 |
|
|
razer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 3, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 7
|
|
Review Date: Jul 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
This is my first IS lens and it just works, period!
|
|
Cons:
|
Price.
|
|
This is the first L series lens i have purchased. I decided that the kit lens didnt give me enough reach and that the 24-105 fitted the focal length i needed. I was right.
After using it over the weekend and getting ISO100 shots at f8 and 1/8 sec handheld it makes me wonder how i did without IS.
I re-created some shot is did with the kit lens and the 24-105 just blows it away, the difference in colour and sharpness is very noticeable (as you would hope!) As for the bokeh its absolutely stunning.
Sample photo here;
http://razer.smugmug.com/photos/79046528-L-1.jpg
The only downside of this lens is the high price, if it was around £50 to £75 cheaper then i would give it a 9.5.
Would i buy this lens again? without doubt.
As for my other lenses, i will certainly be looking at IS alternatives in the future.
|
|
 Jul 3, 2006
|
|
aero145
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 1, 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 333
|
|
Review Date: Jul 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
L glass - light
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
When I tried this lens, I thought I was trying a marvelous piece of glass.
When I looked at the pictures after I had photographed, the photos were very good. But when I looked at the photos on computer screens, the quality was bad! Soft focus, and blurry.
The IS works, but not well.
Don't go for this lens, go for the uncle: 24-70mm f/2.8L USM!
|
|
|
Jul 1, 2006
|
|
DaveFouchey
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 25, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 25, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Light weight for the focal range, IS and L quality glass
|
|
Cons:
|
none at all
|
|
|
Second L lens I have purchased for use on the 5D the other being the 24-70 f2.8 L. These two compliment each other nicely. I find the IS to be a great help in out door shots, the color and sharpness are amazing. It is my #1 walkabout lens. Light enough to carry all day, good range and even at f4 works well in moderate light for me. It makes an ideal companion to the full fram 5D.
|
|
|
Jun 25, 2006
|
|
jitters
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 17, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 16
|
|
Review Date: Jun 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,199.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great travel lens to be with, sharp pictures
|
|
Cons:
|
none so far
|
|
|
I returned a 24-70 F2.8 L to get this lens. I do not see any flare issues and the pictures are sharper than the 24-70 F2.8L. Highly recommended
|
|
|
Jun 23, 2006
|
|
ctantra
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 21, 2006
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 22, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,165.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent sharpness and contrast across their aperture and focal length ranges, (even at wide open f/4), Image Stabilization, superb L quality built, relatively light and compact.
|
|
Cons:
|
Hardly noticeable.
|
|
|
I return the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 for this one. As for indoor shooting, I have EF 50mm f/1.4. I think EF 24-105mm f/4 IS is one of best general purpose lens Canon ever made. My copy (2006 production) doesn't have flare issue and works perfectly. Buy it, you'll never regret it.
|
|
|
Jun 22, 2006
|
|
perpera
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 11, 2005
Location: Denmark
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Jun 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,050.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very good range. Sharp at all apertures. Contrasty with good neutral colours. Nice Bokeh.
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
Very good allround on 1DM2.
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2006
|
|
jjarecki
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 22, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 16, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
I have just acquired this lens and have taken the first test shots with my old (beloved) D60. Will test it on the 5D shortly. Let me say I was not a fan of the Canon IS lens line...in the beginning. I tested a telephoto (believe it was a 200 or 300 mm lens) with the IS system when they first came out, and I was underwhelmed. Never bothered to buy one till the 24-105 came along, and it wasn't the clencher in closing the deal for me. After the initial tests, in low light hand held, there is a marked improvment in my images. I have tested myself and I can usually get a sharp image wide open at 1/10 of a second (its true). The IS system really works...and I will be seeing what my new shake free limits are shortly. So two thumbs up on the IS system in the lens. As far as sharpness, color and contrast go...the lens is beautiful. Can't talk about vignetting or distortion as yet, but so far on the D60 things are looking real good. As of now 2 thumbs way up for the lens!
|
|
Cons:
|
It is a pricey lens...no doubt about it. I got a good deal so the bite wasn't painful.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2006
|
|
Julius
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 26, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 865
|
|
Review Date: Jun 16, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,249.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent built quality like all Canon L lenses, contrasty and sharp at all focal lengths on the full size sensor camera.
|
|
Cons:
|
None found so far.
|
|
|
This is a dream lens on a full field camera, the zoom range is perfect for an all around lens. I found it to be very sharp and contrasty at all focal lengths at f/8-f/16. It has more than average vignetting which is still visible at f/11 but this can be easily corrected in Photoshop. This lens stays on my 5D 90% of the time.
All in all I am very pleased with the performance of this lens.
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2006
|
|
Scho
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jan 29, 2002
Location: United States
Posts: 59
|
|
Review Date: Jun 16, 2006
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: $1,099.00
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Good construction.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not sharp
|
|
|
I bought this lens to use for general walk around shooting. I have not been pleased at all with image quality. Mediocre sharpness, barrel and pincushion distortion, and terrible bokeh. This one is going back and I'll stick with my primes (20mm 2.8, 50mm 1.4, 135mm f2/L).
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2006
|
|
photo1a
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 444
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good build quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Not as sharp focusing as I expected it to be.
|
|
|
I got his for a general purpose lens. As an L lens,I expected it to be very sharp. However, it is nowhere as sharp as my 70-300 or 70-200 on the long end, and o better than my 17-85 on the short end. I sent it to the factory for calibration twice, but it still disappoints me. It focuses about like my 28-135.
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2006
|
|
neilcuk05
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 14, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 15, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Great build quality, not too heavy, fast and silent USM, sharp (enough) wide open, and sharp (enough) from 70-105, an ideal walkaround with a 10-xx on a 1.6x camera
|
|
Cons:
|
Bit pricey, but it's the only option in its range
|
|
|
I love this lens... the USM is great, and i'm particularly impressed with the accuracy of the focus at wide angle. For example, with a lot of lenses i've used in the past, taking advantage of the parfocal nature of the lens to zoom in, focus, then zoom out again often gets better results
However with the 24-105, focusing @ 24mm then zooming in to 105mm and re-focusing more often than not results in NO adjustment to the focus. I guess it's small things like that that make a lens an 'L'
The zoom ring is a bit stiff but that'll loosen up over time. Rather stiff than loose !
The lens is simply a joy to use.
Some may argue F/4 isn't fast enough - but there is no faster alternative with the range, which suggests to me that, given the weight of Canon's 24-70 F/2.8, a 24-105 F/2.8 would be impractical to use as a walkaround lens
It's an ideal compliment to my Sigma 10-20, which covers the wide angle nicely. 24mm on a crop camera is wide enough of my usage, and I don't find myself wanting to swap lenses every five minutes. Also, i found that 18/17mm isn't wide enough for me in many situations - so having an extra lens to cover the ultra wide was ideal
Highly recommended - you get what you pay for, the only lens in its range, and some serious quality for it too
|
|
|
Jun 15, 2006
|
|
YYClickit
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 13, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
SHARP, IS, build quality is excellent.
|
|
Cons:
|
Could be wider on a 1.6x crop, but I knew this before buying.
|
|
|
This is a fantastic lens. From what I can tell, the resolution exceeds that of my 8.0MP XT sensor. No noticable sharpness drop at f/4, either.
The IS is a great bonus and lets me take a lot of pictures that otherwise would not be possible without a tripod.
Highly recommended - I certainly didn't want to fork out the cash for this lens, but in this case, you get what you pay for!
|
|
|
Jun 13, 2006
|
|
JanPhoto
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 27, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 17
|
|
Review Date: Jun 12, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
I am pretty demanding customer and in my book this lens for my line of Canon digital SLR's is a "swiss knife" tool. Sharp, excellent color reproduction, fast focus, silent, relatively small .....
|
|
Cons:
|
... do not recall any at this moment ...
|
|
|
I am using this lens as on "all time" on camera "glass" for it's connivance ... in some instances even in studio for still-life shooting since quality of focusing and it's sharpens in my opinion is so good. Recently I have purchased 30D and found that on this body this lens is superior too. Well I can sing on and on about this lens how ever for those of you thinking to purchase this glass well do not wait any longer, for this one money are well spend ....
|
|
|
Jun 12, 2006
|
|
python2000
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 885
|
|
Review Date: Jun 8, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,219.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Awesome!!! Great IQ, build quality, range. Everything I was hoping for and more.
|
|
Cons:
|
That I didn't get it earlier.
|
|
|
I'm an avid amateur who uses an XT. I shoot mostly for family members and myself. This lens is near perfect for what it does. You knew it was 24 to 105, you knew it was f/4, and you knew it was $1200 all before you bought it. But what you may not know is how nice the pictures are, how quickly the lens focuses, how it feels on your camera, and how nice a big range is on one lens.
I used to have the 17-85 and really loved having 17mm, but was willing to give it up. I contemplated getting the 17-55 but wasn't sure I would appreciate a shorter range. I don't like changing lenses and I really like the ability to get the normal to zoom. (I also have the 10-22 so am not worried about losing the wide end.)
I have no regrets about buying this lens. As much as I love my 70-200 f/4 I hope that Canon comes out with a 100-300 f/4 IS that is smaller and better IQ than the 100-400.
|
|
|
Jun 8, 2006
|
|
silmaril
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 5, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 18
|
|
Review Date: Jun 7, 2006
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
Brilliantly sharp with great colour rendition
|
|
Cons:
|
Vignetting and very small CA.
|
|
|
This is my second review after using this lens more extensively.
This is a significant improvement to the EF-S 17-85MM. Incredibly sharp with great colours. The only thing I am not happy about is vignetting which is evident even after stopping down. This isn't a major issue as it can be fixed in CS but annoying all the same as it is a L lense and issues like this should be non-existent.
Ideally if it is f2.8, it would be the ultimate walkaround lens with a FF camera/ I won't deduct any points as I know that it was an f4 when buying it since it was advertised as f4!!
I am not sure if it is my imagination, but some of my pictures feel very 2D. Maybe it is "too sharp"??? Seems a little weird.
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2006
|
|
jimdavies
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 5, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1557
|
|
Review Date: Jun 7, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, IS, Weight, Build Quality, Range
|
|
Cons:
|
None
|
|
|
Much of my review is said below. The lens is sharp (even wide open) and has a very useful range (even on a 20D).
The IS really is superb opening up some very creative opportunities.
It's the standard lens on my 20D and only the 70-200 f2.8L IS can prize it off for any legth of time.
I love it :-)
|
|
|
Jun 7, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
509
|
861205
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
