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 926579 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
      
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
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add routerguy666 to your Buddy List  
Panthera
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 20, 2005
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Ultrasharp, acceptable weight for long walks, very nice color, IS
Cons:
None

I used the 28-135 IS USM for a long time, wanting a better lens but the 24-70 L f2.8 was to heavy to carry around so not an option if you walk 20 kilometers with the camera around your neck. When Canon released this lens I couldn't weight to have one and well it was even sharper then I had thought it would be (all the way from 24 to 105). I was in love with this lens from the first day on.
The lens is also very quick in autofocus, IS is very quiet, so is AF. Colors are very saturated in comparison with the 28-135. The lens balances very well with the 20D, making a perfect pair.
One little minus: the hood comes off a little too easy, is often turned around when I take the camera out of my bag.
I would not want any other allrounder than this one.


Sep 18, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Panthera to your Buddy List  
jrsubs
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 16, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 39
Review Date: Sep 12, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp, great zoom range even on 20D, IS, it just works.
Cons:
Apparently appalling QA. Extends on zoom.

This is a fantastic lens -- most of the time. It just seems to be let down by lousy QA. I tried 4 - FOUR - of these before getting a good one. The others were clearly soft, unsymmetrical image (soft and more slight vignetting in one corner more than others), or one had IS that caused the image to jump alarmingly at every use.

When you finally get a good one, it is a superb lens in absolute and value-for-money terms. The IS makes it much more usable and in some ways makes up for not being f2.8. It is compact, easy to carry around, and on the 1.6 crop cameras it does not vignette noticeably. Distortion is an acceptable compromise. Most of all, it is sharp for a zoom. At least as sharp and probably sharper than my 17-40.

All those who posted poor ratings for this lens probably should have taken them back.



Sep 12, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add jrsubs to your Buddy List  
RedRebel
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 13, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 183
Review Date: Sep 12, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharpnes, virtual no chromatic abborations, litle barel distorsion, excellent IS, fast auto focus, excellent build quality
Cons:
Vignetting at 24mm

I am using this lens on a 5D (FF) and I like it very much. It is absolutely free of any faults.

I was used to a 350D with a 17-85 IS, which was a nice combo, but sufferred from chromatic abborations and barrel distortions.

The 24-105, shows no chromatic abborations in real life, has only little barrel distortion and is considerably sharper then my 17-85 IS.

The only down side is that it shows vignetting at 24mm when used wide open. The vignetting is gone at 35mm, or when stopped down 1 stop. As soon you know this, it is easy to work arround this.

The IS is very efective, I often shoot at ISO 800/1600 in churches using shutterspeeds of 1/8 .. 1/15 in it's entire zoom range and I get consistent sharp results (just like a 17-85 IS).

The lens is not cheap, but considerring it's quality, versatility and IS it is a resonable price.

For a full frame camera like the 5D, this is THE walk arround lens, that will never let you down.


Sep 12, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add RedRebel to your Buddy List  
angstrom
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: May 8, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Sep 4, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: sharp throughout the range, very effective IS, excellent build quality
Cons:
it took 3 tries to find a decent sample of this lens. CA is an issue at the edges

My first one of these was decentred, the second had focus calibration problems - third time very lucky.
This is an all too common story with Canon lenses - can be excellent if you get a good one. The point is that it is always worth trying another sample if you're initially disappointed.
I sent my second one back to CPS (UK) after 6 months of weird focus errors and they gave me a new one that is just perfect!
Where the ranges overlap, I find it at least as sharp as my 17-40 and almost as sharp as the 70-200 f4. Like these 2 sister lenses, it is perfectly useable at f4, improving slightly at f8.
Mine is a tad soft in one corner (FF) and displays quite serious chromatic aberation at the edges, but these are things i can live with...


Sep 4, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add angstrom to your Buddy List  
perspective
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 10, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 589
Review Date: Sep 1, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Great, useful range, very sharp.
Cons:
Vignetting.

Anyone rating this lens a 6, or a 4 has a bad copy. My copy of this lens is very fine when it comes to being sharp and having the right kind of contrast. It's not a 10. This lens is a 9 and here's why:

It's built very well and has IS that works wonders. It's almost long enough where IS mode #2 would be nice to have too, but alas it only has IS mode #1.

It's sharp even at f/4. It's sharper at 5.6 and 8, but that's just physics anyway - it's a rare lens indeed that isn't shaper stopped down a stop or two.

On my 5D it's well balanced, and the range is fantastic. It covers whatever you need from moderate wide-angle to short telescopic without a lot of weight pulling on your neck and shoulder. It comes with a hood too which doesn't get in the way.

The AF is fast and true. I pointed it at a white brick wall and it had some trouble finding its focus but with just a tad bit more contrast to work with this lens snaps right into focus quickly. This lens seems like it was built with the 1DS and 5D in mind. Probably the 5D even more so for those who need something excellent to walk around with for long periods.

This lens vignets on you. Even at an aperature of 7.1 I still got some vignetting on my 1DSMKII. This problem is mostly an issue at 24-35mm from what I've seen so far. If I had to choose one problem on a lens though, I'd choose vignetting over lack of sharpness and CA anyday because vignetting is so easy to fix in Adobe raw converter.

I'm nervous about the lens telescoping out instead of having an internal focus. I worry about dust getting sucked in (I had a 17-55 f/2.8 IS that was very bad in this regard). So far though after about eight sessions outside I haven't seen any dust at all. It must be well sealed.

Forget the negatives I've outlined if you are thinking about buying this lens. This lens is worth the money. Just buy it from a reputable store or online merchant (bhphotovideo.com is exceptionally reliable) so that you can return it if you get a soft copy. It has such a remarkably good build, IQ and focal range that you really can't go wrong with this lens. A friend of mine has this lens too and never takes this lens off his camera. I think it's been on there so long he's forgotten that he still owns other lenses.



Sep 1, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add perspective to your Buddy List  
svx94
Offline
[ X ]



Registered: Mar 25, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 657
Review Date: Aug 28, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 6 

Pros: Light and good range; IS; L build quality; Color/contrast
Cons:
not much sharper than my 17-85, especially wide open; distortion

It was my first L lens, and frankly quite dissapointed. At F4, it is not sharp as my 50/1.4, and not much better than the 17-85, which is an under rated optically IMO.

I also wish the zoom ring and the M-F ring switch places. The zoom operation doesn't feel right to me because of that.

The good side: light and well suited for the 5D. Great color and contrast - better than the 50/1.4.

I think this lens is over priced and over rated.


Aug 28, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add svx94 to your Buddy List  
navarrosan
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Location: Spain
Posts: 3
Review Date: Aug 15, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fast focus, build quality, IS, color and contrast and sharpeness at f/4
Cons:
none



Aug 15, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add navarrosan to your Buddy List  
Finn Magne
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 14, 2004
Location: Norway
Posts: 4
Review Date: Aug 9, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Image Stabilisation (IS), build quality, very good sharpness and contrast.
Cons:
Barrell distorsion and vignetting on 24mm

Compared to my previous zoom, the EF 24-70/2,8L, the EF 24-105/4L IS has the same picture quality: very good sharpness and contrast. Both zooms have visible barrell distorsion and vignetting on 24mm. However: The 24-105L IS has better sharpness and contrast in the corners on 24mm than the 24-70L.

The distorsion and vignetting on 24mm are in real life no problem. I am using RAW format for important pictures and when stepping down to f8 the vignetting is no problem on 99% of the pictures. It is also easy to correct the barrell distorsion in Photoshop.

I prefer the 24-105L over the 24-70L because of these reasons:
1. I find the IS very useful
2. The lens is lighter and balances better on my EOS 5D camera.
3. Better sharpness and contrast in the corners on 24mm
4. Longer zoom range makes it a better lens also for portraits


Aug 9, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Finn Magne to your Buddy List  
coolbobo
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Mar 5, 2005
Location: China
Posts: 2
Review Date: Aug 9, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 4 

Pros: Good Walk-around focal length, solid build, IS, reasonable weight, weather sealing
Cons:
Soft pictures wide open, improves at f/5.6, sharp at f/8, but so do less expensive lens.

This is an overpriced lens. The "L" rating is a bit of an overstatement. My previous EF-S 17-85mm f/4.0-5.6 IS had similar sharpness at comparable focal lengths/aperatures. Currently my $300 Tamron AF 17-35mm f/2.8-4.0 SP Di LD ASL IF is sharper wide open than the Canon is at f/4.
You can get the 17-35 and the 28-75 f/2.8 Tamrons for about half the price of this lens.
This lens is downright disappointing for its price. If you are stuck on OEM then try Canon's other EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L which is undoutedly a better choice, albeit a bit heavy.


Aug 9, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add coolbobo to your Buddy List  
dhphoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 15, 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 10862
Review Date: Aug 2, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated

Pros: Build quality, zoom range
Cons:
Pretty much everything else, see below

The first copy had to be replaced by Canon as it has a large blob under the front element and wouldn't focus properly either. The second copy is barely tolerable for a lens of this enormous price (for an f4 zoom).

There is significant barrel distortion and vignetting at 24mm on full frame, it isn't anywhere NEAR as sharp and contrasty as my 24-70 2.8L.

I really wanted to like this lens and use it as a good general purpose tool, but for the vast price it just doesn't do it at all. Frankly my old 24-85 is almost as good, almost as fast (faster at the short end) and far lighter.

Don't waste your money.


Aug 2, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews View gallery Add dhphoto to your Buddy List  
Dr Strangelove
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Review Date: Jul 27, 2006 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,250.00

Pros:
Cons:

I perservered at the shop and tried two more copies on the brick wall; I found two that didn't vignette at 24. I went with the 24-105 that had a more gradual low end barrel distortion and brought it home yesterday after the 28-105 met with gravity plus carpal tunnel syndrome. So far I'm pleased with low light indoor shots with an ISO push. The colors are vivid. It's sharpness is between the 17-40 and the 70-200. The IS is great. For build I give it a 9.5. For images a 9.2.

Jul 27, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Dr Strangelove to your Buddy List  
Marcinek
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Oct 28, 2005
Location: Poland
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 27, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Excellent resolution (MTF),fast AF,lightweight (only 670 g),built quality of this lens is exceptional,focus distance is only 0,45 m,silent work.IS !
Cons:
Little barrel distortion on 24mm ,in my EOS 5D (full frame),and little vignietting,CA only in f4 24mm .



Jul 27, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Marcinek to your Buddy List  
pca7070
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 25, 2005
Location: China
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 24, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,270.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Build quality, image stabilization, sharpness, color, flare control, fast focusing, (relatively) light weight
Cons:
A little more barrel distortion at wide end

I bought this lens to replace my 24-70mm f/2.8L that I thought was too heavy as a standard zoom to carry around with me. I compared the two and to my surprise this lens is sharper than 24-70mm f/2.8L at most aperture/focal length combinations. Maybe it was a bad (or average) copy, but I've seen others to be of the same quality as mine, i.e. not so sharp especially at 24mm. I've sold the 24-70mm f/2.8L with no regret.

Jul 24, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add pca7070 to your Buddy List  
straehle
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 5
Review Date: Jul 24, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,050.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Extremely sharp, good range for a walk-around lens, well built, fast focus
Cons:
24mm (on a 1.6 crop)

I bought this lens early in the Spring (2006) and it is the lens that is normally on my 20D. I had been using a Sigma 18-125 which I return to from time to time for the wide angle end, but absolutely love this lens for its sharp photos. I would have preferred to have f:/2.8, but really like the dependable constant aperature and the IS easily makes up the one stop difference for most subjects.
I would highly recommend this lens for a 20D or 30D.


Jul 24, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add straehle to your Buddy List  
paknip
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 28, 2005
Location: Malaysia
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jul 24, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Built, IS, Sharp and great zoom range for carry around.
Cons:
None

Had this copy for almost 6 months and attached to my 20D at most of the time. Sharpness is great at almost all range. A perfect carry around lens with IS as a bonus.

Jul 24, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add paknip to your Buddy List  




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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
526 926579 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