Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras

Comment

I had the 24-70L series Canon lens and switched to this lens about 2 years ago and have had no regrets. The stabilizer is a big plus for this lens. There were many times Id be shooting with the 24-70 and wish it would zoom a bit closer. Its very well made, a little lighter in weight compared to the 24-70, sharp, and fast focusing. I shoot a wide range of subjects from studio product images to people/lifestyle images. I also like it as a general purpose travel lens as well.

Show more

Comment

This is my first L series purchase and the build quality is exactly what everyone is saying, its built like a tank. Not to waste anyones time but this review is not for someone who wants to know all about the technical details, you can read all about that at the canon website and many others. In short the lens is great and worth the money in my opinion! Its super fast and has a very SOLID feel to it. It fits like a glove on a canon 30D and similar bodies. It does search a bit in low light, but i rarely shoot indoors, you have to expect that from any lens with f/4. In that case just bump up the ISO and use the terrific IS and you will produce fantastic indoor images. You can take great pictures with this lens IF you know how to use your camera settings. It pairs very well with a wide angle lens such as the Sigma 10-20. I found it somewhat difficult at first using this lens on a cropped body. After using the sigma for almost six months it took some getting use to the new view on a cropped sensor 38mm-168mm. I am a landscape photographer at heart, but i felt that if i wanted to be a well rounded photographer i needed to venture out and explore other subjects and i believe that i picked the right lens to do that. As everyone else has mentioned, it is a great travel/general lens and i found the extra zoom on my cropped body to come in handy. I would highly reccommend this lens to you, but more importantly i would make sure that you understood how to use your camera first (using aperture, shutter speeds, exposure compensation, etc). Theres no point in buying a Ferrari if you cant drive a stick.

Show more

Comment

This lens has the optical quality of the shorter zooms and the range provides enough opportunities to capture many great photos. The constant aperture along with DSLRs improved ability with high ISOs allows many great photos in low-light that were previously impossible. I originally purchased the Tamron 28-75. It was a lens that took very good photos at times but it had some real limitations. The limited zoom kept me wanting more width at the wide end and more zoom at the telephoto end. Also, it was not good in low lighting. The lens would hunt to focus on the subject. Therefore, candid shots were challenging due to the inability to focus quickly. I decided to purchase the Sigma 18-200. This lens gave me great range and I initially gave it very good reviews. However, as I started focusing on image quality, the superzoom convenience became less important. The compromises in image quality, aperture settings and other aspects became a hindrance. The vignetting and lack of sharpness required me to send it back for service. They fixed everything but my confidence in the lens. I used to purchase the cheaper lens because I didnt believe the difference in image quality was worth the additional price. However, I now have many more "keepers" with the Canon. It focuses much faster than the Tamron. Now, I have many more candid shots of people indoors. The IS gives me handheld opportunities I couldnt get with the faster 2.8. I see more subtlety in color such as my daughters brown eyes instead of looking black. [...] The Canon has changed my perspective regarding professional lenses. Although there are some lenses providing quality comparable to an L lens, I believe in purchasing them now because Ive gone the alternative route and I see the limitations firsthand. The constant aperture, IS, and L lens quality makes this a great all-around lens. People often use the term "all-around" to indicate an implied limitation. However, this lens can be used for weddings, travel, and many other situations. Its a great lens and Ive sold the Tamron and I plan to sell the Sigma also.

Show more

Comment

Canon has created a gem with the 24-105 f4. Yes, it would be nice if it were f2.8 but then it would be a longer and heavier lens and more expensive, so I think the compromise is worth it. I have 4 other excellent Canon lenses but I nearly always end up shooting with this lens, and its the only lens I travel with. I use it on my Canon 40D and my brand new 5D Mark II, and get excellent shots that are crisp and clean, with good saturation and pleasing color. On Canons C-size cameras (Rebel, 10-50D, 7D) there is a conversion factor of 1.6, so the 24mm is actually 38.4mm (very mild wide angle) and the 105mm is actually 168mm (respectable telephoto). On the 5D this lens is even better for traveling, as you get the actual 24mm wide angle for scenics and cityscapes. The 5D makes this lens really shine. Image stabilization is excellent which means you can take full-range telephotos hand held and still get crisp shots. Picture quality is nearly comparable to a good quality prime lens, so unless you get a lot of bang for the buck. I highly recommend this lens to advanced amateurs. Most semi-pros and professionals already know how good it is.

Show more

Comment

I was debating getting the 24-70 or this; I got this, and so far I am not disappointed. I like IS and dont often use wider apertures; besides, I already have a Tamron 28-75, which is a very nice lens, and much lighter than the 24-70. Anyway, the 24-105 really does make a good "walkaround" lens, and the IS is very cool (just give it a second to kick in when you push the shutter halfway). On a 5D, the range is very useful, and I combine this with a 70-300 IS, which is also very nice on a 5D. Some will complain about lens distortion, which this lens has at the extreme ends, but that is easy to fix in DXO or photoshop lens correction utilities. Many pictures will not need it. The thing I have seen is that with wider angle lenses (in general) is that it matters where you point the camera, in terms of perpective control. For example, when shooting a building, pointing up (to get the top of the building in view) creates a lot of perspective distortion; I will need to back up so I can keep the focal plane vertical or get a tilt-shift lens (which I may do, anyway).

Show more

Comment

This lens was purchased before a Canon digital body was chosen, that was the reputation of the former. The 24-105mm L is built in a rugged, compact, no nonsense package that reminds one of the proverbial tank - built to do the job and built to last. Thus far, the images captured by this lens have not been disappointing; actually, surprising, if anything, in their sharpness and clarity, delivering images razor-sharp across the field and even in light distribution. Have been using Canon cameras and lenses since the 1960s, and they seen to be getting better and better as time goes on, with this lens being a prime example of that thought pattern. Seemingly heavy at first, the 24-105 balances very well when mounted on the camera ( in this case a 50D ) and cradles perfectly in the hand. The autofocus is instantaneous and silent, and the built in Iternal Stabilization ( IS ) just adds to the package. The only improvement that I can see with this item would be a lowering of the retail price ( Ha! that aint gonna happen! :) ); other than that, this thing is nothing less than fantastic.

Show more

Comment

When I bought this lens two years ago, I agonized over the non-IS 24-70mm/2.8 and the digital only 17-55mm. The 17-55mm almost had me, with its wide angle, light weight, and amazing image quality. However, I couldnt get past the dust issues that users were reporting with it - not at its price point. Furthermore, the lens is digital only, which seemed a major limitation if I ever went full frame. (Of course, the FF dream seems rather out of reach in hindsight.) I even tried the amazingly priced Tamron 17-50mm/2.8, but the build and image quality compromises were too much for me. The real challenge therefore came down to the 24-70/2.8. Judging by my informal survey of lenses used by photographers on Popular Photography, the 24-70 was a clear choice. However, two things worked against it for me. It was much heavier than I thought I would be able to handle for a full day, and the extra speed would very likely be offset by this weight compounded by a lack of IS. Id be sacrificing sharpness due to camera shake, especially when hand-holding this lens without the assistance of IS. The 24-105mm/f4 seemed the best compromise. I was told by my professional photographer friends that Id not even notice the trade off of image quality and that Id come to appreciate the versatility of this lens. Thankfully they were right. I absolutely love this lens. Even with the 1.6x crop factor, this lens is wide enough for indoor shots, and the IS has been undeniably helpful. The images are sharp, with awesome colors. They have an almost 3-D like quality about them! Throw in my Speedlite 580, and the f4 is no longer as limiting as it would seem. Ive never complained about its weight even after carrying it around for days. Its build quality is simply amazing - it is literally built like a tank and its zoom and focus rings are smoother than ever. If youre starting out in digital photography, Id strongly recommend that you ditch the kit lens as soon as you can, and start off with the 50mm/1.8 prime (the nifty fifty), this 24-105mm/f4, and a Speedlite 580. This combination not only provides the best bang for the buck but also provides the best all-round kit. Side note: I am of the camp that believes that the lens is more important than the camera. Id rather get an average camera and spend extra on the optics than the other way around. This lens actually made me a better photographer, and Im grateful to it. Happy Clicking!

Show more

Comment

I probably should test this lens more before writing a review, but I have been so excited so far! I paired this lens up with a 40D. As soon as I decided to go the SLR route, I decided to put the money into a good "walk-about" lens. If I wait a few years, I can always get more quality for any set price range from the camera perspective since the technology is still evolving. I have not been dissapointed. The quality of the pictures are awesome so far. Nice, sharp details. I do need to take it out and check it under more conditions, but I figure the current indoor pictures I have taken of small pieces of jewelry are done in pretty poor conditions to start with. I am hoping it gets better from here. The only down side is the total weight between the camera and lens makes me wonder how happy I am going to be when I go out hiking with this. But the sturdy construction compared with the lower end models makes the weight tolerable under normal conditions.

Show more

Comment

I have tried a few different walk around zooms. I had the EF-S 17-85 IS, then I tried the Tamron 17-50mm (non-VC version) f/2.8 to get a fast zoom. After realizing the range of this lens did not suit me (well over half my shots were at 50mm and still cropped.) Finally I picked up the 24-105L. Yes, I wish it was an f/2.8 lens. But in decent light or with some fill flash, this thing is fantastic. Great sharpness. Great color. Focuses well. I have mistaken shots from this for some of my primes at times. Its a great range. I liked it on my 7D, and I like it even more on full frame. The only thing to keep in mind on a crop body is that 24mm is not that wide. On full frame, 24mm is plenty wide. If the range fits and f/4 works for your needs, this lens will not disappoint.

Show more

Comment

Despite all the technical metrics, the real measure of a lens boils down to the subjective question: does it take good photos? The EF 24-105L not only takes good photos, it takes beautiful ones, notably nicer than several other well-regarded lenses in the same price range. As an avid amateur, I dont make a living from my camera, but the results matter a great deal to me. After reading every review I could find, I bought three well-regarded lenses to try on my Canon Rebel T1i . This EF24-105L, the new Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD , and the very-well reviewed Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM . Both of the EF-S lenses are newer models than the EF 24-105L and are designed for cropped-sensor cameras. The short: The 24-105 turned out warmer, more beautiful photos in both indoor and outdoor usage, capturing vibrant, accurate colors. The IS works well and is much quieter than the newer IS in the Canon EF-S 17-55mm . While some sort of external stabilization is necessary, it works reasonably well for low-light photography. And the colors...grasses are green, skin tones look healthy, my cats fur gleams, and every color pops. The best results of any lens Ive tried on my Canon DSLR so far. On my cropped-sensor camera, theres very little visible fall-off in sharpness at max aperture of f/4 (although there is some softness); never enough that I found myself dialing down the aperture for that reason. As for the other lenses, I really wanted to like the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM , but it seemed to take unusually few "keepers" in similar shooting situations to the EF24-105L. The captured colors were a little cooler, and the IS comparatively very loud (audible without putting your ear to the lens). All of this was enough to offset the wider-angle and the bigger aperture, so back it went (at the thousand-buck mark, I want my glass to impress me!). The Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD was solid all-around but without the oomph Id expect for 80% of the price of the EF24-105L. Its lighter-weight and has a wider angle, and the IS is a newer generation, but pictures were less rich and didnt pop the way the 24-105Ls do. A great walk-around lens if I didnt have the direct comparison to the 24-105L, but only worthwhile if the price difference (or few ounces weight-difference) is make-or-break. I kept this one as a backup (or for travel), but find I never want to swap it in place of the 24-105L. I also considered the well-reviewed Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM , but its lack of IS and much greater weight turned me away since much of my usage is handheld. And since the EF24-105 is an L series, Canon includes a lens-hood and a structured storage bag, both nice quality. The cons are what youd expect: its a large, heavy, expensive lens, with only a maximum aperture of f/4. Its big enough to draw comments when you take it out in casual settings. But, its much lighter than other L lenses, and only few ounces heavier than EF-S lenses I tried. The aperture is a limiting factor in low-light photography (tripod or flash or other method required, even with the IS), but the results are consistently very good when properly stabilized. Ive used it in a number of bars and other low-light situations. The EF 24-105L has pretty constantly stayed on my camera since Ive had it, turning into my walk-around lens, my portrait lens, my landscape lens. Very well worth its price. Highly recommended.

Show more