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 927843 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:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next
      
winman3
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 397
Review Date: Jan 25, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp Good size, given its specs Comes with a lens hood
Cons:
None so far (it is an early "flare" model, I sent it back even thought I did not experience the reported flare)

Had this lens for about 2 months now. It performs very well under the conditions I use it. Last night I was using this lens indoors with a flash at f8 and at 100 ISO. Cursed flash started acting up, would not fire, so I switched the ISO to 800 and used the lens wide-open at f4. The reults were absolutely astonishing, I printed 11 x 14s and perfect 8.5 x 11 sized prints that were sharp, excellent colour fidelity and hardly any grain.
This lens is light, has a perfect range (given its size & weight), gives excellent results comparable to any of my other L lenses. It is a great travel lens and a good do-it-all tool if you can have only one lens for a variety of needs. BTW, I don't stare at pixels with a microscope & I try to avoid shooting angular objects, e.g. buildings, at the wide end. Every lens is a compromise: size, price, weight, focal range. All things considered, this is a GREAT lens.
For me, a very fussy & critical photo technician, this lens produces perfect results.


Jan 25, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add winman3 to your Buddy List  
i_moose
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Feb 20, 2005
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6
Review Date: Jan 25, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: Lovely zoom range especially on my fullframe Kodak.
Cons:
Awfull distortion from 24mm through 105mm. Perhaps Leica R lenses have spoiled me but this is not "L" quality. Sharpness is OK, IS is fine, colours are OK. Taken all this into account this lens is way, way too expensive, I'm very sorry I bought it.

I bought an official 'Dutch' copy. After the flare was fixed that is. I'm shocked at what Canon calls its Top of The Line lens (L).
The distortion of this lens is as bad or worse even, as the Nikkor 43-86mm I bought in 1977/8 but that was when zoom lenses were first being developed (I think). And even then the distortion occurred mostly at the end of the zoom range.
This L lens distorts all the time. My copy vignettes a bit, mostly at 24mm but I usually have to crop my pictures a bit anyway so it doesn't bother me that much.
I haven't tried it on my 20D since I have the 17-85 IS on it. I personally prefer the image -distortion- quality of the 17-85.

I can't wait till something better comes out, I'll be first in line.


Jan 25, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add i_moose to your Buddy List  
edwardkaraa
Online
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 26, 2004
Location: Thailand
Posts: 8483
Review Date: Jan 23, 2006 Recommend? no | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 8 

Pros: Sharpness, Zoom Range, IS, Build Quality, Color.
Cons:
Unacceptable CA at Frame Edge, Vignetting and Distortion at 24mm Wide End, Price.

I am quite disappointed at least with my copy of this lens which produces quite strong CA at frame edges. Otherwise it's a good lens.

Jan 23, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add edwardkaraa to your Buddy List  
hermosawave
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 12, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 14
Review Date: Jan 22, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,145.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros: Sharp wide open, perfect range, IS
Cons:
flair, heavy, expensive

I have one of the first "post-recall" lenses. I've used it both on the 20D and 5D.

I almost always use the lens wide open. Very sharp at 24mm f/4, maybe a bit less sharp at the long end, but nothing serious.

I can consistantly handhold at 1/4 sec. at 24mm with the IS <i>no problem</i> (a sample: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hermosawave/75427938/)

My copy on the 5D vingnettes a bit at 24mm@f/4@infinity - stop down, zoom in or get close, and it goes away. Also easily fixed in Photoshop.

The only real issue with this lens is flare in an environment with point lights in the frame - in this shot for example (24mm-1/15@f/4 ) http://photos.hermosawave.net/enlargenext.php?ID=76&selection=32 - or with the setting sun.

This is the lens on my camera almost all the time, I would recommend it both for the full-frame as well as croped sensor bodies.


Jan 22, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add hermosawave to your Buddy List  
Harald Labout
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 11, 2004
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 6
Review Date: Jan 21, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Very sharp and clear pictures. I get better results than with my old 24-70 f/2.8. Very good image stabilizer. Well build and a good match with my EOS-20D.
Cons:
None

I have owned a 24-85 f/3,5-4,5 and a 24-70 f/2,8 but the 24-105 give me better results than both my old lensens, yes even better than my 24-70. (perhaps i had an bad copy).
Amazing sharp & clear pictures with nearly perfect colours.
I am very happy with this lens.


Jan 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add Harald Labout to your Buddy List  
dave chilvers
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 11, 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1691
Review Date: Jan 21, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: Build quality is really well up to scratch. USM and IS are quiet and smooth.
Cons:
Lens hood seems to move off of the correct position easily.

First of all I shoot with the 1dsmk2. I have found over the years that if you want the finest quality images with a camera like the FF then primes are the answer so reading so many good reviews got me thinking that maybe things have changed but for me unfortunately they haven`t. The lens is good but not great but maybe I`m being unfair when comparing it to primes. It isn`t as good as my 17-40 where the focal lengths cross and images don`t seem to have as much depth. I`m not sure about the colour of images and noticed that bright overcast is much better than sunny days.
I really wanted this lens to WOW me so that I could carry less and keep the changes down but it hasn`t worked out that way. It`s a better bet on the 20D for some strange reason, maybe I`m not looking for such fine detail with it. One thing that puzzles me is the lens isn`t consistent. I`ve got to be honest and say that my old 28-135IS although not the best lens in the world is at least consistent so you can shoot to it`s strengths if you get my point. I paid 700 for this lens and although the build quality feels like it would outlast most photographers the image quality doesn`t seem to match.
Some people might say that it is a good walkabout lens! and it is as far as focal range but I get most of my images walking about (as many people do) so can`t justify second best on images that I might want to sell on. A friend said to me that I should let it wear in and get used to it and I must admit that quite often that is the case(like when I got the 1dsmk2) things did get better as i learnt it strengths and how to process images from it but we are talking about a lens here where using them on a camera that you know well isn`t exactly rocket science.
I suppose it will take the place of my 28-135 and be used in conjunction with my 10-22 on the 20D as my vacation kit but it won`t have pride of place on my FF cameras where I want the very best that I can extract all the time.
As I say, it`s a good lens but not a great lens and can`t help feeling disappointed after spending what is quite a lot of hard earned cash on it. My normal set up with the 1dsmk2 is,17-40,50mm,85 1.8, 135f2 +1.4 and I should have added the 200 2.8 to complete the bag and saved some money.


Jan 21, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add dave chilvers to your Buddy List  
steveprice
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 3, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 38
Review Date: Jan 20, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Outstanding (qualified - see below)
Cons:
None (my third copy)

I dont know if gwhitegoeg's explanation is correct (see below)
but it fits in with my experience. I originally hunted high and low in early December for a 5D and 24-105 lens kit and have since had and returned two. See my previous post criticising this lens for vignetting. The reason I persisted was that Canon said it shoud not vignet and they advised me to exchange it. Vignetting is light fall of at the corners and edges of the picture frame, for whatever reason. In the case of the first two copies I had bad vignetting. It was correctable in Photoshop but not easily. I teach Photoshop by the way. This week I got my third copy of the kit and wow, what a difference. There is no vignetting even at 24mm and f4. And it is much sharper. I am not doing any post sharpening whatsoever and I have left the in-camera sharpening on the default setting of 3, on previous versions I had to up the setting to 7, the maximum, or sharpen a lot in pshop.

The difference I noticed is that I did not have to hunt high and low for the third copy, my local dealer actually had some in stock, as did other local dealers. This is what makes me think gwhitegoeg' report might be correct.

The moral: be persistant, stick to your guns, read these reviews and you will be rewarded.


Jan 20, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add steveprice to your Buddy List  
gwhitegeog
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 4
Review Date: Jan 20, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

Pros: Great zoom range, real Rolls Royce construction quality, excellent optical quality (see below), internal focussing and zooming, FTM function, excellent focussing, IS
Cons:
Rogue early examples (see below); quite heavy

They have been a lot of negative reviews of this lens and I have the explanation. For once, Japan and the USA getting lenses before us in Europe was a bad thing (for them, anyway). Canon withdrew all offical stock after about 6 weeks, though many grey imports persisted and the lens was still being sold widely on the internet. Official UK Canon pro dealers advised photographers to hold off. All lenses were modified or remanufactured (who can say, as Canon never reveal such things). Many early examples had real CA problems across the whole zoom range (on full frame or APS cameras) but especially in the mid-range and was an awful lens considering its L suffix. Anyway, whatever the problem the issue has been addressed, and UK Canon dealers are now supplying the 'new' lenses. I bought one of these, and it is superb. One of my best 'Ls', if you can live with f4.0. Lens has been outstanding on my 5D.

Jan 20, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add gwhitegeog to your Buddy List  
x0SiN0x
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jan 10, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 81
Review Date: Jan 19, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 9 

Pros:
Cons:



Jan 19, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add x0SiN0x to your Buddy List  
sero
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 13, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 138
Review Date: Jan 18, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, great focal length, IS, perfect size
Cons:
Price, not a 2.8

I think people's expectations are too high for this one. It's compared to the 24-70 all the time, yet it's advantage's are it's extra reach, IS and smaller size at a similar price to the 24-70.

It's funny as everybody loves their 24-70 yet it's rating is basically the same as the 24-105 that everybody nit picks.


Jan 18, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sero to your Buddy List  
JTitor
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jul 17, 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 15, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

Pros:
Cons:



Jan 15, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add JTitor to your Buddy List  
DonSnyder
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 28
Review Date: Jan 14, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

Pros: color, color, color.... I traded my 28-135 IS a few months ago... to buy this.. it is 3 x the price.. but at least 3x the quality.. I am very happy with my new walk around lens.
Cons:
PRICE... If this lens had a price of $900, it would have a rating of 9.9 (IMHO).



Jan 14, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add DonSnyder to your Buddy List  
SurfSessn
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 2
Review Date: Jan 13, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,200.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Sharp, sharp, IS, L glass
Cons:
costly, heavy, big for focal length zoom.

Reading the other reviews I have wonder if I've recieved a rare jewel off of Canon's production line. This lens is SHARP, with fast focus and nearly perfect clarity for the focal lengths it provides. I'm using this on a full frame 5D with only slight vignetting at full wide, no distortion at full zoom and absolutely no fringing, CA, purple weirdness or any coloration as discribed by others. This lens was purchased from B&H Photo and perhaps they returned earlier shipments of faulty production models. The first job using this lens was a family, on the beach, with heavy backlighting. I expected to get back to my office and dive into photoshop to begin "fixing" the routine fringing, and edge ghosting I would normally expect to find with these lighting conditions. Much to my pleasure, there was NONE. That alone is worth the price of admission.

I wonder if those reporting terrible results with this lens possibly have faulty 20D cameras. Perhaps stating that their "kit lens" provides better results could be due to that particular lens having been calibrated to their body. Maybe Canon is calibrating this new L lens for 5D bodies. I've never been completely satisfied with my 20D's focusing ability when using my Canon 28-135 IS. However, I purchased a Tamron 18-200 which is WAY sharper than the 28-135...but it's also way slow at F5.6.

I'm still waiting for someone to make a 40-240mm f2.8 with IS and L quality glass. I'll be at the PMA beggin to anyone that will listen.


Jan 13, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add SurfSessn to your Buddy List  
Al_10D
Offline
Buy and Sell: On

Registered: Dec 7, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1868
Review Date: Jan 13, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,041.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Fantastic IS, great range, very good colors, sharp.
Cons:
Slow.

The best walkaround zoom.

Jan 13, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Al_10D to your Buddy List  
mediluz
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 13, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

Pros: Focal extension and IF cover most situations on FF and make 2.8 unnecessary; distortion acceptable; ideal for single-lens use, surely better than cheaper kit-lenses
Cons:
Not only vignetting is remarkable, but an overall underexposure is well evident at f 4 (maybe narrower than indicated), especially at extreme lenghts. Rather heavy, although well-balnaced. Rather stiff zoom ring.

Rather obviously, performances of prime lenses cannot be achieved, but thinking of how less material has to be brought aorund or changed and how little shots are lost everywhere anytime, one should remind that strictly optical excellence may become a secondary issue for the result of a nice or irrepeteable picture.

Jan 13, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add mediluz to your Buddy List  
rd4tile
Offline
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Mar 22, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 2234
Review Date: Jan 11, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 10 

Pros: Range, Size, IS, Build
Cons:
not f2.8, distortion @ 24mm

If you like butter on your bread you'll love this lens on the 5D. Every bit as sharp as the 24-70 or the Tamron 28-75 (including the corners). And this sharpness starts at f4. AF is fast and accurate on my 5D even in low light and the IS is lightning fast. This may be the ultimate street / landscape zoom for handheld work.

Jan 11, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add rd4tile to your Buddy List  




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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
526 927843 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:  20 · 21 · 22 · 23 · 24 · 25 · 26 · 27 · 28 · 29 · 30>  next