 |
|
|
Gunzorro
Online
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Aug 27, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 4390
|
|
Review Date: Sep 26, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 6
|
|
Pros:
|
Good focal range.
|
|
Cons:
|
Disappointing optical performance.
|
|
|
I bought used to see what the lens would be like. It offers a useful range, but unfortunately, not optical performance that can be used for top quality, or even good enough for professional work. Spend the extra to get a 24-105L.
|
|
 Sep 26, 2012
|
|
unclechuck
Offline
Image Upload: On
Registered: Mar 12, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 382
|
|
Review Date: Feb 19, 2012
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp overall, esp f/8 and beyond. Good color.
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
You can learn a lot on FM forums and of course, reviews.
I bought this lens here after seeing references to the 24-85 in individual posts; looked it up and found the 95% user recommendation.
95% cannot be wrong and the lens I got proves it. Seriously folks $150 +/- ?
You can't afford not to have it --- if you own it you will use a lot more than you ever expected --- and marvel at the output.
To all who pointed me this direction, a sincere Thank You!
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2012
|
|
Gerald Johnson
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 23, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Oct 13, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $129.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, performance, weight
|
|
Cons:
|
plastic
|
|
|
I bought this lens on Ebay for $129 wanting a lighter, smaller alternative to my Tokina 28-70mm f/2.6-2.8 lens. I use the lens on my Canon 1D MKII camera which has a 1.3x crop factor, making the effective focal length of this lens 31mm to 110mm. Unlike the huge and heavy Tokina lens this lens is small and light and can stay on my Canon 1D MKII without the camera falling forward at rest. That alone was a pleasant surprise.
But even more pleasing are the pictures that this little gem produces. I've owned the Canon 17-40mm L lens as well as the 28mm 1.8, 50mm 1.4, and 85mm 1.8 Canon primes, so I do have some basis for comparison. All I can say is if you're thinking about this lens...buy it! Yes, the L series lenses have a better build quality and the primes are faster...but for general shooting this lens is a steal.
Forget all the technical mumbo jumbo. Buy this lens and see if you like it. I think you will.
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2011
|
|
DemonAstroth
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 9, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 99
|
|
Review Date: Apr 5, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Size, sharpness, cost, relatively fast.
|
|
Cons:
|
No IS, older design.
|
|
|
This lens can be very sharp. Most of the time is very sharp, and it is very inexpensive. This is one of those lenses one needs to know about if one is shooting crop.
The 24mm wide end is significantly wider than the 28 of other alternatives, it is USM, and at least on a crop sensor (7D) the images are sharp.
However, it feels like an old lens, there is no IS, the zoom and focus ring are not well dampened and are sort of small.
Regardless of the few negatives, the lens is an excellent value and has a very useful focal length. It is very sharp and if one can put up with the lack of IS and the non-constant aperture, it can truly shine.
|
|
|
Apr 5, 2011
|
|
Snopchenko
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 18, 2010
Location: Russia
Posts: 1755
|
|
Review Date: Sep 29, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $225.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
great range, sharp, compact,
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality not stellar
|
|
|
This is a great walkaround lens on my 1D Mark II N. Very good focal length range means that I can put it on the camera and take nothing else with me unless I really need to shoot ultra wide angles.
Even when used alongside the 70-200 and the wideangle lenses it finds its uses. This lens is really sharp when slightly stopped down (I'm yet to use it wide open so I'll hold my judgement), the colors are maybe not as good as the 70-200/2.8 L IS but not objectionably so. The barrel distortion is noticeable at 24mm. At longer focal length I have to be careful to avoid motion blur, being used to stabilized longer lenses.
The lens is very compact and this helps with stealthier shooting in some areas. The double extending barrel looks flimsy though and the lens will probably collect dust through the holes between its elements though. Ring USM is a pleasure to use, always fast and precise and silent to boot.
For the money, it can't be beaten. Maybe FF owners would find the border quality lacking but most lenses don't fare well on FF at wide apertures, or at all, so there's little to be desired. It's a pity that Canon has discontinued this lens in order to shove $1000+ L lenses down our throats. Me, I'm lucky to have snatched this little gem.
|
|
|
Sep 29, 2010
|
|
Vandergaze
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 19, 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 10, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $170.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Extremely sharp already wide open both at 24mm and 85mm, Vignetting at widest aperture, pincushion abberation
|
|
Cons:
|
champagner silver looks ridiculous on my 5D, little plasticy, simply not a strong light-giver, minimum focussing distance at 0.5m not always enough
|
|
|
Completely sharp. Great Bokeh
|
|
|
Jun 10, 2010
|
|
altair2020
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 12, 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 29, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Small, light weight, good range
|
|
Cons:
|
optical quality could be better
|
|
|
I use this lense on a 5D-I. It is small, light and the 24-85 range is very useful on a full frame camera. Optically it is OK but not great. For landscape shots it needs to be stopped down to F11, and even then the corners still look smeared at most focal lengths. Color and contrast are not as good as my 17-40 but this can be fixed in post processing. Pictures look sharp up to 12 x 18. At 20 x 30 loss of sharpness and definition are obvious at close viewing distances. High contrast scenes such as snow against blue sky or rock show noticeable color fringing. Not a bad lense if used within it’s limitations: shoot raw, F11 or 16, don’t enlarge beyond 12 x 18 or 13 x 19 unless the photo is to be view from a distance.
|
|
|
Apr 29, 2010
|
|
primeshot
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 21, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Nov 1, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Nice travel lens. Light. Good optics. Good range on a full frame camera.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some distortion on the wide end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 1, 2009
|
|
nikoniand70
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 30, 2008
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 17, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
good quality
nice heavy lens
zoom ring and usm fast focus , silent
|
|
Cons:
|
none
|
|
|
i have the "goldfinger" edition , the silver / champagne coloured version orgiinaly designed for the Eos Ix aps camera but now on my Canon eos 300D.
the zoom ring is one of the things i bought it for, and the positive reviews on other fora on the internet
This lens weighs 300g and that is part of the metal lens bajonet and the usm motor , the range on a cropped body like the 300 D is 38.4mm - 136mm which means that you lose the wide angle on the Canon eos 300 D
the build quality is a lot better than the ef-s 18-55 IS , but orogininaly priced about 200 dolar higher, you notice it is a better lens.
|
|
|
May 17, 2009
|
|
willis
Offline
Buy and Sell: On
Registered: Jul 23, 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 457
|
|
Review Date: Jan 29, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Small light, nice range, quite sharp even wide open, good contrast, decent colour, very fast focus.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some distortion, lateral chromatic aberration, not L build, no IS.
|
|
|
Excellent for the money, good performance even on FF. Zoom a bit wobbly but as with most of Canons mid range consumer zooms it seems pretty tough despite this. Mine is six years old and still going strong.
Shame it's a bit slow and has no IS but what do you expect at this price.
|
|
|
Jan 29, 2009
|
|
HMZRHS
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 10, 2007
Location: Brunei
Posts: 62
|
|
Review Date: Jan 8, 2009
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
colour,light weight,flexibility in mm range.sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
I got this lens from my Canon SLR IXUS (APS film) and i hook it up to my 1D MKII.Recommed for landscape photography and wedding events.
samples with 1D MKII
http://suprasonic.aminus3.com/image/2008-12-29.html
|
|
|
Jan 8, 2009
|
|
palombian
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 22, 2008
Location: Belgium
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Sep 22, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $120.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
sharp, fast USM, light, cheap
|
|
Cons:
|
CA in corners, wobbles a bit
|
|
|
I have this lens for 2 years on a 400D in a set with EF-S 10-22, EF100 2.8 macro, EF100-400L, and the results are comparable
In correction to my previous review, it is much sharper than the EF50 1.8 at f:8
CA in corners, and somewhat less color saturation than an L-lens are the only minusses, and Canon DPP does not know this lens for corrections
Do not miss IS
See no reason yet to upgrade to EF24-105 L
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2008
|
|
peddr
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 28, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 88
|
|
Review Date: Sep 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Great ,lightweight walk around lens. Better than expected quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing really. There is a bit of zoom creep, but on a short zoom like this who cares.
|
|
|
I bought this lens for a song on eBay. I have been pleasantly surprised by it. It is light, fast focusing and has a decent range. I own the 24-105 L but hesitated to take it out on long days because of its weight. This is a great walkaround lens. Sure 17mm would be better, but it is only 24. I tried the 17-85mm and found it softer and much heavier.
I find the build quality to be better that the 28-135, so it's not an issue. On a crop camera the results are quite good.
|
|
|
Sep 13, 2008
|
|
stepvan
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 1, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 1, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
image quality was better than I expected
|
|
Cons:
|
build quality was a bit worse than I expected
|
|
|
I acquired a used copy of the 24-85mm EF USM as part of a larger deal. It was a thow-in. I wasn't looking for one, but now that I've got it, I played around with it. First impression was that build quality was really not great. The barrel slops around dramatically, and if the held vertically, the zoom will slide right out to the extent of its range.
However, when I looked at the pictures I took (30D) I was pleasantly surprised. Many of the shots are quite sharp, color and contrast are nice. The focal length (equivalent to 38-136mm on a 1.6 sensor) is a pretty handy range for a walk-around lens. it's small and lightweight. USM AF works fast. Very easy to live with while travelling.
It's certainly not an 'L' lens, and it's not very fast; but, it's a pretty decent compromise (price/performance) for a travel lens.
|
|
|
Jul 1, 2008
|
|
d4ni3lz
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 25, 2008
Location: Indonesia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: May 25, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $250.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
price, light, good range, USM, deliver nice images, all round lens, and sharp
|
|
Cons:
|
Zoom creep, wobble, images soft in wide open
|
|
|
nice walking lens and the price is really good for this lens.
The sharpness is good, maybe not great as L lens, but really acceptable (maybe above your expectations).
|
|
|
May 25, 2008
|
|
elfanucchi
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 5, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 117
|
|
Review Date: Mar 13, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $125.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Good all around zoom - excellent price value.
|
|
Cons:
|
Lens Zoom tube is a bit soft.
|
|
|
My most used lens on 20D / 10 D.
Best for people face shoots and softer look portraits/fashion on 1.6x cameras - OK for Landscapes.
|
|
|
Mar 13, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
59
|
171310
|
Sep 26, 2012
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
95% of reviewers
|
$246.28
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
7.45
|
8.46
|
7.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
