about | support
home
 

Search Used

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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
516 895906 Apr 18, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
86% of reviewers $1,515.98
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.48
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:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next
          
rrobr
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 9, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Feb 28, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros:
Cons:

Before buying this lens I read this and other forums and knew going in of the controversy raised by using the Canon 24-105 L on a full frame sensor camera such as my 5D. I was also coming from a year of using the 20D and a 17-85mm zoom, a combination with which I was very happy.

My first exposure to this lens was borrowing one for a weekend. I went out and shot a few hundred frames of landscapes and came back to the studio to study and print half a dozen of the best I could winnow the pile down to. I wasn't happy with any of them at 13x20, however, if I squinted, stood back a ways and tried not to think about how much money this combo cost me, I could agree that my 20D could not do better. The resolution just wasn't there. The more I looked, the more it appeared that it wasn't focusing where I thought it was. The edge resolution, particularly at 24mm, was poor, too. We all know about the chromatic abberation wide open-no surprises there.

The next weekend I borrowed a second version of the lens. I couldn't duplicate my shots frame for frame, but I shot similar subject matter under similar lighting. The results were much more to my liking. I printed a lot of 16x24s and was happy again.

So I went out and bought my own 24-105L and spent another weekend shooting...and more days trying to like what I got. No dice. Back to square one. Now, Kirk, who had kindly lent me the first lens, had returned his to Canon for a recalibration. When he showed me the results of his born again lens, I was encouraged and packed mine off to Mother Canon. It came back yesterday and inbetween rainstorms and work, I've fire off a dozen or two frames, ran a couple through DxO Pro and Adobe Camera RAW and have begun printing them. Success! It seems to be performing just fine.

Beyond the resolution increase of the 5D over the 20D, there is better dynamic range and even smoother tonality that is readily apparent in the images, irregardless of the quality of the lens, but now that I seem to have the lens I wanted for this camera, I can't wait to get out and do some shooting.

The moral is-if this lens fits your needs, do try it and be prepared to send it to Canon for a week. Why Canon has dropped the ball on quality control here is a mystery, but it is imminently correctable and it's a shame many owners of full frame sensor cameras have been put off by the justifiably negative reviews many examples of this lens have produced.


Feb 28, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add rrobr to your Buddy List  
Steve Y
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 26, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Review Date: Feb 26, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,249.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: IS is truely incredible, For wedding work no longer need to use a tripod for long exposures in the church. I have found this lens to be very sharp. built solid
Cons:
have not had any of the problems with flare that others have mentioned nothing negative about this lens at all!



Feb 26, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Steve Y to your Buddy List  
veroman
Online
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Aug 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 3697
Review Date: Feb 25, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros:
Cons:

This is my third "L" series lens, and my first Image Stabilized lens. It replaces (maybe supplements is a better word) my trusty 28-105mm, which is actually a very good lens and a bargain at the price.

The new 24-105mm f/4 IS is very, very sharp; it's probably my sharpest lens. It's capable of rendering an amazing amount of detail. In fact, I didn't think my EOS 10D was capable of that much detail (which once again tells us just how important the glass is).

The 24-105 f/4L IS is quick, silent, contrasty (but not exaggerated contrast) and very easy to use. The AF is much faster than any of my other lenses, including my 70-200 f/4L. IS works better than I expected. I took some initial indoor shots at 1/25 and they were just as sharp as could be...and nicely exposed, too; perfect right out of the camera. This lens is heavier than I thought, but I got used to that pretty quickly. Still...be prepared for the fact that it isn't really a "compact" lens in the same way as the 28-105mm f3.5 or similar lenses in that category. The 24-105mm f/4L IS is more like a 17-40mm f/4L in terms of heft and feel.

I've found myself underexposing by half a stop in many brightly lit situations, particularly when there's a white highlight or two or serious reflection from a white surface. The lens seems more prone to blowing out highlights than I'm used to. The minor amount of underexposing seems to help. (I should add that I have not yet used the lens with its supplied petal hood.)

What is most impressive about this lens is its color faithfulness. The color is dead-on accurate; better than any of my other lenses in this regard, and by a wide margin. I was really taken back by this color accuracy when I opened my first files of shots.

All in all, this lens is a pleasure to own and use and so far has lived up to the positive reviews and accolades. It's a great walkabout, though the range on a 1.5 to 1.6 crop-factor camera — adequate for most shooting sessions — can seem limited at both ends under certain circumstances.


Feb 25, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add veroman to your Buddy List  
Bigpikle
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 19, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 107
Review Date: Feb 23, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: IS, zoom range, build quality, sharpness
Cons:
size, weight, IS has no panning mode

This is a great walkabout lens for the 5D. It is a little big and heavy for carrying for long periods but the zoom range and IS make it a very versatile lens.

I can honestly say the benefit of IS and being able to stop down and still handhold effectively, outweigh the fact that this is only a f4 lens - for me in my general shooting. The IS is great although I wish it had a panning mode as well.

Highly recommended.


Feb 23, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Bigpikle to your Buddy List  
LeeG
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 11, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 220
Review Date: Feb 22, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp, light.IS,quality build.
Cons:
none

worth every penny. this lens and the 10-22 make a great combo!

Feb 22, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add LeeG to your Buddy List  
twistedlim
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Oct 20, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3127
Review Date: Feb 22, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Nice range, sharp, colorful, IS, did I mention sharp.
Cons:
None within the limits of the lens.

Purchased to replace a 17-40 on my 1D and it is pretty much everyting I could have hoped for. The lens is very sharp at all apertures. Contrast is excellent. Focus is spot on an really has yet to miss its target. It really makes things almost too easy. I do miss the creative aspects of a faster lens but for landscape or general shooting I don't think you can top this lens.

Feb 22, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add twistedlim to your Buddy List  
pfuller
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 6, 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 32
Review Date: Feb 21, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,050.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp, IS, Range
Cons:
None

I worried about buying this lens because of some of the reviews. Since buying the lens I am extremely pleased. Sharp throughout the range. Minimum F4 and my 20D's ability to ratchet up the ISO when needed is plenty for low light for me. IS for non-motion shots works great. One of the really nice features of this lens is the size of this lens, nice and compact for a 24-105 range. Great walk around lens.

Feb 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add pfuller to your Buddy List  
photosponge
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 4, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Feb 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,249.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: I LOVE it! The wide angle is subperb. Very fast response. Actually bought the lens BEFORE I bought the EOS 5d, and used it with my EOS Rebel. Such an improvement in photos with the IS! And I don't notice any vignetting that others have talked about. Have taken wonderful sunsets, with a still fairly bright sun at the sunset and don't get any flare. I don't put any filters on the lens and shoot in RAW.
Cons:
Just wish it went to 300mm's! Maybe the next one.... Yes, and maybe if it had a max. aperature of 2.8 instead of 4. But nothing I can't live with.

What more can I say: It's a Canon! Their quality really shines through here. Captures beautiful images with the EOS 5D. I personally think the lens is a little heavy, but I like that solid feel. My husband has a Canon 75-300mm lens that I borrow, and it's lighter than my Canon EF 24-105mm L.

I just wish it had a longer telephoto, say up to 200mm. I guess that will be my next one! I don't think you will be disappointed with this lens. I bought it from RitzCamera.com. I do a lot of business with them.


Feb 18, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add photosponge to your Buddy List  
John Daniel
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 6, 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1301
Review Date: Feb 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Clear pictures, fast focus, light (compared to 24-70), IS
Cons:
a bit of vignetting at 24mm that is dissapeared at 25mm

Just sold my 24-70 f/2.8L but had time to do a shooting comparison. My conclusion are:
1: the 24-105 matches the 24-70 at all focals and sometimes surpasses it. It offers a longer range and best of all, Image Stabalization.

It would bee a 10 all the waay, but I had to remove 1 point for price.(but hey, it's an L )

John


Feb 18, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add John Daniel to your Buddy List  
Aerospace
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 8, 2006
Location: France
Posts: 233
Review Date: Feb 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Focal range, sharpness, good build quality,IS
Cons:
Enormous distortion at 24 mm for a "L".Too expensive

I am using a 20D .
I am very happy with this lens .
If you are looking for a good all-around lens in this range, get it! You won´t be disappointed. (Well, you might if you mainly use it to shoot brick walls to test for vignetting and distortions...)


Feb 18, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Aerospace to your Buddy List  
Xenedis
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 11, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Review Date: Feb 15, 2006 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: Versatile focal range, L-series quality, IS, build quality, constant f/4 and sharpish results.
Cons:
Not f/2.8, and the price could be a little lower.

There seem to be a lot of people who aren't too happy with the 24-105/4L IS.

However, I'm sitting on the other side of the fence, for I am content with mine.

I was a very early adopter, having purchased mine within a day or two of its release. It was arguably a gamble, as the lens was brand new, and had no history. However, I wasn't particularly worried about that.

What prompted the purchase was the dreadful, frustrating experience I had with a former lens. Its replacement was to be either the 24-70/2.8L or the 24-105/4L IS, which at the time hadn't been released.

I came extremely close to buying the former, but eventually chose the latter after much deliberation, as the extra reach, IS, smaller size, much less obnoxiously-sized hood and significantly lower price made it a far more attractive package. The only selling point the former had was an extra stop worth of light, which I didn't consider as important, as I am predominantly an outdoor scape shooter.

I am happy with this lens. Whilst mine is a very early, flare-prone copy (which I have not had "fixed"), I have not yet experienced the flare. Granted, I haven't tried to produce it, and I probably haven't shot in such a manner as to accidentally produce it.

I haven't performed any extensive testing by taking photos of brick walls and the like, but from my real-world experience shooting with it, it's a good, quality lens which can produce some nice results. I've certainly taken some very nice photos with it.

Below is a link to one of my albums, whose shots were all taken with the 24-105/4L IS. Naturally, I have applied unsharp masking and adjusted the contrast and levels, but in my experience, this is necessary for all shots.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/xenedis/sets/72057594052064839/

The lens does at times exhibit a small amount of CA/PF in high contrast areas (trees against skies, etc.), but in my opinion it's well controlled, not "in your face" (unlike that which I experienced on my previous walkaround lens) and certainly isn't a showstopper.

The 24-105/4L IS is my walkaround lens, and lives on my camera a good 90% of the time.

I recommend this lens, and it suits my purposes well, but of course, it's not the lens for everyone.

J.


Feb 15, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Xenedis to your Buddy List  
sochigetto
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 93
Review Date: Feb 15, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros:
Cons:

So how do you tell it's second batch or third batch?????

Feb 15, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sochigetto to your Buddy List  
homerdog
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 11, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
Review Date: Feb 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Sharp from f5.6, fantastic autofocus and IS, solid feel.
Cons:
A bit soft at f4.

I bought this to replace the 17-85IS used on my 20D. It is much sharper than that lens and if, like me, most of your shots are taken in this zoom range, it makes sense.

The autofocus is incredibly fast and almost silent, while the IS is the best I have experienced.

I was a little bit disappointed with sharpness wide open, but when stopped down to f5.6 it is very good.

To the reviewer who suggested buying a 28-135IS or 17-85IS instead, I would say fine if you don't want the sharpness, but why wouldn't you? I've owned both these lenses and the 24-105 is much better - as you might expect, given the price.

Only the performance at f4 stops me giving it a 10.



Feb 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add homerdog to your Buddy List  
Xenedis
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 11, 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Review Date: Feb 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Practical focal range, sharpness, good build quality, size/weight and IS.
Cons:
Not f/2.8, and could be a little less expensive.

There seem to be a lot of people who aren't too happy with the 24-105/4L IS.

However, I'm sitting on the other side of the fence, for I am content with mine.

I was a very early adopter, having purchased mine within a day or two of its release. It was arguably a gamble, as the lens was brand new, and had no history. However, I wasn't particularly worried about that.

What prompted the purchase was the dreadful, frustrating experience I had with a former lens. Its replacement was to be either the 24-70/2.8L or the 24-105/4L IS, which at the time hadn't been released.

I came extremely close to buying the former, but eventually chose the latter after much deliberation, as the extra reach, IS, smaller size, much less obnoxiously-sized hood and significantly lower price made it a far more attractive package. The only selling point the former had was an extra stop worth of light, which I didn't consider as important, as I am predominantly an outdoor scape shooter.

I am happy with this lens. Whilst mine is a very early, flare-prone copy (which I have not had "fixed"), I have not yet experienced the flare. Granted, I haven't tried to produce it, and I probably haven't shot in such a manner as to accidentally produce it.

I haven't performed any extensive testing by taking photos of brick walls and the like, but from my real-world experience shooting with it, it's a good, quality lens which can produce some nice results. I've certainly taken some very nice photos with it.

Below is a link to one of my albums, whose shots were all taken with the 24-105/4L IS. Naturally, I have applied unsharp masking and adjusted the contrast and levels, but in my experience, this is necessary for all shots.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/xenedis/sets/72057594052064839/

The lens does at times exhibit a small amount of CA/PF in high contrast areas (trees against skies, etc.), but in my opinion it's well controlled, not "in your face" (unlike that which I experienced on my previous walkaround lens) and certainly isn't a showstopper.

The 24-105/4L IS is my walkaround lens, and lives on my 20D a good 90% of the time. Of course, it's not the lens for everyone, but it suits my purposes well.

J.


Feb 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Xenedis to your Buddy List  
jmraso
Online
Image Upload: Off



Registered: May 25, 2004
Location: Spain
Posts: 2232
Review Date: Feb 12, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Very sharp and focals at a time. Color rendition IS
Cons:
F4 is my only regret.

Very proffessional walk-around lens when there is light.

Very happy clients when see the prints.

"L" glass is "L" glass anyway.

Jaime
www.jmraso.com


Feb 12, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add jmraso to your Buddy List  
allan m.
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 269
Review Date: Feb 12, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,099.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: sharp, actually quite sharp, IS is simply superb, weight is not bad (i am used to it already), built like a tank, weatherproofed, fast AF, width & reach, hmmm, did i mention sharp?
Cons:
[tank] price, price, price

This is the best lens i have ever owned... even better than my old Nikkor 105mm 2.5. I have owned 10 Nikkors and this is zoom. I got the lens last week so i have got a good copy- glad i waited. The sharpness, color accuracy, and silent USM is spectacular. I was leary was leary at first and decided to wait till ther were more positive ones on other sites. DigitalGrin.com's review did it for me- wit working examples- albiet with a 5D. i have have it hooked up to my Mark2N since day one. I got mine at Allenscamera.com which hasn't had a bad copy from the 2nd batch yet. I will do some extensive shooting with it in a week or so and really be able to see if it will live up to the '10' rating on a consistent basis. I just wish for other people's sake Canon didn't rush this [to conicide w/ the release of the 5D] and gave every peson a chance to have a good copy. If you can afford it and just want one lens for 90% of your work [street photog/fine art] then this is your lens baby! [no pun int'd]


Feb 12, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add allan m. to your Buddy List  

   



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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
516 895906 Apr 18, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
86% of reviewers $1,515.98
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.48
8.03
9.0
24-105lisusm


Page:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next