 |
|
|
bj.fm
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 10, 2011
Location: Canada
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 10, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
|
So, what's up with the ratings for this lens? Cons include: Only f4; No IS; only 17-40mm. Did no one read the box before you bought this lens? I want a review of the quality of this lens ... not a dream list of your perfect lens (mine would be a 20-100mm f2.8 IS III (with no distortion and exquisite image quality that could also make lime cocktails and french toast). This site is particularly bad for this type of ``wish list'' reviews. Why not comment on the quality of the lens and leave the `great lens ... but it doesn't mow my grass or shovel my snow' comments for your own blogs! I am pretty well giving up on FM reviews ... sorry!
|
|
 Aug 10, 2011
|
|
JackyFong
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 27, 2006
Location: Singapore
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jun 26, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
The range it covers, built like a tank, good weight to balance between camer and lens, color it produces and cool optics.
|
|
Cons:
|
Hunts a bit in low light, a bit soft on wide end and IS needs to be switch off when used on a tripod.
|
|
|
I begin to realise I can no longer bring 2 DSLRs for event coverage like neighbourhood activities and weddings. My usual work cameras are 1Dmk2 with an EF 20mm f2.8, EF 50mm f1.8 and 7D plus EF 70-200mm f2.8 L. Since I am no longer young, I decided to go for a walkaround lens for these activities.
This EF 24-105mm L IS USM is what I need. Eventually I found a guy selling off this copy of mine still very much in mint conditions and flawless lens optics, just a bit of fading in the rubber. I solved the fading rubber by applying a few coat of black markers and immediately it looks new. Some more, the guy who sold me includes a B+W haze filter for me! I got a gem lens.
The second day bought in along to a beach for some quick test, on my 1Dmk2 with is 1.3x, it is not too wide unlike my 20mm and the longer focal length is acceptable in most conditions. Just like any Canon's wide angle, this one suffers a bit of clarity issues when using at f4 but a little unsharp mask will do the job.
On the 7D body, it fits well too. Onlt that I took sometime to adjust the AF adjustment; I had to test and set the AF to -7 before everything is working fine.
Image quality is superb then the normal lens I used. Comparable to my 70-200mm L.
Overall, it is a fine walkabout lens.
|
|
|
Jun 26, 2011
|
|
R10
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 79
|
|
Review Date: May 10, 2011
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
Pros:
|
focal range, AF speed, IS, overal performance and versatility
|
|
Cons:
|
rather low contrast; short end at f4 on FF with severe vignetting & corners could be better for an L-lens; sample variation!
|
|
|
Meanwhile I need to update my review about this lens.
So far, I used two samples of this lens on a 5D MkII. While I rated the first one an 8 (see my last review why), the 2nd one is considerably better concerning corner performance (better than the 1st one; full aperture corner performance on FF is still unworthy of Canon’s L league, but maybe I'm too much used to Leica standards).
So, the 24-105 can be better than that of my 1st review, but this is an embarrassing fact for Canon at the same time, ie for Canon’s quality control. Such sample variation is just an unreasonable demand, especially with lenses with such a price tag.
Still, as mentioned before, the 24-105 is a very useful and a good all-around lens. I still like the AF and IS performance very much.
I'd rate it now a 9 (can't edit the rating with this 2nd review!?)
|
|
|
May 10, 2011
|
|
R10
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 4, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 79
|
|
Review Date: Mar 9, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
focal range, AF speed, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
low contrast, on FF (esp short end & f/4) blurry corners and severe vignetting
|
|
|
I used this lens on a 5D MkII for about one year.
This is a very useful and good all-around lens! I liked the AF and IS performance very much!
I found it not that sharp though (less than the 24-70L which I had before and which I had to buy 3(!) samples of before I had a centered one) but I liked very much using it as a travel lens.
It is a pretty ‘weak L lens’ at full aperture (corners are totally useless, esp at the short end). It is pretty good at f/8 but I expected more from an L lens and I have no understanding for expensive zooms that are not able to produce at least ‘somehow useful’ corner sharpness at full aperture, even not on monitors or small prints (‘full-aperture-crisp-corner-zooms’ do exist, they feature no red ring and no L but a red dot and a name that starts with L...). This makes this lens rather useless for images with shallow DOF where the focused subject is outside the center area.
To prevent misunderstandings, I liked using this lens. It’s optical performance, focal range, rapid AF and good IS altogether make it a very versatile companion.
Finally, however, I sold it in favor of a Zeiss Contax-N Vario Sonnar 24-85 (Conurus converted to EOS) which, optically (color, contrast, tones, 3D, Bokeh), outperforms both the 24-70L and 24-105L with ease (with f/3.5-4.5, no IS, and a bit slower AF though).
|
|
|
Mar 9, 2011
|
|
agnesleung
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 12, 2010
Location: China
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 8, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
range, size and weight, IS, built, color.
|
|
Cons:
|
aperture
|
|
The range of this lens is perfect on my full frame camera Canon 5D mark II, it serves really well as a walk around lens, for it's nice range, weight & size, especially for landscapes and snaps.
The color of this lens is really good, bokeh is nice when taking close up on the tele range. The sharpness of this lens is pretty good, too. The built is solid, AF is fast...on par with my Canon 17-40mm f4L zoom lens. The build-in IS comes in handy in some low-light situation, such as shooting stills in the museum where no flash is allowed.
I brought it as the kit lens with 5D2, so the price is comparably more reasonable.
This lens is overall a VERY GOOD performer in many aspects, it can take EXCELLENT landscapes, too. However, this lens does not shine in low light situations, and the picture quality (e.g. bokeh, DOF) is no way comparable to those canon L primes with larger aperture, such as my Canon 35L and 200 2.8L.
I use this lens mostly for outdoor video taking, thanks for it's great range! I highly recommend this lens for video taking.
You can see some samples I took with this lens:
http://agnesleung.com/tag/canon-24-105-f4l/
|
|
|
Mar 8, 2011
|
|
tororo
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 26, 2010
Location: Japan
Posts: 49
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2011
|
|
edatc
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 17, 2009
Location: N/A
Posts: 75
|
|
Review Date: Feb 19, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Range, built quality, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
|
|
|
This lens has a phenomenal focal range... I have used it to shoot weddings, and events in tight quarters. The only lens I take to a museum! Dropped the lens from about 2 and a half feet onto the concrete on airport parking lot. It bounced a little and the hood is now scratched up. I worried about it but it still took the shots I needed. So far I haven't seen any problem in the way it works. I'd say I was lucky on that one.
|
|
|
Feb 19, 2011
|
|
edelsolar
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 16, 2005
Location: United States
Posts: 15
|
|
Review Date: Jan 2, 2011
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,050.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Focal range, build, IS
|
|
Cons:
|
Some CA, distortion at wide, flat colors
|
|
I bought this lens to replace my Tamron 24-135mm, not a bad lens. It has nice build, fast AF, good focal range on a 5DII. While it shows CA and distortion at the wide angle side these are correctable inside LR. The image quality is not bad, and this lens is a good compromise for what it has to offer. Colors were a bit flat in RAW but this is all fixable inside software by boosting saturation and contrast
Based on my negative experience with QC of the 17-40mm zoom, I tested two lenses, both were good performers to my surprise. Below are some images taken with this lens:
http://delsolar.org/nature/webs/Canon%2024-105/
|
|
|
Jan 2, 2011
|
|
Bopperkat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 10, 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 27, 2010
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: $1,200.00
|
|
The 24-105 is highly usable in low light. The photo below was shot with the exposure of 1/6 s, something I wouldn´t normally try but I got away with it. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bopperkat/5294331063/sizes/l/in/photostream/ (I practically never use a tripod). So the IS helps, also the IQ is excellent wide open, with the exception of borders in the 70 to 105 range. You can see this in the first cat shot below (@73 mm @f4.0)
I mentioned below that the AF is superior to that of the 135 f2L. That is true for moving objects in the AI Servo mode, and I don´t think it is a result of the different camera (500d for 135L, 550d for 24-105L). I guess it´s possible, but it did not even occur to me initially.
I now have five lenses and I need a sixth, but the 24-105 is indispensable for me. For this range I definitely need a zoom, otherwise I prefer primes.
|
|
|
Dec 27, 2010
|
|
Bopperkat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 10, 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 24, 2010
|
Recommend? |
Price paid: Not Indicated
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 24, 2010
|
|
Bopperkat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 10, 2010
Location: Finland
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Dec 10, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
AF, IS, wide range
|
|
Cons:
|
only F4
|
|
|
This is a very good all-around lens. Perhaps I would not include it in my shopping-list if I had to start all over again and plan a whole new sortiment of lenses, but this item has really no cons except the relative slowness, which can be a factor in sports photography. You can always rely on the autofocus, it is fast and accurate, clearly superior to the EF 135mm f/2 L USM. And I really find the image stabilizer useful in this range.
|
|
|
Dec 10, 2010
|
|
dnauer
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 22, 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 21
|
|
Review Date: Oct 23, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,050.00
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Range, IS, Build, IQ
|
|
Cons:
|
A little heavy, f4
|
|
|
Wanted to replace my 17-85 kit lens on my 40D. Reviewed my past history and found I rarely shot below 24mm for my outdoor shooting, but wanted something sharper and longer. After some research decided to go with this lens and have been very happy with the IQ, Colors, Contrast, quick focus, and the IS is very good. If you have a crop camera you may want to also be sure you won't miss that range below 24mm or have alternative lenses. I still have the 17-85 in case I need that 17-24 range, but over the months I've had this lens I've used the 17-85 only one time. This is becoming a favorite lense for me.
|
|
|
Oct 23, 2010
|
|
Todd Klassy
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 27, 2010
Location: United States
Posts: 290
|
|
Review Date: Oct 18, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,600.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Good focal range, image stabilization, build quality, sharp images > f/5.6.
|
|
Cons:
|
Color and contrast not as good as other L lenses, f/4 maximum aperture, vignetting (especially at 24mm), and lack of weather sealing.
|
|
The Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM is a good all-around lens. I owned this lens for almost three years and found it to be a very useful every day lens, which is available at a relatively competitive price.
Images are sharp and clean on my Canon 5D and 5D Mark II; especially those > f/5.6. The focal range makes it a good walk-around lens, but I always thought its maximum aperture of f/4 was a bit lacking and I always wanted something more. Color and contrast are good, but not stellar, and definitely not as good as the other L lenses I own. Like most zoom lenses, this lens is the 'jack of all trades' but a master of none.
If you plan on owning just one lens, and want to replace the silly kit lens that came with your camera, then I would say you can hardly go wrong owning this lens. If, however, you own other lenses in this focal length, or if you are trying to build a nice collection of useful lenses, this might not be the best option for you.
I briefly owned a Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens and I can not say the EF 24-105mm lens is a substantial upgrade over the EF-S 15-85mm lens...because it is not; especially if you own a Canon EOS 7D, 60D, 50D, or any other Canon camera with a 1.6 crop factor. About the only real advantage this lens has is its EF mount, which means you can also use it on a 5D, 1D or 1Ds, and it affords better build quality. Images are also a bit sharper than the EF-S 15-85mm, but the difference IMHO is negligible.
Trust me, this IS a very good lens, but if I had to do it all over again I would have purchased the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM instead.
Here are some examples of photographs I have taken with my Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/135745767/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/97621020/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/98733366/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/latitudes/98276792/
|
|
|
Oct 18, 2010
|
|
marks.
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 23, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 144
|
|
Review Date: Sep 24, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $1,200.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
covers all the basics, great for lowlight with IS and a little depth of field, weather resistant construction,
|
|
Cons:
|
"only" f4, could be sharper, Zoom creep, Sunshade (but that's on all zoom lenses)
|
|
|
I highly recommend this lens. I use it mostly for travel when space/weight is an issue and for lowlight shooting when i need a little extra depth of field. I know it sounds contradictory, but for most images with more than one person you need a little focal depth and this just does it. Sometimes the focus has difficulties (even with my 1Ds III), but you can't have it all.
Is it as sharp as my other prime L lenses, not really, but it has a complete different design and usage.
The single most outstanding point for me in the last couple of month is the quit amazing quality i get when shooting video with a handheld 5D II. I focus manually and the IS compensates movement fantastically (the camera is rigged on a RedRock grip system) and the shots feels very lifelike and engaging. Very easy to use even for a novice.
For hybrid use this is THE lens in the Canon line up. And the concern of having only a f4 is negligible due to the relative high sensitivity i can shoot the Canon 5DII and 7D.
|
|
|
Sep 24, 2010
|
|
Digital Fury
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jun 10, 2009
Location: France
Posts: 3
|
|
Review Date: Aug 25, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Compact, solid and light walk-around L lense, 24mm for FF, 3-stop IS, fast focusing, image quality, compact hood, price
|
|
Cons:
|
f/4
|
|
|
This is the lens I use most of the time unless I'm in very low light situation and/or need the f/2.8 speed indoor, as I also have the biggest non-IS 24-70 f/2.8, or I need something outside its 24-105mm range. Its built and image quality are excellent, it's fast focusing and low priced to boot.
It's "only" an f/4, but also quite smaller and lighter than the 24-70m f/2.8, and the 3-stop IS is quite useful.
To complement what the previous reviewer (LPrimeFreak) mentioned. The Peripheral Illumination Correction (PIC) data for vignetting is actually written in the RAW files, and thus can be used by RAW converters (e.h. DPP, DxO) just like the camera bodies do for JPEGs - ergo, vignetting is not actually an issue even on FF.
|
|
|
Aug 25, 2010
|
|
LPrimeFreak
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 29, 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 29, 2010
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $700.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Great range for full frame users that miss a extra range due to no cropfactor, IS, good built quality.
|
|
Cons:
|
Too much vignetting on 24mm (fullframe), for crop users as a "walkaround" less interesting cause they lose the wide-angle.
|
|
|
I bought this 24-105 for my 5D, the range was the best for a standard Canon zoom, a good walkaround lens, but I sold it cause there was too much vignetting, especially at 24mm.
I took pictures of a boat festival, all corners of the air were black. This was not so pleasant. Now I have the 5D MKII which has a function to correct this lens error in the camera itself, so that the vignetting is gone in jpegs, but I only use RAW.
I sold it for the 28-70 2.8L (for the sharpness but also to have the f2.8 back, love that bokeh, had it in past also on my 17-55 f2.8 IS). In fact f2.8 is my highest f-value on any lens, and i'm going to keep it that way.
First I doubted with the newer 24-70 2.8L, but this one has some bad copies which aren't all sharp if you read further reviews.
I got this 28-70 2.8L from a teacher from the university (12 years old but not so much used) for only $600 as new.
The 28-70 2.8L is the sharpest standard zoomlens for fullframe, but more difficult to find, as it's older. See also the highscore on this site, it's really the best. If you see the sharp pictures without knowing which lens, you think it's a prime.
Next to my case, the 24-105L is a very popular lens thanks to the range and IS if your not too picky for the vignetting and f4.
Some people with cropcams buy it for the range, but only realise later this is more a fullframe lens, with the 1.6 cropfactor they lose the wide-angle and then it's not so "walkaround" anymore, zoom starts at 38mm, almost head/shoulders for portraits.
|
|
|
Jul 29, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
529
|
987866
|
Oct 3, 2022
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
85% of reviewers
|
$1,500.96
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
9.44
|
8.05
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
