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 904529 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:  30 · 31 · 32 · 33  next
          
painterdood
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 25, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 4
Review Date: Dec 17, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros: has an L rating ????? Is heavy ?? Looks cool?? Could be used as a paper wieght ? You can pretend you have a pro lense ?
Cons:
sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooft

Went back to dealer to see if he had any more "sharp" copies. Mine was soft. A pro was in the shop along with a wedding photog of some 20 years. They helped me check through the 4 other copies in the shop ..Guess what ..my kit lense 18-55- beat every other copy for sharpness on my 20D. I bet most people have this lense and think its awesome but its may be a false L lense security they are flyin on. This lense was L for looser in that shop. The saleman could believe what he was seeing, He was shocked and I am not over stating this. He had believed ( as I ) there was no way the kit lense would beat the 24-104. But alas ..it did ..and in some copies of the 24-105 ..hugely so.
I would wager if you check yours carefully against your kit lense at 35 mm- shoot a price tag or some item with lettering on it from 8 or so feet ( no flash) focus on the tag then crop it 100% - you will see the kit lense drop kicks this lense. Only one other 24-105 came close ..but a 24-70 2.8 L we tested bested the kit lense at that setting.
Sure that range is the sweet spot for the kit lense ..but give me a break ..a 1200 dollar lense should be able perform better than it for basic sharpness. Canon has quality control problems ..or this lense is just a huge lame duck. ..a econo grade lense sporting an L tag. Maybe Canon is hoping people will not notice ..maybe I just hit a batch of lenses that were ALL sub-standard ?? who knows ..but I am looking elsewhere now.


Dec 17, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add painterdood to your Buddy List  
erlingmm
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Feb 20, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 10
Review Date: Dec 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,249.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Good walk-around range for daylight shooting, fast AF, sharp
Cons:
A bit pricey

There seems to be som variation in quality of this lens. I had the 1st (flare) generation, and returned it, mainly because I found it soft. My new copy is very sharp.

Dec 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add erlingmm to your Buddy List  
joepapa
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Jun 17, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 1
Review Date: Dec 15, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,199.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: Image stabalization works amazing. Lens is very sharp even wide open and the extra reach makes this lens perfect for my work (weddings and dance comps). I find the lens to have less distortion at 24mm than my 24-70L, even on my Mark II at 1.3 crop. Very nice lens.
Cons:
None

This lens exceeds my expectations. Being that there are some reviews that are a bit negative, I was hesitant to purchase this lens. I do not regret it at all. I like this lens much more than my 24-70L and the extra reach is awesome. Paired up with my 70-200 2.8L, I feel covered for all my shooting situations. Distortion at 24mm always bothered me on the 24-70 but this lens doesn't bow straight lines IMHO as much. Image stabalization is nearly silent. Much better than my Nikon 70-200VR lens I sold 3 years ago. Build quality is amazing and the zoom and focus rings are as smooth as silk. I also like it that Canon finally recessed the AF and IS buttons so you don't accidentally bump them off. I highly recommend this lens.

Dec 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add joepapa to your Buddy List  
painterdood
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 25, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 4
Review Date: Dec 15, 2005 Recommend? | Price paid: Not Indicated

 
Pros:
Cons:

small update.
In reviewing my shots I see that the 24-105 does show good sharpness colour and contrast, in good light. There it outpulls the kit lense somewhat.
I didn't notice this because the majority of my test shots were in less than optimal light. (gloomy days) What I do see however is in lower light things degrade for the 24-105 and the advantage over the plasteeeek econo lense seems to evaporate.
hummm is the diff worth the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$...I am revuink da situvation ..


Dec 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add painterdood to your Buddy List  
painterdood
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 25, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 4
Review Date: Dec 15, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 5 

 
Pros: well built, super fast, almost completely silent focus. Good walk around range and nice wieght. Looks great-like it could actually take great pictures
Cons:
not sharp sharp -colour and contrast and "pop" less than expected from an L series.

Just got this lense and have shot about a hundred plus shots through it against the 18-55 $100 kit lense doing a shot to shot comparision on a tripod plus walking around in varied lighting etc.
I was shocked to find the 24-105 not only did not trouce that punny plastic offering I was trying hard to upgrade from, it was extrodinarily hard to declare an overall winner!!! YIKES!!
The 24-105, like the kit lense, is -"sharp enough" -but 100% and 200% crops showed that its sharpness was limited..just like the kit lenses. Good enough for small prints but unacceptable (to my eye given the price) if you want to venture beyond that. Its colour was marginally better though perhaps too warm.
Now I admit I am super critical. The lense may be functioning just fine in most people's eyes. I am often declare blaring imperfections where others would say none exist. Be that as it may ..in my eyes this lense is functioning at an econo lense standard..not an L series standard.
Maybe this experience is telling me I am a primes guy ..maybe my expectations are way high for a zoom and this is as good as it gets. I will exchange it and see.
I would add this one final word.
Photographs are truly not so much about the lense or camera as the one taking the picture ..BUT fine tools make for better pictures. I thought the 24 -105 would be such a tool..It looks and feels the part ..but alas ..it aint.


Dec 15, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add painterdood to your Buddy List  
molson
Online
Buy and Sell: On



Registered: Oct 29, 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 10516
Review Date: Dec 12, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 6 

 
Pros: Nice size and weight - makes a great travel lens
Cons:
Sharpness is only so-so, vignetting is bad at all focal lengths, noticeable CA, distortion

Overpriced, considering the slow f/stop and mediocre optical qualities. It should be priced more in line with Canon's 17-40 f4L and 70-200 f4L lenses.

Dec 12, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add molson to your Buddy List  
ernst_b
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 11, 2005
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 11, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Outstanding Zoom range, Excellent IS, Fast and silent AF
Cons:
4.0, Image quality is not excellent (worse than my Tamron 28-75), bad focus at low light

I don't have a clear opinion about this lens. On one side it was the lense I waited for about 5 months because of the specifications. On the other side, I wanted to replace my very sharp tamron 28-75 and the image quality of the 24-105 is worse.

Dec 11, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add ernst_b to your Buddy List  
smac
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Sep 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 11
Review Date: Dec 10, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,160.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Extremely high resolution at all focal lengths. Excellent contrast and color. Sturdy build.
Cons:
The laws of physics and optics apply.

I was only going to test this lens at the dealer's to see if I could live with the 2 issues that have come up often around these forums: vignetting and distortion. The dealer offered me a good price and guaranteed return if I didn't like it. I tested it (on 5d) against my prime lenses in the applicable range and was immediately impressed. I have a stellar, extremely sharp 24 f1.4, which has been my favorite lens since I got it. Imagine my surprise when the 24-105mm beat it at every aperture. The same was (very) true with my 16-35mm f2.8L and 70-200 f2.8L. It beat my 50mm f1.4 and matched my 85 f1.8 and 100 macro. Had I read here that this would end up the sharpest lens in my collection (in this range), I would not have believed it. Vignetting and barrel distortion is not an issue in most circumstances and is easily dealt with in CS2. Coming from darkroom days, I always burned the corners as matter of style preference anyway. This lens is going to be on my camera often and for a very long time. The optical engineering that has gone into achieving success in this lens is prodigious. If you're on the fence over this lens, as I was, wondering if the downside was worth the convenience of having my 3 favorite focal lengths in one lens, my advice is to get it immediatly and enjoy it in good health.

Dec 10, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add smac to your Buddy List  
californiajay
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 5, 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 166
Review Date: Dec 9, 2005 Recommend? no | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 7 

 
Pros: Good size, build quality, performance between 28 and 85mm
Cons:
Poor performance at 24mm (vignetting, distortion), less than stellar sharpness at 105mm, very expensive

Frankly, I don't see what the hoopla is over this lens other than the fact that the concept of a 24-105 L is very attractive.

In reality, I find this lens to be more a 28-85 F4 overpriced lens. It's real good if you only use it within that range. At 24mm there is too much flare and distortion for it to be considered a serious contender, and at 105 it does not perform nearly as well as either the 100 macro nor the 100 F2.


Dec 9, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add californiajay to your Buddy List  
dnenciu
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Jul 25, 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 621
Review Date: Dec 5, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 9 

 
Pros: sharp even at f4, great contrast, great build, IS
Cons:
nothing major

Not much to say that was not already said I use it on a 1d2 and on the 1.3x crop is a great walk around range. The image quality is very good and the lens is sharp even at f4. The build is great and the IS is amazing. I had the chance to play with a 24-70L but the weight, the shorter range and no IS made me chose this one.

Overall I really like it.


Dec 5, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add dnenciu to your Buddy List  
Scubashootah
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Mar 18, 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 68
Review Date: Dec 4, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,100.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Focal length range. Sharpness, contrast and saturation is comparable to the 24-70L. 3rd gen IS is excellent. Lightweight and weathersealing.
Cons:
Distortion, esp from 24-35. Vignetting (light fallout) in the corners on a 5D (which I returned).

It's a pity Canon doesn't upgrade all new lenses with the new 3rd Gen IS. It is a marvel.
I have the 24-70L which I'll keep but will be used perhaps 80% less now as this lens has replaced it on 1.25 crop 1D2 for non vignetting all purpose walkaround lens. You cannot downplay 280g less weight on a long trek, while it's wrapped round your neck or shoulders.
Testimony to the DWR sealing. I was caught in a thunderstorm while trekking, the rain so heavy visibility was down to maybe 15m at one point. My buddies with Tamron and Sigma had malfunctioning lenses due to leaks, while mine worked flawlessly in adverse weather conditions. That alone is worth $700.
AF speed is as fast as the 24-70L and the pictures are very comparable except for the distortion from 24-50. It's slight and acceptable but still is an annoyance. I think people shooting architecture may object to it but landscape and general photography wouldn't object to it as much.
Mine was under recall so I had Canon calibrate the repaired to my 1D2. It didn't affect the lens at all since it was a swap except for the mount. It's not a perfect lens but excellent build and good images offset the slight distortion that is prevalent in the wider lengths. It also vignettes pretty badly on a 5D, but I returned the camera and kept the lens. It is the best outdoor zoom lens available for my 1D2, for my needs.


Dec 4, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add Scubashootah to your Buddy List  
davetea
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Dec 7, 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 3
Review Date: Dec 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Weight, IS and range.
Cons:
Cost, f4, distortion.

Distortion is unacceptable at this price point and in an 'L' lens, as is the softness at 105. The Canon recall shows me that Canon have still not got their QC on the ball and also that I've used 3 of these lenses now and each one had a different feel on the zoom ring. 24>70 much better without doubt in most situations. This lens is probably best on a 20D and not a FF body, or maybe the best compromise would be the 1D with a 1.3x sensor. If you're using FF, try before you buy.

Dec 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Visit Homepage Add davetea to your Buddy List  
vario
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 6, 2005
Location: China
Posts: 90
Review Date: Dec 3, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,130.00 | Rating: 8 

 
Pros: Nice range, sharp (even wide open), great build
Cons:
Expensive!!

A good walkaround lens, even for the 350D. My copy is pretty sharp even at f/4 and quite contrasty so I don't have much complaint regarding the pictures it produces. However the steep price made me hesitate to give it a higher rating...

Dec 3, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add vario to your Buddy List  
evangellydonut
Offline
Image Upload: Off

Registered: Dec 2, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 16
Review Date: Dec 2, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,250.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: quieter, faster AF than 17-85 it replaced, excellent build quality
Cons:
slight corner softness at wide-open even on APS-C sensor

For those complaining about price, considering IS lens generally cost $500 more than none-IS version, the price is not THAT bad.

As for the lens extension, hey, it's still shorter than 24-70 at 24mm, and lighter too.

However, even on APS-C senor at 24mm (x1.6) and F4.0, I notice some corner softness, which makes me think that it's not going to be pretty on a FF... maybe 1.3 crop would be best.

I'm glad to have upgraded from 17-85, and if I really need the F2.8, there's always the option of going through multiple copies of the Tameron 28-75 F2.8 for ~$400 until I find a good copy :-)


Dec 2, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add evangellydonut to your Buddy List  
temalibero
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Sep 18, 2005
Location: Italy
Posts: 0
Review Date: Dec 2, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: Not Indicated | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Colore, risoluzione e contrasto incredibili! Lunghezza focale perfetta per 20D (IMHO)
Cons:
Costo (ma compri quello che paghi)

Questo zoom rende immagini eccezionali anche nelle situazioni più sfavorevoli. La qualità della luce che trasporta rende ai soggetti un volume ''3D'' pari obiettivi principali di elevata qualità. Il colore ed il contrasto sono quasi eccessivi. La risoluzione è ai massimi livelli, ora il limite sono gli 8,2 milioni di pixel della mia 20D. IS perfetta.
Ho riscontrato poco CA, anche nei test più estremi. Forse la mia copia di questo zoom e particolarmente fortunata o forse Canon nella seconda release di questo obiettivo, ha sistemato qualcosa di più che i problemi di flare?
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=PgComSmModDisplayAct&keycode=2112&fcategoryid=216&modelid=11924

Altamente suggerito anche agli amanti delle obiettivi principali.

PS con la 20D suggerisco l'uso del paraluce (lens hood) del 24L f1.4 se lo possedete.


Dec 2, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add temalibero to your Buddy List  
craigster
Offline
Image Upload: Off



Registered: Nov 19, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 5
Review Date: Dec 1, 2005 Recommend? yes | Price paid: $1,187.00 | Rating: 10 

 
Pros: Crisp pictures, IS a big plus, love the 24-105 range. This has become my walk-around lens.
Cons:
A bit heavy; don't like the significant extension in lens length for longer zoom.

I think Canon has a hit with this L quality lens. While I use it on my digital Rebel so the range is longer than marked, I find it to cover the vast majority of shooting situations I am normally in. Good bokeh as well. Over-all I find that the qulity of pictures is similar to my 70-200mm L lens - all of which adds up to a lot of lens for a lot of money...but worth it.

Dec 1, 2005
View profile View recent posts View reviews Add craigster to your Buddy List  

   



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

Buy from B&H Photo
Reviews Views Date of last review
517 904529 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:  30 · 31 · 32 · 33  next