Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 29 Dec 2012 (Saturday) 00:20
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24-105 slightly soft?

 
scrane
Member
63 posts
Joined Mar 2005
     
Jan 04, 2013 07:10 |  #61

The 24-105 is the lens people hate to love. It's not very long and it's not very wide. It's not expensive or exclusive. It is not a sexy lens.
But it is reliable and consistent in its output. Auto focus is reliable and precise. Image stabilization works great across it's range. It sharpens up remarkably well in post processing.
As far as IQ goes, the 24-70 II is better. It also is more than three times the price and lacks IS.
The 24-105 is very much an OK lens.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
howiewu
Senior Member
Avatar
629 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2011
     
Jan 04, 2013 08:09 |  #62

I pretty much agree with this assessment. Its Achilles Heel is the vignetting (and distortion) at the wide end, but otherwise, for what it is, it's quite good. Not stellar but good, and the price pretty much settled to its true worth.

scrane wrote in post #15442821 (external link)
The 24-105 is the lens people hate to love. It's not very long and it's not very wide. It's not expensive or exclusive. It is not a sexy lens.
But it is reliable and consistent in its output. Auto focus is reliable and precise. Image stabilization works great across it's range. It sharpens up remarkably well in post processing.
As far as IQ goes, the 24-70 II is better. It also is more than three times the price and lacks IS.
The 24-105 is very much an OK lens.


5DII, 70D
17-40mm f/4 USM L, 24-70mm f/4 IS USM L, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM L, 24mm f/3.5 TS-E L, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 100mm f/2.8 IS USM L, 300mm f/2.8 IS USM II L, 430 EX II, 270 EX II, 1.4x TC III, 2x TC III, Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC
Home Page: http://www.travelerath​ome.com (external link), Blog: http://travelerathome.​wordpress.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Donald ­ Ong
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
64 posts
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Singapore, Singapore
     
Jan 04, 2013 09:37 |  #63

scrane wrote in post #15442821 (external link)
The 24-105 is the lens people hate to love. It's not very long and it's not very wide. It's not expensive or exclusive. It is not a sexy lens.
But it is reliable and consistent in its output. Auto focus is reliable and precise. Image stabilization works great across it's range. It sharpens up remarkably well in post processing.
As far as IQ goes, the 24-70 II is better. It also is more than three times the price and lacks IS.
The 24-105 is very much an OK lens.

24mm is pretty wide on FF. But I agree. I could use a little more reach...but then it would just be a 28-135 with a red ring, wouldn't it :p

howiewu wrote in post #15442945 (external link)
I pretty much agree with this assessment. Its Achilles Heel is the vignetting (and distortion) at the wide end, but otherwise, for what it is, it's quite good. Not stellar but good, and the price pretty much settled to its true worth.

Vignetting doesn't bother me too much (I actually like it :D) but the distortion is a bit much at 24mm.


Vimeo (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Youtube (external link)| Facebook (external link)
5D3 | 24-105 f/4 L | Samyang cine 14 T/3.1 | video stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
scrane
Member
63 posts
Joined Mar 2005
     
Jan 04, 2013 09:51 |  #64

Luckily vignetting and distortion are pretty easy to correct in PP, though you have to sacrifice some field of view with distortion. At least it is simple barrel. In most cases without straight lines at the edges it can be ignored.
But it's not like I wouldn't ditch it in a minute if there was a reasonably priced alternative. If the new 24-70 f4 is as sharp as the 70-200 f4 and can be had for less than $1200. I'll go for it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
howiewu
Senior Member
Avatar
629 posts
Likes: 21
Joined Feb 2011
     
Jan 04, 2013 10:03 |  #65

scrane wrote in post #15443290 (external link)
Luckily vignetting and distortion are pretty easy to correct in PP, though you have to sacrifice some field of view with distortion. At least it is simple barrel. In most cases without straight lines at the edges it can be ignored.
But it's not like I wouldn't ditch it in a minute if there was a reasonably priced alternative. If the new 24-70 f4 is as sharp as the 70-200 f4 and can be had for less than $1200. I'll go for it.

Everything comes at a price. Correcting distortion in PP will not only reduce field of view, it also introduces loss of image quality. If these lens imperfections could be corrected at no loss, then nobody would bother making top quality optics.


5DII, 70D
17-40mm f/4 USM L, 24-70mm f/4 IS USM L, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 IS USM L, 24mm f/3.5 TS-E L, 35mm f/2, 50mm f/1.4 USM, 100mm f/2.8 IS USM L, 300mm f/2.8 IS USM II L, 430 EX II, 270 EX II, 1.4x TC III, 2x TC III, Kenko Pro 300 1.4x TC
Home Page: http://www.travelerath​ome.com (external link), Blog: http://travelerathome.​wordpress.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Donald ­ Ong
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
64 posts
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Singapore, Singapore
     
Jan 05, 2013 06:42 |  #66

howiewu wrote in post #15443338 (external link)
Everything comes at a price. Correcting distortion in PP will not only reduce field of view, it also introduces loss of image quality. If these lens imperfections could be corrected at no loss, then nobody would bother making top quality optics.

even more important for video as correcting distortion in video really isn't simple. :D


Vimeo (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Youtube (external link)| Facebook (external link)
5D3 | 24-105 f/4 L | Samyang cine 14 T/3.1 | video stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Stir ­ Fry ­ A ­ Lot
Senior Member
679 posts
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Berkeley, Ca
     
Jan 05, 2013 11:19 |  #67

For photos use the joystick to select the AF point. I ended up remapping my dof preview button to turn on ai servo mode instead. I use it when shooting events or at 2.0 or lower.

I don't use my 24-105 mostly because my copy has terribly mushy corners. I love it for video production though.


Flickr (external link)
5D3 | 5Dc | 7D | Tok 16-28 | 24-105 | 17-55 | 70-200 f4 IS | Pancake 40 | Sigma 50 | 85 1.8 | Yongnuo 565EX | Demb Flash Bracket | DiffuseIt Bounce Card | Manfrotto 535 CF Tripod | 2x Yongnuo YN560s | 2x PBL Softbox Umbrellas | CyberSync Triggers | Epson R3000 | A very understanding wife

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bluefire7
Member
Avatar
190 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 12
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Queens, NY
     
Jan 05, 2013 14:09 |  #68

Donald Ong wrote in post #15440982 (external link)
Very nice :D

thanks, donald!:lol:


Canon 5DmkIV | Canon 16-35 F2.8L II, Canon 100 F2.8L Macro, Canon 135 F2L, Canon 24-70 F2.8L II, Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS II, Sigma 50 F1.4 ART, Sigma 85 F1.4, | Canon 600 RT, Canon 580 EXII, Canon 430 EXII | Radiopopper JrX's
NY Wedding Photographer (external link):eek:
LIKE Us (external link):cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Donald ­ Ong
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
64 posts
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Singapore, Singapore
     
Jan 05, 2013 18:52 |  #69

Stir Fry A Lot wrote in post #15448030 (external link)
For photos use the joystick to select the AF point. I ended up remapping my dof preview button to turn on ai servo mode instead. I use it when shooting events or at 2.0 or lower.

I don't use my 24-105 mostly because my copy has terribly mushy corners. I love it for video production though.

yeh, for video, there's nothing quite like it... Good reach, constant aperture, IS, decent-enough-sharpness, smooth focus ring (most still lenses fail here and are hence, unusable for video), good macro at 105mm etc.

Just a shame it isn't as sharp as the 70-200 f/4...but that's to be expected.


Vimeo (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Youtube (external link)| Facebook (external link)
5D3 | 24-105 f/4 L | Samyang cine 14 T/3.1 | video stuff

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Excelisus
Member
84 posts
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 11, 2013 19:10 |  #70

Just wanted to add that I have had the same experience (with 6D). I can understand if a lens is not as sharp as the primes, but this lens is considerably soft and I found a lot of threads talking about this softness. Another comparison is here (external link).

Over the weekend I was out shooting with both the 24-105 and the 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM lens. To my disappointment, the L lens did not perform any better than the cheaper zoom lens. I know some people say not to pixel peep, but there is a functional reason for that, such as when you're shooting wildlife and need to crop. Furthermore, if an expensive lens is going to perform at the same level as a much cheaper one, financially it makes little sense to own it.

At first I thought I might have a bad copy (MFA is ruled out), but looking at various scientific lens reviews and also seeing many threads like this one, it's clear that the lens was just designed this way. This is unfortunate, because there are many other lenses that perform at the similar level, but are half the price and have much larger reach and/or speed. It's likely that this lens would be viewed as another ordinary lens had it not be for the red ring and $1k price tag.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ejenner
Goldmember
Avatar
3,860 posts
Gallery: 96 photos
Likes: 1045
Joined Nov 2011
Location: Denver, CO
     
Mar 11, 2013 21:43 |  #71

Excelisus wrote in post #15704146 (external link)
J

Over the weekend I was out shooting with both the 24-105 and the 70-300 4-5.6 IS USM lens. To my disappointment, the L lens did not perform any better than the cheaper zoom lens. I know some people say not to pixel peep, but there is a functional reason for that, such as when you're shooting wildlife and need to crop. Furthermore, if an expensive lens is going to perform at the same level as a much cheaper one, financially it makes little sense to own it.

This make no sense to me. You're comparing a 24-105 to a 70-300? I guess they are both about a 4x zoom, but variable aperture shot-to-long telephotos are much easier to make sharp than wide-to-short telephoto range.

The question is what else covers approximately that range and is considerably sharper? 24-70 II is more than twice as much and not as long and the new 24-70 f4 sacrifices a good chunk of zoom range.

But if you know of a cheaper alternative, I'm all ears (or even a $2k alternative with the same zoom range + IS, but much sharper)


Edward Jenner
5DIV, M6, GX1 II, Sig15mm FE, 16-35 F4,TS-E 17, TS-E 24, 35 f2 IS, M11-22, M18-150 ,24-105, T45 1.8VC, 70-200 f4 IS, 70-200 2.8 vII, Sig 85 1.4, 100L, 135L, 400DOII.
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/48305795@N03/ (external link)
https://www.facebook.c​om/edward.jenner.372/p​hotos (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Excelisus
Member
84 posts
Joined Jun 2007
     
Mar 11, 2013 22:27 |  #72

From that perspective, you have a valid point. I am not saying that you can get other lenses exactly the same range as the 24-105mm. I'm only saying that the lens is not very sharp. If that zoom range is very important to you, then you pretty much have no other choice because there are no other choices in that exact range. But like many people, IQ is very important for me. Also, I don't really care too much about zoom below 70mm because the reach is still small and can be easily taken care of by cutting down the distance (portrait vs body shot, for example), whereas a zoom like 70-200 or beyond is quite useful when trying to shoot from a distance. So having one prime lens in the range of 30-50mm and a zoom lens beyond 70mm, both of which have much better IQ and much further reach, is a much better alternative, at least for those who don't have your zoom needs.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wisdom2thewise
Member
127 posts
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia.
     
Mar 12, 2013 07:11 as a reply to  @ Excelisus's post |  #73

Took a spontaneous shot of my daughter the other day. I turned around and fired the camera with the following settings:

Tv @ Al Focus mode
1/125 / iso 100 / 75mm / f/8

I like the photo, despite being a tad soft. Surely my camera skills & settings were to blame??

IMAGE: http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8378/8545404003_8e532d4097_b.jpg
IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/92488751@N07/8​545404003/  (external link)
Katie (external link) by wisdom2thewise (external link), on Flickr"]
(DUPLICATE IMAGE)
 (external link)
Katie (external link) by wisdom2thewise, on Flickr (external link)

Sold my first DSLR & lens = 6D (24-105L) & (40)
Now what prime should i get with the 7d mark ii?...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Anthon
Senior Member
267 posts
Joined May 2012
     
Mar 12, 2013 08:20 |  #74

And yet again, a lot of hatred for 24-105.

It's a great lens, just get over it. I did a nightclub shoot recently - on 24-35mm range the picture looks razor sharp on 100% crop, even on f4 with iso 1600 and 50 luminance noise reduction in lightroom.

Corner sharpness you say? Screw it, who needs it anyways!
Distortion? No one would ever notice.
Vignette? I like it!
CA? Haven't noticed any, but you can easily correct it if you do.

Not to mention that I bought it mainly for built quality, weather-sealing, - and IQ turned out to be great also.

Does it perform much better that cheap zooms? Actually it does! Blows 17-85 of ouf the water at wide end. But you have to know how to get the best out of it!

If you can't get good images from it, maybe you should give up photography.


Canon 5D mark II Gripped / 17-40mm f4 L / 24-105mm f4 L / Canon 70-200 f4 L / Samyang 14mm 2.8 AE / Pentax SMC 50mm f1.7 / Pentax SMC 28 2.8 / Canon Speedlite 600ex-rt / Canon Speedlite 580ex II / YN560 II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
lgunnz
Senior Member
Avatar
419 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 3
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Abu Dhabi
     
Mar 12, 2013 11:52 |  #75

I got my 24-105 as the kit lens with my 5DIII and am absolutely in love with it. Yes there was vignette of the shots I took at a car show, don't care I used it. Mine is not only sharp but I honestly don't have to do anything to most of my Raw files. I considered just getting the body and buying the 24-70 that I've wanted since I started shooting but glad I saved myself the money.


5DIII|24-105L|100L|135L|70-200L|28-135|430EX II|

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

14,788 views & 0 likes for this thread
24-105 slightly soft?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is paneerIegend
1225 guests, 299 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.