Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

    Hello everyone and I am wondering if anyone uses this lens and if so then how are you getting on with it? It seems to have a lot of mixed reviews which are generally not too favorable but I was thinking that it must surely be okay as it is an L series lens. I have had the Mk1 version in the past and on checking my photo library have found that over 60% of the images taken with it were taken using the 71-105 focal length which suggests that it would be more beneficial to me to buy the 24-105 again rather than a 24-70 lens. However, a little apprehensive because of reviews and users feed back elsewhere. So is it a lens that you would buy? Thanks in advance if anyone replies.
    Last edited by pipflash51; 09-09-2018, 11:56.

    #2
    Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

    I have the earlier version and it’s fabulous. I agree I don’t think canon would release any lens....especially an L that does produce images to professional expectations ....you could save some money and get a Mk1.....bit the Mk2 might be better optimised for the latest cameras
    Brian Vickers LRPS

    brianvickersphotography.com

    Comment


      #3
      Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

      Thanks for the reply Brian. I think I would go for the Mk2 version not necessarily to save money but because it is a current model and therefore should last me well into the future. The Mk2 might also be better for the latest generation of cameras which seem to be having a higher number of megapixels with each release and so I wonder if the Mk1 would be showing it's age and capabilities when used on one of them. I use the 6D Mk2 at the moment so it would probably be fine on that.

      Comment


        #4
        Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

        The reviews (proper technical tests) are pretty dismissive of this lens. But they were the same for the older version, which many people like so it might be the difference between "really, truly, good" and "good enough that most people can't see the issues".

        Nobody rates any 24 - 105 mm lens as good with a high pixel count camera, particularly at the 70 - 105 mm length. They all give sharper images at the wide end, as do all wide to short tele zooms, they are a compromise. The greater the range of a zoom, the less good they are at any focal length, a 24 - 70 will always out perform a 24 - 105 within its range, though even the 16 - 35 models are much weaker at 35 mm than at the shorter focal lengths. Most of the difference between zooms and primes is in the outer part of the image rather than the centre.

        With something like the 5DS/R (50 megapixel) bodies only the latest primes and a few very expensive zooms, can actually get close to matching the resolution of the body. So anyone buying one of those bodies is largely wasting their money if they only have the common lower cost zoom lenses. That's why Canon (and others such as Sigma with the Art series) have recently been producing new ranges of lenses, particularly primes, that can match the capability of the very high pixel count bodies.

        Of course, for anyone who is only posting images on line and/or making small prints (i.e. most people) it would be difficult to see the difference.
        EOS 6D, 6D Mk II, 80D, 70D, 100D, 200D, M50, M100. Canon 10-18, 18 - 55, 55 - 250 IS STM lenses, Canon 16 - 35 mm F4L, 35 mm EF-S macro, 50 mm F1.8 STM, 60 mm EF-S macro, MPE-65 macro, 85 mm F1.8, 200 mm F2.8 L II, M 15 - 45 mm, M 22mm F2, M 32mm F1.4. Sigma 24 - 35 F2 Art, 135 mm F1.8 Art, 17 - 50 F2.8 DC, 105 mm OS macro, 100 - 400 C, 150 - 600 C.

        Comment


          #5
          Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

          Thank you Richard for your reply. I am tempted by a 24-70 lens and would prefer, rightly or wrongly, to stick with a Canon, which means f4 IS or f2.8 non IS (and considerably more expensive). However, as mentioned in my original post, I am somewhat surprised that when I had the original 24-105, over 60% of the images were shot longer than 70mm. Because of this I might find the 24-105 more use to me. For what it's worth I had thought about the Tamron SP 24-70mm f2.8 VC USD G2 lens but have now decided to stick with Canon. Regards from Phil.

          Comment


            #6
            Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

            I have this lens, and use it on my 5D4, and love it.
            On a full frame camera, it's a great walkabout lens, very nice focal range, F4 throughout.

            My 'standard' kit is now 5D4 + 25-105 II, and 7D2 with 100-400 II. I usually carry the 16-35 too, but haven't had to swap it over too often with the 24-105... so I guess I'm more than happy with it!

            Interestingly, when I only had crop cameras, I used the 15-85 lens, which is the 'equivalent' to the 24-105, but just not an 'L' lens. I loved that lens too, so that would still be a good choice if you have a crop camera.

            Mike
            flickr
            5D4 : 7D2 : 16-35 f4 L : 24-105 II L : 70-200 f2.8 L : 100-400 II L : Macro 100 f2.8 L : Manfrotto CX055 Pro3

            Comment


              #7
              Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

              Thanks Mike.I'm not a pixel peeper and neither am I convinced that most people can really see a great difference between a lot of lenses when photos are taken with them at the same settings. I know some will disagree with this but there you are, my opinion. Because this is my thinking then I'm likely to go with the 24-105 Mk ll as I was always happy with the results from the Mk1 and the later version has better IS and weather sealing I believe.

              Phil

              Comment


                #8
                Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

                I think the reality is that today there is no such thing as a bad lens. Today's digital interchangeable lens cameras, even the low end ones, have so much higher resolution than film that the manufacturers have really had to work hard to keep up. Being of a scientific turn of mind, I enjoy looking at figures, tables and charts but when it comes down to it I usually pick up the 200D with one of the light EF-S lenses simply because the combination is so light and the image quality is still much better than I actually need.

                Interesting that one (relatively) low cost lens announced so far for the EOS-R is a 24 - 105 F4 IS L and I suspect many people will buy the camera with this lens as a kit. It's 9% shorter than the slr version and 95 grams lighter. It has 5 stops of IS and also uses the new nano USM AF motor, which has universally been praised for extremely fast, silent and very accurate a/f in the 70 - 300 mm f/4-5.6 IS II. It's the first L lens to use that motor.
                EOS 6D, 6D Mk II, 80D, 70D, 100D, 200D, M50, M100. Canon 10-18, 18 - 55, 55 - 250 IS STM lenses, Canon 16 - 35 mm F4L, 35 mm EF-S macro, 50 mm F1.8 STM, 60 mm EF-S macro, MPE-65 macro, 85 mm F1.8, 200 mm F2.8 L II, M 15 - 45 mm, M 22mm F2, M 32mm F1.4. Sigma 24 - 35 F2 Art, 135 mm F1.8 Art, 17 - 50 F2.8 DC, 105 mm OS macro, 100 - 400 C, 150 - 600 C.

                Comment


                  #9
                  Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

                  I find my 24-105 mk 1 is fine on my 5Dsr...
                  Click on "original size" here to see what you get at what should be the worse settings (as zooms are usually better at the wide end), namely wide-open at 105mm (remembering not everything foreground/background will be inside the DoF), especially check out the sculpture on the far left:
                  Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.

                  Do the same again for a couple of f5.6 examples (I think it's best at f5.6):
                  Expert news, reviews and videos of the latest digital cameras, lenses, accessories, and phones. Get answers to your questions in our photography forums.
                  Last edited by DrJon; 09-09-2018, 22:14.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

                    That's interesting as it surprises me but it's there for all to see. I'm going for the 24-105 Mk 2 version and will be ordering it today. I'm absolutely sure that it will be my most useful walk about lens because when I had the Mk 1 that was nearly always on my camera.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

                      Lovely lens - well worth the upgrade if, as me, you use it a lot !

                      Brian
                      ef-r

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Re: Canon EF 24-105mm f4L ll IS USM

                        I've just got a 24-105 II as part of a longer term aim to go full frame which I now use as a walk-around instead of my 18-135. I tended to shoot towards telephoto too, so don't miss the 18 much, although I have the 10-22 for WA occasions. It has surprised me that the 18-135 is remarkably good in comparison, if not ever so slightly sharper around 100mm. Of course, the 24-105 II gives good results, but from the reports I have seen I would think that the II is not a whole lot better than the Mk I, and recently at a talk from a landscape photographer he certainly had a view that the 24-70 f/2.8 was out-performing the 24-105 (but that was probably the Mk I at the time). If I'd had the Mk I I'm not sure I'd have upgraded to the Mk II, but it is solidly built and a good one. Like you, while the 24-70 might be better, I'm happier with the 105mm max. FL
                        Though using APS-C bodies I don't know what the improvements at the edges of the frame would be like. I suspect they will be better - suggest you (and I) should look at the MTF charts.
                        Last edited by neonlamp; 31-03-2019, 11:55.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X