|
|
|
|||||
Reviews for Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM Zoom LensImage Stabilization - MPN: 0344B002
$1,149.99 - $1,261.03
By member:
overclockxp
- Apr 14, 2006
A Lens for Everyone! (If you can afford it!)Strengths: Awesome Colors, Sharpness, and IS! Weakness: None really First off if you purchase a lens that is advertised as f/4 how is the fact that it is f/4 a weakness? That's kind of like buying a Yugo and then saying it doesn't do 175 MPH. 92% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
Reply by member: Anonymous
Jan 23, 2007 You could not have said it any better.
Reply by member: lovrekj
Aug 17, 2007 I now own the 17-85mm IS you spoke of, and I'm less than thrilled with it. I just ordered this lens ( my second order from Profeel, who isn't on the list here). I can't wait to see the difference!
By member:
julianpan
- Apr 17, 2006
EF 24-105mm f/4Strengths: Sharp, stunning IS, solid build, nice color/contract. Did I mention sharp? Weakness: None. Maybe the zoom is a little bit too tight. Like most people, I struggled on deciding between 24-105 f/4 and 24-70 f/2.8. I went for 24-105 because of the IS, size, weight, and extra 35mm zoom. It's suppose to be a "walkaround" lens. 24-70 is just too heavy. I assume I got a good copy. It's very sharp wide open between 24-50 mm. At 105mm, it is still very sharp 1-stop down. The color and contract is just amazing. Bokeh is smooth, not like some pics I saw on pbase. It's worth for the "L" price. Highly recommended! 89% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
Netgarden
- Jan 30, 2006
Great walkaround 24-105L ISStrengths: size smaller than 24-70L, nice. Bring anywhere lens that has rich creamy colors and amazing sharpness. Weakness: I have not seen any weaknesses, occasional slight ca in bright sun. Would have loved it to be a f2.8-4.0, but with the IS you can get very sharp indoor shots without flash. 88% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
bluesloth
- Jul 18, 2006
Amazing Lens - Highly RecommendedStrengths: Amazing optical clarity, Great focal range, Fast quiet focusing, Image Stabilization, Solid build quality Weakness: None so far. This was my first L-class lens, and I have to say that it has opened my eyes to a world of photography that I didn't think I could attain. My photos have much greater clarity, and the image stabilization helps in low light conditions. 
88% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
bakerwi
- Jun 7, 2006
Great One Solution Lens!Strengths: Image Stabilzation, Range, Build Quality, Sharpness, Focus Speed, Color, Contrast and Weight. Weakness: None so far! I purchased this lens April 2006 (build date UU0310) at a super price net of the Canon rebate. Based on the specifications I knew the potential short comings of this lens, but they were acceptable. When I read other reviewers posting that the price is a "cons" I laugh. The price is only a "con" if you borrowed the lens; loved it, but couldn't afford it. If you purchased this lens then price was evidently not a "con". Also, the complaints about "low light" situations or that it should be f/2.8. Get over it and review the specs again. The lens is f/4. If f/2.8 was important to you then you should have purchased the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 USM (an awesome lens). I borrowed one from a friend and I hope to purchase one in the future. This lens is a great walk around lens and not so great for other situations. I'm rating this lens based on the specifications and not on what I want it to be. For those of us who talk about Vignetting, CA and Distortion your probably correct based on your subject matter and I've noticed a little in certain situations, but at the end of the day it is still a solid lens for me. This lens can't be everything for everybody. 86% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
tough_dog
- Mar 2, 2006
Super-Sharp Lens Once Canon Fixed ItStrengths: Very sharp even wide open. Excellent quality. The IS works wonders. Weakness: Poor Quality Control at the factory. Tried two copies - both had soft images due to severe autofocus errors. Kept the second and sent it to Canon for calibration - now focuses perfectly. The calibrated lens is very sharp and usable even wide open at f4 and improves only slightly when stopped down to f5.6. Much sharper at 24-50mm than my 17-85mm IS lens. Above 50mm my 17-85 gets almost as sharp at the L-lens. 79% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
CanonLens
- Jan 3, 2006
Great Lens. The best all around.Strengths: sharp (even wide), IS, excellent range, color, contrast Weakness: Slow (f/4) comparing to other faster L lens It is the best lens in this range (24-105mm), this lens simply cannot be beat. It is really sharp even wide open and corner to corner on a FF sensor. The IS an amazing feature. I like to shoot at low light situation without using flash, and I am thrilled because I managed to handheld at 1/5 with IS consistently. It is on par with other L lens. The only complain I have is that it does not have f/2.8 71% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
dspprc
- Feb 23, 2006
Great all arround lensStrengths: Versatile focal range, L-series quality, IS, build quality, sharp Weakness: Not f/2.8, and the price could be a little lower. What more can I say: It's a Canon! Their quality really shines through here. Just sold my 24-70 f/2.8L but had time to do a shooting comparison (i borrowed it from my friend for a week before i decided to purchase it... .) The 24-105 matches the 24-70 quality and it offers much longer range which I need and Image Stabilization (IS). I am very happy with this purchase. 67% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By anonymous - Jan 10, 2008
Canon 24-105mm f/4LStrengths: Tack Sharp, great focal range, quiet quick focusing, and incredible build quality Weakness: None I finally made the plunge and purchased an L-class lens after several years of using a much cheaper product and lots of digital editing. After looking at several alternatives including the 28-70 f/2.8L I decided on the 24-105 because of the focal range. After receiving the lens (right on schedule from Beach) I was not disappointed. I've read several reviews that list the f/4 and the focal range as weaknesses, if you wanted a faster lens or one with a different focal range, you should have purchased something different. This lens is as advertised, a 24-105mm f/4L. Many folks have stated that they have experienced some softness at the extremes of the focal ranges with this lense, I can detect no difference throughout the zoom. This lense is so sharp that I was able to reduce the sharpness setting in my 350D back to normal after having it bumped up for years to compensate for a cheap lens. The USM alone is worth a significant portion of the cost of this lens. Quick and quiet!! I've tested the IS on ambient indoor lighting on still subjects and it works incredibly well. Now I just have to start saving for the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. 67% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
nyctaz
- Apr 1, 2006
This is One Great lens!Strengths: Sharpness and Image Stablization Weakness: None but the price This is a great lens. I have a Rebel XT and it instantly became my favorite lens because of the quality, size, reach, and of course IS! I don't think my 24-70L will get much use anymore. I also have a 17-40L that I will use for wider shots, but the 24-105 will definitely be on my camera most of the time. The IS is great and is very quiet and effective. 50% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
redredring
- Apr 5, 2006
Great walk around LensesStrengths: Light weight, very sharp image, IS helps alot on 105 end Weakness: the PRice just got it last week, played around with it on my Las Vegas trip, it's an alsome lenses. IS helps alot on 105mm end, enjoy it on easily take a sharp on this length. 50% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
pictin
- Mar 16, 2006
Great lensStrengths: Image Stabilization, USM autofocus, top quality Weakness: f/4, no "panning" IS This is an excellent lens. My older Sigma 18-125 is very close in sharpness, though Canon performs better in corners on my 20D. Difference in contrast is more prominent between the two (again, Canon wins), and IS as well as ring-USM simply put this lens in a different league. 50% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
M3-driver
- May 4, 2006
Canon L-lens w/ ISStrengths: Image Stabilization, not too heavy, sharp at fully open, good range 24-105mm, quite USM Weakness: I wish it is F/2.8 and slightly wider, 20mm This is a nice Canon L-lens with Image Stabilization. The IS really works, and I can handheld up to 1/15 sec and still get a nice shot. It is lighter compare to the 24-70mm F/2.8 and offers a longer zoom. The IS only has one mode, compares to some of other IS, has mode 2 for panning. I didn't notice much different on the battery life, when IS is on. Image is sharp even at fully open F/4. Depends on the need, if you shoot in low light condition most of the time, than go with the 24-70mm F/2.8. If not, definitely 24-105mm F/4 is the choice. 43% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
code53027
- Feb 8, 2006
Pretty good all-purpose lensStrengths: the IS function with the inclusion of 24-105 zoom range Weakness: the slow F4 I could hold 1/10 of a second without any bluring. I haven't used it in the long end, 80-105 zoom range. I'm going to be using it in studio and general purpose photography. 14% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
touristguy87
- Aug 14, 2007
good midrange lensStrengths: Sharp wide-open, good zoom range, 400D focuses well with it Weakness: a little slow and geez not exactly cheap...plus 24mm ain't 17mm I'm trying this out of desperation after going through the 17-85F4-F5.6 IS, the 17-55 F2.8IS and the 28-135 F3.5-F5.6 IS. It seems to hit on a few points but it is definitely going to cost you an ISO step. I'm trying to extend the usability of the Rebel XTi, make it more of a "well-rounded" camera...the loss of 17mm wide-angle is painful, this is not all that close to 17, much closer to 28. Just barely wide-enough. It's sharp at wide-open, not too big and actually I find 100mm to be just fine, enough zoom for me. And the flat F4 helps with that. Where it is borderline also is the speed...forget about shooting ISO800 handheld at night, just get every erg of speed out of the Rebel with this lens that you can get. I find it to be a consistent 1-8th to 1-15th handheld shooter and that is just barely enough. Focuses well, though. I mark it as "satisfactory" because really it is too slow and too long at the wide end. The lens I want is at least an 18-100 flat F3.6 with IS. Ok, 20-100 flat F3.6...F3.3...F2.8...you get the picture. 4% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
Reply by member: touristguy87
Aug 16, 2007 ... wow, for once, after another night of shooting, I'd pretty-much just have to repeat what I just said, except to add more emphasis on the limit of this 400D camera and 24-105 F4 lens being focus-quality more than speed. I tried an ISO100 shot from a rest, it was hardly any better than the ISO800 shot handheld, in fact, one attempt was worse than handheld because the focus accuracy was pretty bad. And I mean, that's another mark on the F4 lenses. They need the multipoint focus as the light gets bad. You get shots that are "ok" but clearly not sharp and in focus, and they flat-out look out of focus when viewed at 100%. In terms of light, with decent night light you can shoot this lens at IS01600 handheld and get good results, when it is dark? It's too dark to do it. Doubling the speed for the same exposure, or getting another EV step, helps a lot, when you're stuck shooting handheld at 1-10s F4. So, ok. With the 17-55 F2.8 its limit is really the available light, as it is focus-limited, and 55mm even on a 1.6x FOV crop camera is just way too short. I did an experiment with this last night, starting at 100mm I walked down towards a target that I had shot at half viewfinder size. I had to walk 5 blocks just to get down to 70mm on the lens. I think the 24-105 F4 simply gives you more in trade than you lose, by switching from the 17-55 F2.8. You can always use that mini-tripod for the rare night shot that you just can't get handheld with the F4, and of course you will lose some 55mm shots that it isn't fast enough for, but you get so much more with the extra zoom during the day...all at F4. I regret losing the wide-angle more than losing the F2.8 but still that is a major penalty for shots that you are forced to take at 24mm instead of 17-24mm. Of my 500 keepers from yesterday, with this lens, about 190 were 24mm and about 150 were 55-105mm. That would really be more like 2:1 or so but still. You aren't going to get shots over 55mm with a 17-55mm lens, and the 24mm short end means that you have to take some shots from an angle or from long-distance instead of straight on. It does mean that there is a greater chance of more "junk" getting in the shot, it does mean even more of a stability penalty in low light. But it's like buying a $5k moped or a $5k used Nissan Sentra. One just flat-out does not make sense unless you live in Monaco, or Newport News, or something. Maybe your girlfriend would never be seen in a used Nissan Sentra. But you sure as hell aren't taking her on a trip to the beach on a moped, unless you live just off the shore. But to be honest with you I can't really decide which is the best all-around lens. They're both great lenses. I have no doubt that the 17-55 F2.8 is too short...and I have no doubt that the 24-105 F4 is "just good enough, but I wish that it was better in almost all facets". Probably the only thing about it that I am really happy with is the 105mm long-end, and, of course, having a sharp F4 at the long end. It's not really wide enough, or fast enough, or sharp-enough focus. It's just "ok". But it is the best option short of buying both the 17-55 F2.8 IS and the 70-200 F2.8 IS and switching lenses *frequently*. And I'm sorry, unless you plan on shooting only during the day or off a tripod, and shooting 3MP at most, the 18-200 Sigma F3.6-F6.3 is hardly going to help. Sure, it has the zoom range, but at what cost in sharpness and speed? A phenomenal cost. You can shoot F8 or throw away the off-center sharpness. Well, ok...for $500, maybe it's worth a try. It can't break your camera.
Reply by member: touristguy87
Aug 17, 2007 ...it's a good lens, but at $1240 with ten dealers on PG selling it for under $950, I had to return it to RitzCamera. If they had sold it to me in the $1000-$1100 range I probably would have kept it, and I told them that. They're just charging too much for it. They had nothing else that I really wanted to try...maybe the 17-85 F4-F5.6 again, maybe the Sigma 18-135 F3.5-F5.6...but they didn't have any IS/OS/VR/VC lenses other than Canons, but even the 70-200 F2.8 IS. They probably would have wanted $2k for it, though. I guess that numerically as a walk-around single lens, the 17-85 F4 makes more sense than the 17-55 F2.8 or the 24-105 F4 but what would make even more sense of course would be a 20-100 F3.6-F5.6 with IS. You can play games like this all day long. Canon has too many lenses and they don't do what someone who is an amateur photographer would want. Cover a significant zoom range, offering a sharp wide-angle and a decent zoom, both, all while giving enough speed to make it worthwhile to buy and not have to worry about carrying a tripod except for the most difficult of night shots...the real issue is that a flat F2.8 lens can only be so long and fit the EF-S format. An F2.8 lens simply requires a lens diameter that is about 1-3rd of the focal length. But, if they can do 17-55 F2.8 in EF-S, then they can do 17-85 F2.8 in EF, in full-frame. The main problem is that none of Canons' lenses are more than 4x zoom. But instead of 28-135 F3.5-F5.3 with IS, why not 25-100? It's just not worth the money to Canon to build a wide zoom range for the EF-S market. Nikon, of course, just bit the bullet and came out with the 18-135 and then the 18-200 F3.5-F5.6, knowing that they would just lose that market to Sigma and Tamron if they didn't, and it is a clear differentiator between Canon and Nikon. I could have walked out of Ritz Camera today with the Tamron 28-300 F3.5-F6.2 lens (without "VC") on my camera, for $345. I was very tempted. But even Penn Camera in downtown DC would have that lens for $100 less.
Reply by member: touristguy87
Aug 18, 2007 ...the real problem with this lens is that it makes a lot more sense on the 5D than it does on the 400D. On the 400D it's long enough but not wide enough, and, really, too slow, on top of that.
Reply by member: touristguy87
Aug 24, 2007 I do have to say though that it is tack-sharp and has very little in the way of ghosting, internal reflections. And it does zoom out well in low light and the IS is very effective on it, I have a fair number of shots at 1-6s and 1-4s. But this is the thing, you have to shoot it that slow in low light, to get good shots at ISO800. But still. This lens is sharp and clean as hell.
Reply by member: jeffreyd00_1181664237
Oct 7, 2007 Hi,
By member:
who_knew
- Sep 18, 2009
Excellent "EVERYDAY" LensStrengths: Great versatility, SHARP, Easy to Use, outstanding wide angle to zoom functionality, excellent glass Weakness: None that I've found Having used Canon's 28-135mm F/3.5-5.6, the Canon 24-70mm F/2.8 L lens, and Tokina's 18-250mm F/3.5-5.6, I've finally found THE BEST "Everyday" Lens. I get more excellent usage from this lens than any other lens in it's class. It's sharp, fast and versatile. And, I've found that faster ISO settings make up for the fact it's a F/4 lens, so I've lost nothing at this F-Stop. In fact, I've several night shots and indoor shots that clear, and sharp representations of my claims. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By anonymous - Jul 30, 2008
Purchased for July of 2008 vacationStrengths: Great all around lens for the Rebel XTi camera, weight not a problem, IS a must for the weight Weakness: None, it is a "L" lens so expensive, but have found out that you pay for what you get in taking pictures Took camera, its len's that came in the "kit" along with this newq lens. Took pic's from Florida all the way home including four days in DC. The difference between the kit lenses and this one very noticable. Took photos at sunset with aperature wide open had no problems with clarity of pictures. Even inside attrations in DC that they did not allow you to use a flash, plenty of light either on auto focus or when manual. If your thinking of buying a lens spend the money and get this one. It would be nice if F stop was lower but with the Rebel you can adjust brightness of picture with after reviewing the histogram and brigtness displays. What was amazing was how fast the IS worked on wildlife pics, and combining with auto focus on moving objects no problems. Then taking pics on manual settings without use of tripod was very easy. Still have a lot to learn about using camera, but my next lens will be the "L" series 100mm - 400mm lens. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
By member:
dbaker240
- Jul 28, 2006
Great LensStrengths: Great pictures Weakness: Heavy This is a great lens to have. We love using it. The dslr camera is new to us and this was a great lens for us to start off with. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful? Top
productwiki.com - Jun 22, 2011
The Canon EF 24-105mm F/4L IS USM is a general-purpose lens designed to cover a large zoom area ranging from 24mm wide-angle to 105mm portrait-length telephoto. It was constructed from a single Super-UD glass element and three aspherical lenses, and it’s designed to minimize chromatic aberration and distortion. Featured also is Image Stabilizer technology for steadying camera shake up to... Top
bestcovery.com - Dec 3, 2008
Best General Purpose and Travel Lens for Canon SLR Cameras
Bestcovery experts have rated the Canon 24-105mm EF f/4L IS USM Lens as a best pick for the Best General Purpose and Travel Lens for Canon SLR Cameras. Bestcovery's experts recommend the best products and services for a particular need based on extensive research and evaluations. Click below to see Bestcovery's full review of this product. Top
testseek.com - Nov 4, 2008
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM
Testseek.com has collected 22 expert reviews for Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM and the average expert rating is 83 of 100. The average score reflects the expert community’s view on this product. Click below and use Testseek.com to see all ratings, product awards and conclusions. Top
cameralabs.com - Aug 1, 2007
Camera Labs – Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM review
Offering decent wide-angle to short telephoto coverage, Canon's EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM is an ideal general purpose lens for full-frame bodies. Indeed, many stores sell it as a bundle with the EOS-5D, making it one of the classiest 'kit' lenses around. The EF 24-105mm performed well across its range, particularly in terms of corner sharpness at wide angle, while essentially matching our EF 85mm... TopAdvertisement  
|
|
|
Terrific All Around Lens
Strengths: Very Sharp Optics, IS, Versatile Zoom Range, Compact, Lightweight Lens
Weakness: At f/4 limited aperature for indoor shots at wide angle
I've used this lens for shooting both outdoor portraits and landscapes and it is incredibly sharp and a versatile lens. The image stabilization is great allowing use without a tripod in many instances. I keep this lens on my camera 90% of the time (I have also the 17-40mm 4L and 70-300mm EF IS lens). I purchased this lens in March 2006 so it has a later build date (in contrast to earlier problematic copies). If you had to purchase only one L lens which gives you the most flexibility and quality build this is the lens for you!
94% of readers found this review helpful. Did you find it helpful or unhelpful?