about | support
home
 

Search Used

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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
517 902436 Jul 19, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
86% of reviewers $1,515.98
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.48
8.04
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
          
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
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 7, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 1797
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: 2218
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  
Peter Dhaeze
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 10, 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 10, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Has a practical zoomrange on my 20D. Nice f/4 in combination with IS 3 stops. At ISO 800 useable handheld shots in musea and theatre. Well build, not to heave. In good balance with battery pack. Fast and quit AF. No cornerproblems due to APS-C sensor.
Cons:
Had been better with 20-85mm



Jan 10, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Peter Dhaeze to your Buddy List  
Sanderman
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 8, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 9, 2006 Recommend? | Price paid: $1,199.00

 
Pros: IS actually works pretty well. Solid build quality.
Cons:
CA, purple fringing and otehr abberations on FF.

I tried this lens on my 5D and was extremely disappointed in its overall performance. Soft corners/edges, CA and rather severe purple fringing. It went back and I'm now using primes only on the body and the difference in overall picture quality is huge. I do not think this lens is suitable for a FF body unless you are extremely forgiving.

Jan 9, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Sanderman to your Buddy List  
Sanderman
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 8, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
Review Date: Jan 8, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,199.00

 
Pros: Good AF, IS works as advertised.
Cons:
Excessive distortions on FF cameras.

I tried this lens on my 5D and found it lacking in almost every respect. Soft overall, very soft in the corners and around the edges of the frame. Worse still was CA and purple fringing befitting a $400 5 MP point and shoot special. We're talking, tree branches with purple fringing as thick as the branches themselves! Add in extremely obvious vignetting and a bit of barrel distortion and it's difficult to fathom how this lens got classed as an L. To be fair, I would expect these defects to be far less apparent on small sensor cameras like the 20D or Rebel. But frankly, I feel this lens is simply not suitable for an FF camera like the 5D. I took it back and am buying nothing but primes for it instead.

Jan 8, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Sanderman to your Buddy List  
johnhopkins
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Aug 17, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 59
Review Date: Jan 6, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Very close optically to 24-70L. Excellent performance wide open. Lightweight. IS. Range.
Cons:
Slight corner softness at 70mm (relative to 24-70L) and longer. High price for f/4.

A friend of mine recently got a 24-105L and I tested it against my 24-70L and 16-35L. I set up the tripod and took test shots at 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 70mm at f-stops between f/4 and f/11. For good measure I took extra test shots at f/4.5 and f/5 expecting this to be the range where differences would be most apparent. I tested with a 1.6x crop sensor using 8.2 mega pixel JPEGs with no post-processing.

My summary result is that 24-105L and the 24-70L were almost identical optically at 24mm and 50mm. I gave the 24-105L a slight advantage at 35mm and the 24-70L a bigger advantage at 70mm. Both standard zooms were consistently slightly ahead of the 16-35L at 24mm and 35mm. The thing that surprised me most was the excellent sharpness of the 24-105L wide open in the 24-50mm range.

At 24mm the 24-105L was a bit better at f/4 and the 24-70L a bit better at f5.6-f/11. But the differences to the eye were very slight. Using averaged JPEG file sizes as an objective proxy for resolution the differences at 24mm was a negligible 0.4% advantage to the 24-105L. Call it a draw.

At 35mm the 24-105L was a winner at all apertures from f/4 to f/8. JPEG file sizes produced by the new zoom averaged 2.8% larger. Comparing the images carefully those from the 24-105 seemed very slightly sharper but also a little brighter.

At 50mm there was nothing between the 24-70L and the 24-105L. The averaged JPEG files were practically identical and my eye could not see any difference in the images. I took some further test shots with a 50mm 1.4 prime and it was no surprise to see that it was a bit better than either zoom. JPEGs produced with the 50mm prime averaged 3.5% larger than the zooms and the eye could see some finer details.

At 70mm the 24-70L was a clear winner at all apertures especially f/4 through f/8. The JPEGs from the 24-70L averaged 6.5% larger than the 24-105L and this is readily visible to the eye. The 24-70L was a bit sharper in the centre but the bigger difference was the corners (even using a 1.6x sensor) where the 24-105L was noticeable softer than the 24-70L. I couldn’t test with a full-frame camera but I can imagine the corners could only get worse. At 105mm there was again decent centre sharpness but some softness in the corners.

My conclusion is that the 24-105L is a very good lens especially at the shorter focal lengths coming very close to the 24-70L optically. Which medium range L zoom you prefer probably comes down to your desire for the wide-aperture ‘look’ of f/2.8 versus the low weight, IS and usefulness of the extra range of the 24-105L within the context of your lens collection. For those who want only one high quality lens that never comes off the camera, and is not heavy; the 24-105L is a great choice.


Jan 6, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add johnhopkins to your Buddy List  
mungo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jan 6, 2005
Location: Finland
Posts: 2
Review Date: Jan 5, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharpness wide open & edge to edge (on 5D), contrast & image quality in general, handling, build, IS, range (on 5D)
Cons:
Vignetting, not internal zooming, sometimes could use f2.8 (what a monster that would be) :-), tad expensive, closest focusing distance could be better

I got this lens just before christmas, because I needed something of a standard zoom for 5D. I must say, I have been more than pleased! The image quality this baby can produce is just amazing! Sharpness, contrast, bokeh, range - all just clicks into place with 5d.

The IS is also very nice. I have been able to take portraits in lighting situations that otherwise could have needed flash or other additional light source. It really has been worth that 3 stops, even when shooting people. (ok, not sports) This compared to 5Ds excellent high iso makes the lens really attractive.

Downsides like vignetting is there, but very rarely manifests it self in my style of shooting. I also haven´t noticed any distortion other have mentioned. Maybe if I shot more architecture.. Sometimes I also miss the somewhat better (although very slight) macro advantage I had with 17-40 on 10D, but luckily I very rarely need that.

My recommendation: 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...)


Jan 5, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add mungo to your Buddy List  
Desmo
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Aug 20, 2005
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 97
Review Date: Jan 4, 2006 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Typical L quality, not so big and heavy, sharpness, IS which bring a lot more versatility, perfect range for a walkaround lens ( at least for my style of photography...)
Cons:
zoom ring a bit stiff ( but my lens is only 3 hours old...)

I visited my favorite shop tonight, looking for a new camera bag... Conversation went on the 24-105. I said "Impossible to find one" ( They have been all withdrawn, here in Switzerland, after "the problems" came out), the salesman answered "I've got one..." He told me Canon had just begun to re-ship brand new lenses with all defects corrected.... As I had my 20D with me I tested it right away. It was night already, so I could only take a few pictures inside the shop, under bad artificial lighting. All at f4. And came the big surprise: no vignetting, virtually no distortion, perfectly sharp, beautiful colours !!!!!!!! So you guessed it : I ended up spending much much more than I expected.... Back home I did a few more trials. On a shot taken at 24mm/f4 I tried PTLens, then I got a distorted picture !!!! It might be a totally different story on a FF slr/dslr, but on the 20d crop-sensor I can't find any distortion !!! Pictures are very sharp, I'll need more testing to judge it but it seems to be at least as good as my 70-200 f4 ( a very good copy) And IS is incredible as always... I have a very usable picture at 105mm 1/5 sec.... and definitely sharp at 1/25. I'm sure this lens is going to be a lot on my camera !!!!! BTW I've got the bag too :-)

Jan 4, 2006
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Desmo to your Buddy List  
sberley
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 30, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 30, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Wonderful lens. Very sharp, good color...
Cons:
Would be great if it were 2.8

I love this lens - just got back from 17 days in Vietnam and Cambodia using this lens on a 20D.

Check out my photos and see for yourself what this lens can do...

http://pix.berley.com/gallery/1047398/4/49432483
http://pix.berley.com/gallery/1047398/7/49434328
http://pix.berley.com/gallery/1047398/11/49435719

Steve


Dec 30, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add sberley to your Buddy List  
supershot
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 30, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 30, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Sharp , sharp good colour I love this lens
Cons:
none

I love this lens , good colour sharp from 24-105 .the image stabilizer works great
I use this lens on my Canon 20d I also own 16-35 L 2.8 and
100-400 L in my book L stand for quality .
I tried many other lenses but I am totaly satisfied with my three L lenses ...


Dec 30, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add supershot to your Buddy List  
steveprice
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 3, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 38
Review Date: Dec 30, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: Analysis of December reviews
Cons:

Some people like this lens, some dont. So how does it stack up by type of camera? I did some sums. I counted who likes it, who doesn't and what sort of kit they have i.e. full frame or crop sensor. In Dec 05 (up to 28th: aVOlanche) there are 31 reviews, this is the breakdown:

Full frame (i.e. 5D owners): 4 out of 4 dislike
Crop sensor: 17 likes, 3 dislikes
Kit not indicated: 5 likes, 2 dislikes.(1)

(1) Reading between the lines I suspect those people whot did not indicate their kit are sub-full frame users. The full frame users who dislike it do so largely because of the vignetting.

My vignetting tests by f stop:
24mm@f4 severe vignetting, correctable to moderate
24mm@f5.6 moderate, correctable to slight
24mm@f8 slight, correctable to very slight
24mm@f11 very slight, correctable to imperceptible
24mm@f16 imperceptible, correctable to none
24mm@f22 none visible

(Severe, moderate, slight and very slight all mean visible).

My vignetting tests by focal length:
24mm@f4 severe vignetting, correctable to moderate
28mm@f4 slight, correctable to very slight
35mm@f4 imperceptible, correctable to none
50mm none
70mm none
105mm none

Cropping test
Instead of correcting the vignetting why not just crop it out using Photoshop? Taking the worst instance of vignetting i.e. 24mm@f4, the original image size of 14.6x9.7 inches had to to be cropped to 12.3x7.5 inches. The new size gives about the same angle of view as the 35mm lens setting or, I suspect, a 1.6 crop! Even after correcting as much as possible for vignetting before cropping I still ended up with about the same size picture, 12.4x7.9 inches. Whats the point of having a full frame sensor at twice the cost if you have to restrict your focal length or crop it to a sub-full frame equivalent.

Shooting conditions
I do a lot of architectural photography and my test shots were of an interior with white walls. I used the camera on its default settings i.e. fine quality jpegs etc.

Post production
My citeria when correcting in Photoshop CS2 (v9), using the vignetting sliders under the lens correction filter option, was not to let whites burn out or to introduce other artefacts as a result of correcting e.g. colour distortions. I did not other correction.

Results
At 24mm, on a 5D, vignetting is apparent at all apertures except f22 and only fully correctable under my test conditions at f16.

Conclusion
Lovers of this lens are sub-full frame. If vignetting is a problem for you and you shoot full frame then test this lens under your typical shot situations first. If like me you like shooting architectural interiors, i.e. wide open in low light then get used to vignetting or go sub-full frame. This is a shame because by going sub-full frame many people are missing the joys of wide angle photography. Some preliminary shots showed that spot on exposure is imperative to keeping vegnetting down to these levels.

Addendum
I knocked this out fairly quickly. If you see any flaws in my argument I will be delighted to hear from you. I am looking for reasons to keep the lens and the 5D.




Dec 30, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add steveprice to your Buddy List  

   



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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
517 902436 Jul 19, 2014
Recommended By Average Price
86% of reviewers $1,515.98
Build Quality Rating Price Rating Overall Rating
9.48
8.04
9.0
24-105lisusm


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