-70 as an either/or situation. For me the 24-105 doesn't replace my 24-70 but rather compliments it. I can certainly see the 24-105 becoming my 'holiday lens'. The only thing that would really rock the boat is if Canon ever produced a 17-105 f2.8 L IS. Then we'd all potentially be making those guys at Ebay EVEN richer!
|
|
 Oct 20, 2006
|
|
cubis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 22
|
|
Review Date: Oct 19, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,119.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, beautiful stunning contrast, L build and quality feel, superb balance and rightness of feel on a 5D body
|
|
Cons:
|
I suppose the minor vignetting at 24mm, clears up at35mm, Perhaps a little strong in the price department.
|
|
|
This is my first review and I apologize in advance as it is only my first evening with the lens, but I am just so darn excited!Perhaps some other short coming might arise after using it a while but maybe not. I just felt compelled to post a quick review as I find that sometimes first impressions are somewhat telling. I have to say that I was blown away by this lens. Shocking would be a better description. After reading some of the posts on this site of horror stories of soft copies, clunking IS, dust sucking and vignetting, I was somewhat braced for a bumpy ride, to include, pixel peeping, focus charts and wrangling with sales people to achieve satisfaction. These activities will be unnecessary. This thing is amazing and is a perfect complement to the 5D. Up until a week ago I was shooting a 20D with the 17-85 IS. I know that that lens has more than it's share of detractors, but I must say that mine was a sharp copy and I had many a fantastic shots that that lens was responsible for, so much so that I was concerned that I would be able to replicate the results that I got with that lens. I appears that my fears were unfounded. Also I do have some other decent points of comparison in my lens arsenal, such as the wonderful 70-200 2.8 IS. If you are shooting a 5D, I would say that this thing is a no brainier. DO IT. You will not regret it! It appears to be an ideal walk around lens for the 5D.
|
|
|
Oct 19, 2006
|
|
Joe Roback
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 16, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Oct 18, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,129.99
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, "L" quality build, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
lens extends really far @ 105mm
|
|
First L lens. Now, I will never buy anything less then L quality. 3x more expensive, but you can see why from the moment you take it out of the box to the moment you are getting sharp terrific pictures.
Purchased it as an all-around--walk-about lens. Very pleased. 
Comes with hood and soft case. Purchased canon UV-1 filter and circular polarizer filter to go with lens.
|
|
|
Oct 18, 2006
|
|
Theophile
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Oct 17, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,250.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Wonderful Walk Around mid-WA to mid-Telephoto Range on 30D-Excellent Color-Sharp Contrast-Great IS-Solid Feel of construction (Yes, it's an "L")!
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
|
Sold the 100mm f2.8 macro and 70-200mm f4.0 to make this purchase, have no regrets!! This stays on my 30D 95% of the time for normal shooting, it is very sharp and has a pleasing Bokeh! Have 17-40L for WA and 100-400L for super zoom...so far, well pleased with these 3-lens compliments!!
|
|
|
Oct 17, 2006
|
|
chuchutrain
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 6, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 290
|
|
Review Date: Oct 12, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,050.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality, Image quality, Image Stabilizer, Zoom range.
|
|
Cons:
|
F4 (but you get what you pay for)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oct 12, 2006
|
|
jgonzo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 18, 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 11, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, great range, fast, IS, acceptable weight, build quality, ...
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far
|
|
|
I use it on my 350D.
Mounted on this camera it,s sharp, has a great range, it's fast, has IS, has an acceptable weight, perfect colours and has a great build quality.
|
|
|
Oct 11, 2006
|
|
Nick De Marco
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Oct 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Great range, pretty sharp, good build quality, not too heavy, reasonable price
|
|
Cons:
|
Slight distortion at 24mm
|
|
I purchased this lens in August 2006 as a 'kit' lens with my new 5D.
I had wanted this lens anyway as it has a great range for an L lens and is not too expensive. For full frame it is an excellant walkabout lens. Although I found I often wanted to go a bit more wide and this lens can have some distortion at 24mm (so I bought the 17-35mm f2.8 L second hand), I particularly like the fact this lens goes to 105mm unlike some of the competitor L lenses. It means that for 'walkabout' you do not have to change your lenses quite as often as you otherwsie might. I am satisfied with this lens and would highly recommend anyone buying the 5D to get one as a kit lens as it is then very good value indeed.
To see a gallery of photos I have taken with this lens on my 5D, go to http://www.pbase.com/nickdemarco/canon_24105mm_f4_l_lens
|
|
|
Oct 9, 2006
|
|
FatBoyAl
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Sep 4, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 631
|
|
Review Date: Oct 6, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,173.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Lightweight, great build quality, terrific IQ!
|
|
Cons:
|
Perhaps cost
|
|
|
My first L lens. I had the hardest time deciding between this and the 24-70/2.8 primarily due to the 2.8. Since I actually sat down and analyzed what I shoot, however, I decided the IS would take care of the extra stop. Plus, I really wanted the extra reach of the 105.
This replaces my 28-105/3.5 and that wasn't a bad lens at all. I appreciate the build and image quality of this lens and I think it's just the first L I buy.
So far, IQ has been just fantastic. Great colors and contrast. And the option of handholding down to 1/15sec is simply amazing! Sure, the 2.8 could have let me go to 1/30, but that wasn't going to be clear, not without IS! I'm totally impressed.
To boot, it's light and incredibly well made. Really, aside from a bit of a price break, what more could you ask for?
|
|
|
Oct 6, 2006
|
|
William Austin
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 30, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 30, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Easy to handle, Sharpness you would expect from an L class Lens, Good range, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Lens extends when zooming
|
|
|
I got this lens as part of a bundle with the Canon 5D, I've been very pleased with the results I get from this lens, I would say that in equals that of the 17-40 F4L in the sharpness area but the 24-105 produces better contrast and colours.
|
|
|
Sep 30, 2006
|
|
Montrealer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 146
|
|
Review Date: Sep 29, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp. Excellent contrast and colour rendition. Good range for everyday and walkaround lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Position of the zoom ring. Not as sharp at f4. Heavy.
|
|
|
It is a bit expensive, and interestingly enough like a few others I had to get to know this lens before appreciating it. I've had the lens for a month now and a few hundred shots into it, while post-processing some older shots taken with my previous lenses, the differences really became apparent, and I really came to appreciate the true quality of this lens. The IS is new for me, and I'm becoming a big fan.
My first L lens, bought only a month before this one was the 70-200 f4, which puts the bar pretty high... this one is very close behind.
|
|
|
Sep 29, 2006
|
|
achromatic
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 16, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,494.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Lovely sharpness. Good range. Nice build quality. Sturdy.
|
|
Cons:
|
Is it greedy to wish it went down to 17mm?
|
|
|
I love this lens. It's my primary tool. A good range, and nice and solid. Big and solid, without being overly weighty and annoying when around the neck.
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2006
|
|
slobomitic
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 11
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,150.00
|
|
Pros:
|
IS
|
|
Cons:
|
not sharp, heavy, big
|
|
My first L lens and quite a disappointment. Aside from being surprised with the size and weight of f4 lens, my biggest disappointment was lack of sharpness. I read some people go through several copies to find a keeper, but this is pro lens (L) and it should never be an issue. Canon’s QC is pathetic and it’s bad business since I would discourage anyone to buy this lens (and Canon in general). You may get the good one or you may not. I didn’t.
Just to make sure it’s not me, I compared images made with this lens and with Tamron 28-300 ($350 and half the weight) on 5D. See it for yourself here:
https://home.comcast.net/~pointco/Canon24-105_Tamron.htm
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2006
|
|
cdryall
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2005
Location: South Africa
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 26, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,000.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Image quality, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
|
First L lens - initially not that impressed but over time have realised both the contrast, image sharpness and the accuracy, speed and consistency of the autofocus with 30D are a level up on my other lenses. Most used lens I have today. Best feature for me though is the IS which has been a revelation.
|
|
|
Sep 26, 2006
|
|
joebox
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 6, 2006
Location: Czech Republic
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 24, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid construction, professional look, zoom range
|
|
Cons:
|
Sharpness, weight
|
|
|
I could not find any difference in sharpness when compared with pictures taken by eg. Canon ef 100-300. (camera Canon D30)
Yes, the picture is sharper compared to the kit lens, but the difference is not dramatic and does not justify the price. I expected definitely different performance from an L lense. Moreover the lens is quite heavy.
I was dissapointed and returned the lens.
After this experience I decided to try Sigma or Tamron, because I think I must get the same quality pictures for significantly less money. I'll be thankful for any suggestions.
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2006
|
|
Joel Nini
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 22, 2006
Location: Portugal
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Sep 22, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Colors, contrast, IS, range
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
|
I was one of the first to buy these lense. More than a year of use I can say that, nowadays, 95% of my shots are done with it.
In fact, I already sold some of my gear due to not using it much.
Perfect range, the colors are just great, and the L contrast is incredible.
I consider it the perfect walkaround lense.
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2006
|
|
routerguy666
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 16, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 19, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,149.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Colors, contrast, IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
Extending front.
|
|
|
I'm actually a big fan of prime lenses, though oddly enough this is my second L lense and is a zoom like the other I own. I bought this lense to fill the gap between my 10-22 and my 50mm and went with a zoom rather than the 35mm prime simply to add a nice walkaround lense to my bag. Till now, I've pretty much swapped the 50mm and 85mm to cover most everything I shoot.
Tried this side by side with the 24-70 F2.8. Much lighter, the IS is a nice feature, image quality is the same. If you want a portrait lense, you can supplement the 24-105 with a 50mm and 85mm prime (on a crop) and you are all set and will have the nice, creamy looking bokeh you are after.
No complaints at all about the lense. It is expensive but you get what you pay for.
|
|
|
Sep 19, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
509
|
860691
|
May 10, 2013
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
86% of reviewers
|
$1,518.30
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.49
|
8.02
|
9.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
