 |
|
|
ktomkins
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 28, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 10, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,250.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
nice zoom range
|
|
Cons:
|
Severe distortion, vignetting, and Chromatic aberration
|
|
|
I was really disappointed with this lens. It was quite sharp throughout the range, but there was also a lot of barrel distortion and CA throughout the entire range. The CA was no better than the $400 28-300 Tamron that I also have. It also had a lot of vignetting at 24mm. I ended up sending it back.
|
|
 Apr 10, 2006
|
|
KeithA
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 11, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Apr 9, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Color,Contrast, IS & SHARPNESS!
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
|
I was having a hard time deciding to buy this lens. It seems people who are unhappy with it are much more likely to submit a review (at least on other sites). I have been very happy with this lens on my 20D. I was torn between this lens and the 24-70l. I was able to borrow a friends "good" copy of the 24-70L and found it quite nice but was looking for the extra range. I then tried out the 24-105L, I found it just as sharp while shooting various subjects. I didnt notice any of the problems others have had but didnt try that hard to find them. If you are thinking of buying your first "L" lens you cant go wrong with this one. It quality over the lower end len's will be easy to see.
|
|
|
Apr 9, 2006
|
|
julianpan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 21, 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 6, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, stunning IS, solid build, nice color/contract. Did I mention sharp?
|
|
Cons:
|
It's a gift. So price is not an issue for me. The zoom is a little bit too tight.
|
|
I just got 24-105L as a gift from my brother. It's just amazing! It's about as sharp as my 50mm f/1.4. The color is nice and rich. Bokeh looks smooth, not like some pics I saw on pbase. I used to own a 28-135 IS. The IS on 24-105 is much better than the one on 28-135. I just took a picture for my girlfriend. Indoor, f/4, iso 100, with build-in flash. I got amazing sharp images with shutter speed at "1 second"!!!
100% crop no post process sample
http://www.cis.nctu.edu.tw/~gis88502/IMG_3161.jpg
|
|
|
Apr 6, 2006
|
|
TimesUP
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Feb 6, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 650
|
|
Review Date: Apr 6, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,125.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
It's "L" glass, what more needs to be said? Sharp, Crisp, and did I mention its "L" glass? Super quiet! Great match to my 5D
|
|
Cons:
|
Price is a tad high but it's "L" glass....
|
|
|
Well, I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a pro and this is my first "L" purchase but I must say I'm impressed. Just picked it up this week and cannot put the camera down.
I tried to take the "poor pros" route of purchasing the fast Sigma twins....the 24-70 f/2.8 and the 70-200 f/2.8 and while both of them cost the same as the 24-105 there is no comparison. The IS totaly lives up to the claimed 3 stop difference. The lens is dead quiet, excellent in the few low-light situations I've been in and there is NO comparison in sharpness. the Sigma could not even compare to my 17-85 IS lens that I had on the 20D. Yes, I did purchase the Sigma's on ebay so that could have been part of the problem but I did learn my lession.
Once you go "L" to cannot go back!
|
|
|
Apr 6, 2006
|
|
TONYWORKSHOP
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 31, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 3, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,499.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, ultra-fast focusing, build quality, good color, focal range
|
|
Cons:
|
Price, not a right lens for Canon 20D
|
|
I am disappointed on the perfomance of this lens on a my 20D. but it is still a good lens and it works perfect on a 5D body.
I have some portrait pictures taken by my 20D with this lens:
http://flickr.com/photos/tonyworkshop/
|
|
|
Apr 3, 2006
|
|
TechnoPhil
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 3, 2006
Location: San Marino
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Apr 1, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
leggera, robusta, ottima resa!
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
Davvero un'ottima lente!!secondo me la migliore lente standard!!
si riesce a fare davvero tutto!
ottima risoluzione e wide degno della serie L!
|
|
|
Apr 1, 2006
|
|
Achechino
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Feb 1, 2006
Location: Spain
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Mar 31, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $950.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, IS, ultra-fast focusing, build quality....
|
|
Cons:
|
Some geometrical distortions at ends (none significant if you're not an architectural shooter)
|
|
|
Bought a (good, I think) copy of this last january, and my photos are a step forward since then.
Quality is really high, focusing is ultra fast and images looks sharp, a lot.
The only negative aspect is the distortion (is there all the range) if you shoot architectural, because is extrange mix between barrel and pincushion, hard to fix. But not noticeable if used far from geometrical compositions.
Great lens.
|
|
|
Mar 31, 2006
|
|
G Lund
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 9, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1283
|
|
Review Date: Mar 26, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Fast AF, not heavy, the IS, great color and saturation, very useful even at f/4, near 100% keeper rate.
|
|
Cons:
|
None yet
|
|
|
I have only had it about a month but, it has been on the 5D most of that time. This is a lens to have. If you are looking for a good all around L lens to be your first one, this will hook you on L glass.
|
|
|
Mar 26, 2006
|
|
lamancha
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 23, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 23, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,175.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, Weight, Image-Stabilization, focal range
|
|
Cons:
|
None so far
|
|
|
Just purchased this lens. I was torn as to whether I should trade in my 24-70 2.8 (which I loved) for this . While I loved the 24-70 I wanted more reach and more versatility on my 5D (I also have a 20D). I wanted a "killer" walk-around lens if at all possible so I took the the chance and took the plunge. I had read the many mixed reviews (involving earlier initial copies of this lens) and was somewhat concerned as to whether it was worth the money or the aggravation of possibly getting a "bad" copy. I bought it based on the fact that Canon appears to have responded to initial bad press/reviews about this lens and reworked it in later batches that it produced.
I must say that I am absolutely pleased with this lens (at least the copy that I got from later batch). It is tack sharp throughout the entire range, the IS works terrifically and the color is amazing. I thought I would never part with my 24-70 because it was so good, but I must say that I am more than glad that I did trade it in for this lens. Part of my decision had to do with whether I wanted to give up my 2.8 "fast lens" for an f4. When all was said and done it really depends on how you're going to use the lens. Since I'm not a working professional (I just love the art of photography) I came to the conclusion that, for me, working with an f4 lens was more than doable because of the added Image Stabilization on the 24-105 f4 and the fact that 90% of my indoor shooting is done with a 580EX flash. This is an absolutely great "walk-around" lens. This is the lens that you "must" take on trips for candid fast shooting and over-all sharp beautiful pictures.
Let me say again, this is a "terrific" lens. You won't be dissapointed if you decide to take the plunge. Just make sure you test it out when buying to make sure your copy is all that it should and can be. At least you now know that there are some terrific copies of this lens. So, buy it and enjoy yourself!
|
|
|
Mar 23, 2006
|
|
muevelonyc
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 18, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 178
|
|
Review Date: Mar 21, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,037.92
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Extreme versatility (wide focal range + IS), Sharpness, build quality, contrast, Fast AF, f4 through the entire focal range
|
|
Cons:
|
Price (but totally worth it!), weight (testament of build quality: Solid), very slight distotions at the very ends of the focal range, but any zoom is prone to that, but on this lens is extremely barely noticable
|
|
I was shooting at the Nationals comptetition of Westminster Kennel Club where I saw 99% of the staff and professional magazine photographers using this lens. I already was researching the lens, and chatted with a few of them why they chose this particular lens over the fast 2.8L offerings. All replied exactly with the same answer. Pure versatility. While I was there swapping lenses between shots missing a few good opportunities, they were popping away. With such a wide range of focal lengths that extends into the short range telephoto you don't need to swap lenses. I was sold, and finally bought it for myself as an early birthday present. With L grade glass, you get the sharpness that almost approaches the quality of primes (not quite as sharp as primes, but is quite close). See my benchmark on that topic here where I bench it against my EF 50mm f/1.4 @ 50mm f/4 & f/8:
http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/371271/0/3163627
With IS you get stability in low light conditions (although not fast enough for action shots in low light), so you won't necessarily need a tripod/monopod in some situations. If you have a steady hand, you can still get good pictures at 1/15th.
The lens is heavy and large, but for what it's worth, it's expected and warranted for its versatility and it's sturdy (metal) construction. Some argue that it's pricy, but you get what you paid for.
What could I reallly ask for? Well if it was f/2.8 it'd probably be the ideal walk around lens as with that speed, it'd be better suited for low light. However, as it's stands it's the near perfect walk-around lens. It will be the only lens I take with me to my honeymoon in Hawaii so I can travel light. 
Highly recommended. You simply cannot go wrong.
|
|
|
Mar 21, 2006
|
|
rwelliott
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 12, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5
|
|
Review Date: Mar 20, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,245.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Just got the 24-105. Sharp as a tack at 4.0 24-30mm. No noticable flare. At 105mm lost some sharpness and saturation at 4PM on the beach during overcase conditions. IS is excellent. A great walk-around lens.
|
|
Cons:
|
Pricey
|
|
|
I plan to use this lens this week during an AVP (Volleyball) shoot. We will see. Still may need a 2.8 for blur.
|
|
|
Mar 20, 2006
|
|
hijkim
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 27, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 85
|
|
Review Date: Mar 17, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
IS, Sharp, Fast AF and Range. Good bulld quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
F/4, but for L lens with IS at this price, I can't complaint.
|
|
|
I now have two Canon L lenses this and 17-40 and they both are supurb lenses. I got this lens as a christmas gift and I opened it before the christmas and took it out and started to test out the lens. The IS is just amazing, I was kind of dizzy at first, my hands were shaking but the view finder was showing something different and I could not get use to it at first. The 99% of the pictures were all sharp which I could not say with 17-40L and colors were about the same as 17-40L. I don't know if it is just me but both of my L lenses have little warm tone to it especially when taking photos of people the skin tone comes out softer and warmer than my other lenses, but then it could be just my computer monitor settings.
This lens is on my camera 90% of the time. For me it is a normal to telephoto lens on my 350D. I could not say it is a wide lens on 1.6 crop. It is perfect for portraits, I would not use it for taking wide angle photos unless it is on a 5D or 1D. I'm saving up for 5D at the moment so that I don't have to buy the digital only 10-?mm lenses but this summer I might have to get 10-20 unless I get a bonus from work.
Anyway, I'm really happy that I have 24-105L and if you can afford it I can recommnad this lens. Even though it was a gift, basically it was out of my pocket. I need permissions form 'the other one' to buy anything.
|
|
|
Mar 17, 2006
|
|
dimisp
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 1, 2005
Location: Greece
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,100.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Very sturdy yet light enough, very sharp, extemely fast focusing, IS.
|
|
Cons:
|
A bit pricey.
|
|
|
This is an extremely well made lens. I was also considering the 24-70/2.8 but after testing both lenses for an hour or so, it seemed that for my needs, this was the better suited lens.
All in all:
Built quality is excellent (as expected from all "L" series lens and actual price)
Focusing speed is ultra fast and USM seems a lot more quiet than my 85/1.8. I can hardly hear it.
IS delivers as promised: 2-3 stops depending on circumstances and individual ability to remain still. Actually makes a difference in several situations where I would normally need to pump up the iso. This is my first IS lens so I cannot compare to earlier versions, however the noise it makes is very low, barely noticeable clicks.
CA is very well handled, something that the aforementioned 85/1.8 fails to do.
I got one of the newer copies so I cannot commend on the flare issue of earlier copies.
Canon certainly did well on this one. Highly recommended.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2006
|
|
dlm32067
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Mar 14, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,149.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice focal range. L Color saturation and contrast. Sharp!
|
|
Cons:
|
Exposure?
|
|
|
I just received my copy and so far, I'm very pleased. After reading some of the reviews here of this lens, I decided to do some testing. I compared this lens with three other lenses; the EF 70-200 f/4L, the EF 28-105 f/3.5-4.5, and the EF 50 f/1.8. I compared this lens to each of the above lenses at the same focal length.
The results;
At 28, 35, & 50 the 24-105 killed the 28-105.
At 50 the 50 f/1.8 surpased the 24-105 f/4L (no real surprise).
At 70 & 105 the 24 -105 and the 28 - 105 were dead even!
At 70 & 105 the 70 - 200 was only marginally sharper.
The above test was made using the same subject at the same distance on a tripod. Resolution was determined by the nik Sharpener pro "Real Resolution" Test.
With that out of the way, I'd have to day the lens is excellent, although, not knock your socks off. The Color and Contrast are what I've come to expect from L glass.
My only concern is with exposure. I'm not quite sure how it does it, but when I shoot raw and expose for the highlights, I have to add +1 EV (I usually only requre +1/3 EV). This I don't understand, but I accept for great Images.
|
|
|
Mar 14, 2006
|
|
Lawless
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 8, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 2
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, colour saturation, excellent range and the IS works great.
|
|
Cons:
|
Price
|
|
|
I guess I got lucky because I have what seems to be, an extremely sharp copy of this lens on my first try. I tested it against my 17-40 f4 and my 70-200 f4 and it is on the same level as these very sharp lenses. It actually surpasses the 17-40 @ f4 slightly. The color saturation is excellent, and the IS lives up to the hype. Perfect compliment to my lens line up.
The 24mm end isn't that wide on my 20D, but a lot of my photos are taken at this length, so it works out nicely.
Get a sharp one, and you won’t be disappointed.
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006
|
|
JohnJ80
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5645
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2006
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,095.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice portable size, 24 is 'somewhat' wide on a 1.6X crop camera, very sharp, great contrast
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
I have none of the flare issues that have been reported on early models. My copy is very sharp, has that great L color and saturation.
I like its size, relatively compact for its range.
J.
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
509
|
864107
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
