lightskyland wrote:
I just ordered the FE 24-105/4 from Greentoe.. I'll do some comparisons to my Minolta 28-135/4-4.5 which I occasionally use when I don't have the time to change lenses. Whichever one is better I will keep and the other will go up for sale.
I'm considering ordering from Greentoe as well. At what price did your offer get accepted at ?
The 24-105mm arrived yesterday and I'm very impressed.
It is noticeably sharper than my 24-70mm ƒ2.8 ZA at comparable apertures, sharper than the 12-24mm at 24mm, and sharper than the 35mm ƒ2.8, especially on the edges.
Here's a Flickr album with a few shots around the neighborhood - 24-105mm Album
My local camera store just got these in and I took some test shots and opened them up in Lightroom. Yes the lens profile is there so it corrected the distortion and vignette. Very impressed with this lens after looking at the shots I took in store. Very sharp on the wide end and the corners looked good. Long end was good as well but I have a feeling it was not quite as sharp as the wide end. I shot everything in store at f4
MikeEvangelist wrote:
The 24-105mm arrived yesterday and I'm very impressed.
It is noticeably sharper than my 24-70mm ƒ2.8 ZA at comparable apertures, sharper than the 12-24mm at 24mm, and sharper than the 35mm ƒ2.8, especially on the edges.
Lovely images, especially the first, the stand-alone in purple/blue. The smoke and lighting is so unusual that it would be especially nice to have the technical data, including any filters, to understand what the lens is doing.
MikeEvangelist wrote:
Since Fred and Guy are always showing off the Southwest sunshine, I thought I'd counter with a bit of Minnesota overcast.
Minnesota overcast is just nice, and it looks pretty much like conditions here in Norway, Northern Europe, so I get an idea how the lens could work for me. Thanks for sharing your samples on flickr! I appreciate it!
MikeEvangelist wrote:
The 24-105mm arrived yesterday and I'm very impressed.
It is noticeably sharper than my 24-70mm ƒ2.8 ZA at comparable apertures, sharper than the 12-24mm at 24mm, and sharper than the 35mm ƒ2.8, especially on the edges.
Here's a Flickr album with a few shots around the neighborhood - 24-105mm Album
Mike, I'm not seen much LoCA on your images. Is that your impression?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Mike, I'm not seen much LoCA on your images. Is that your impression?
Haven't stressed it much, but from what I've seen, it's very well controlled. Here's a couple shots which I'd expect to have LoCA, but they're pretty clean. (full size can be seen in this album - 24-105mm samples
MikeEvangelist wrote:
Haven't stressed it much, but from what I've seen, it's very well controlled. Here's a couple shots which I'd expect to have LoCA, but they're pretty clean. (full size can be seen in this album - 24-105mm samples
Pretty low LoCA.
In some of your other image samples, I see some corrected lateral CA though. (gray outlining around areas of high contrast towards the edges)
Fred Miranda wrote:
In some of your other image samples, I see some corrected lateral CA though. (gray outlining around areas of high contrast towards the edges)
It wasn't bad though.
This time of year, when all the leaves are off the trees around here, I tend to get fringing in a lot of shots.
As you've noted, the VC 40mm has an especially hard time.
100% crop from the VC 40mm showing uncorrected fringing
MikeEvangelist wrote:
Here's another example from the 24-105. Wide open at 105mm.
I'm not sure if you use Lightroom, but with most native lenses, it removes CA automatically even if we don't checkmark the "Remove Chromatic Aberration" option. The only way to know about CA performance is to check for gray outlining around the edges of high contrast. (Or tape the lens contacts)
I do think the 24-105/4 G is well corrected for CA for a zoom and it looks to be better than the Canon in this regard. (I had the Canon version for many years)
Thanks, Mike. It's better than passable from what we've seen so far. Bright colors, good impact and contrasty. The old winter trees and bright sky is a lens torture test, very unkind of you to post the CV 40mm image, that was a low blow, lol. I've seen much worse too, at least you have definition in small motifs on the branchlets still intact, not huge visible extra line thickening.
Good pictures but nothing special about them. Zoom ring is stiff, bokeh is dirty (lots of activity in bokeh balls with nervous backgrounds, especially in event environments), and not quick to focus on older bodies like the a7II. I also didn't like the built in lens correction profile. I'll pass on all of the F4 trinity. I used it for event work, portraits, product photography, interiors and video.
The 24-70GM gave me special images. I tend to gravitate to zooms that can replace a prime. The 24-105 performs like a traditional zoom lens, so don't sell your primes for this.
I was considering the 24-105 to replace my 24-70 f/4...but really I just need to bite the bullet and buy the 24-70 GM and call it a day. It's ability to handle lower light due to f/2.8 yet be sharp across the frame when stopped down for landscapes makes it versatile for me.
Good pictures but nothing special about them. Zoom ring is stiff, bokeh is dirty (lots of activity in bokeh balls with nervous backgrounds, especially in event environments), and not quick to focus on older bodies like the a7II. I also didn't like the built in lens correction profile. I'll pass on all of the F4 trinity. I used it for event work, portraits, product photography, interiors and video.
The 24-70GM gave me special images. I tend to gravitate to zooms that can replace a prime. The 24-105 performs like a traditional zoom lens, so don't sell your primes for this.
Sorry, can't be the everything is roses guy. ...Show more →
Thanks, this is really helpful after hearing that the 24-105 is in some ways superior to the 24-70 GM (hard to believe and the images I saw in all honesty didn't support that).
I need that prime-level rendering so will stick with my GM zooms.
