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 05 Jun 2013 (Wednesday) 17:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Ready to buy but want to say "Wow!"

 
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jun 05, 2013 18:48 |  #16

ConCon wrote in post #16003626 (external link)
Does the 24-105 offer any significant reasons to upgrade over the 15-85 lens that I already have?

Depends on your usage. If you shoot more often on the long side, it gives you a stop faster aperture. If you want weather sealing, it's there. If you want full frame compatibility to use on both FF and crop, then yes. Just don't expect a jump in IQ because they are very even.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
4g63photo
Goldmember
Avatar
2,742 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Dec 2005
Location: SoCal
     
Jun 05, 2013 18:49 as a reply to  @ post 16003627 |  #17

I must be the only one in this world that thinks the 24-105 kicks ass!!! The range is awesome. Constant aperture is great. IS is very helpful. Super versatile. What about skill? Kinda like some someone's quote.... Hey your oven makes great cakes? Your lens makes wow pictures? No? Maybe I'm off here?


Ps-I promise I'm not being mean. I just wonder about pixel peepers/and chart photographers.


-Fernando-
Gear List
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jun 05, 2013 18:56 |  #18

My Sigma 17-50 and Canon 70-200/4 IS are both sharper, but I hate switching between these lenses so often. I like to shoot portraits and the classical full frame equivalent focal length of 85-135mm is not covered by either of these lenses in full. The 24-105 however does. When shooting studio shots with off camera flash, I can go from full body shots to tight headshots without having to change lenses and keep a nice perspective.

Also outside, when the kids are running around, I have a nice range to cover them with out getting too close, yet be wide enough when they run up close to me. The 24-105 is my most used lens and I have some pretty good glass to choose from.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
irishman
Goldmember
Avatar
4,098 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
     
Jun 05, 2013 19:07 |  #19

Pardon my French, but you guys are crazy. The 24-105 is so sharp at f/8 your eyes will bleed. I've had so many lenses in my life I can't count them all and if I could only have one lens this is it. Built like a brick, uber-useful range, tack sharp, handholdable down to a second. Hey, go take pictures of something other than a chart and then come back and talk. Don't talk trash about my 24-105 boy.


6D, G9, Sigma 50 1.4, Sigma 15mm Fisheye, Sigma 50 2.8 macro, Nikon 14-24G 2.8, Canon 16-35 2.8 II, Canon 24-105 f/4 IS, Canon 70-200 2.8 IS, tripod, lights, other stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NewCreation
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,214 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 585
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 05, 2013 19:08 |  #20

h14nha wrote in post #16003627 (external link)
The level of sharpness to be expected should be comparable to your 50/1.8 if you have a sharp copy of that. You mention reach and portraits, what about the 135/2 L. It has the attributes you say you want, and is an awesome bang for buck lens.

I must not have a sharp 50/1.8 because I can't stand it wide open. I'll put the 135 on my list to consider. Thanks.

4g63photo wrote in post #16003671 (external link)
I must be the only one in this world that thinks the 24-105 kicks ass!!! The range is awesome. Constant aperture is great. IS is very helpful. Super versatile. What about skill? Kinda like some someone's quote.... Hey your oven makes great cakes? Your lens makes wow pictures? No? Maybe I'm off here?


Ps-I promise I'm not being mean. I just wonder about pixel peepers/and chart photographers.

You got me...I peep on occasion. I want to count eyelashes. lol In all seriousness though, most of the soft images I get are out of my old tammy, so may I will look at the 70-200 first.


My name is Brenda ~Saved by grace, walking by faith
http://brendahoffmanph​otography.com (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NewCreation
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,214 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 585
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 05, 2013 19:10 |  #21

greenjeans wrote in post #16003622 (external link)
I have the 18-135, 24-105L, and the 70-200 F4L IS. I use these on a T3i and a 6D interchangeably and the two L lenses get 90% of my total use. The 18-135 has served me well as a general walkaround on the T3i, but it hardly ever gets used since getting the 24-105. If I already had the 18-135, which I did, I would get the 70-200 first, which I also did. I have no complaints with the 18-135 other than some creep. The 70-200 F4 is a fantastic lens and I wish I had bought it sooner. I got the 24-105 with my 6D because the 18-135 will not fit the full frame.

I don't look at the charts and testing very much, just what I see from photographs I take myself. Get the 70-200 first and live with the 18-135 until it can be replaced. Just my opinion.

I may do just that. Thanks for your input! As I just mentioned previously, I have most softness/complaints with my 75-300 anyway.


My name is Brenda ~Saved by grace, walking by faith
http://brendahoffmanph​otography.com (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phantelope
Goldmember
Avatar
1,889 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 40
Joined Sep 2008
Location: NorCal
     
Jun 05, 2013 19:34 |  #22

I'd go with the Tamron 24-70 (has vibration control, Canon doesn't and is a LOT more expensive), a great lens I just got and already love. 70-200 f4 is fantastic, and a lot smaller and lighter than the other one. A lot. Cheaper too, but that wasn't a concern for me when I bought it, size and weight was. I could not fit the 2.8 in my largest bag with all my other gear. Unless you really have a need for wider open, go with the f4 and don't look back.

If possible, go look at them all in a store (if such a thing still exists where you live) and check them out. I could not be happier with my lenses, but I also don't pixel peep :-)


40D, 5D3, a bunch of lenses and other things :cool:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 35
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Jun 05, 2013 19:37 |  #23

The 24-105 is definitely not a "wow" lens. What it is, is the perfect walkaround general purpose zoom available for Canon FF cameras thanks it its relatively small size, light weight, constant aperture, weather sealing, fast AF, great range, IS and low price. If you have a crop camera, I would not recommend it because 24mm is not wide enough IMO. If you want a "wow" lens, look more into high end primes, they really will wow you. The Sigma 35 1.4 and Canon 135L are two of the cheapest "wow" factor lenses out there IMO. After those, it gets more expensive rather quickly.

I bought the 70-200 f4 IS as my first L lens. It did not wow me. It made me feel a bit ripped off in fact, I felt it was not worth $1300. So I returned it and bought the non-IS version, and that did impress me a lot. It was everything the IS version was (except for IS and weather sealing), at half the price. IMO if you're going to buy the f4 IS, never buy it new. I ended up buying a used one when I found a good deal and I'm much happier.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
17,989 posts
Gallery: 33 photos
Likes: 2035
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jun 05, 2013 19:46 |  #24

you should really think about renting lenses...especially for the longer lengths...you can see if the size/weight of the lenses works out for you...instead of the f2.8 version I though, i'd consider the sigma, and tamron options...

you could also look at upgrading your 18-135IS to the STM version...there doesn't look to be a massive difference sharpness wise between it, and the 24-105L

also buy lenses for the camera you have now...no sense in buying for a camera you don't own...if you're terribly worried about losing money when you have to sell...buy used


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,976 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
Jun 05, 2013 20:05 |  #25

NewCreation wrote in post #16003498 (external link)
Yeah, I know two different lenses. :/ I figured I would end up with a good range between the two. I eventually want to get rid of both my 18-135 and my OLD Tamron 75-300. Maybe I can start with the 70-200 and ponder my options for the other end of my range for a bit longer.

When I compare the 24-105 to the 18-135 on this site: http://www.dxomark.com …and3)/Canon/(ca​mera3)/272 (external link) on a 50d (they don't have 60d as an option) There isn't much of a difference to, in my mind, to justify the expense. I have considered the 85/1.8 before. Do you have thoughts on the 70-200/2.8 IS ver 1. I read that the 70-200/4 IS is sharper. I can't justify the ver 2 of the 2.8 because this is just a hobby at this point.

The 70-200/2.8IS is a great lens; I put over 10,000 shots a year on mine with no complaints. It is a little soft at 200/2.8, but stopped down to f/4 it is plenty sharp. I think you'd be happy with either lens; it's a question of wanting to have f/2.8 when you need it or would rather save the weight.


Current: 2x5DM3, 8mm fish, 17-40/4, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/4IS, 85/1.8, 135/2, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/2.8IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,422 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 341
Joined Sep 2011
     
Jun 05, 2013 20:09 |  #26

h14nha wrote in post #16003627 (external link)
The level of sharpness to be expected should be comparable to your 50/1.8 if you have a sharp copy of that. You mention reach and portraits, what about the 135/2 L. It has the attributes you say you want, and is an awesome bang for buck lens.

My 24-105 isn't as soft at any aperture or focal length as my 50/1.8 is at f1.8.

My 24-105 isn't as sharp at any aperture or focal length as my 50/1.8 is at f4.

Your statement to me is like saying traffic on I-90 is as busy in Montana as it is in Chicago because it is the same road.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NewCreation
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,214 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 585
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 05, 2013 20:18 |  #27

phantelope wrote in post #16003765 (external link)
I'd go with the Tamron 24-70 (has vibration control, Canon doesn't and is a LOT more expensive), a great lens I just got and already love. 70-200 f4 is fantastic, and a lot smaller and lighter than the other one. A lot. Cheaper too, but that wasn't a concern for me when I bought it, size and weight was. I could not fit the 2.8 in my largest bag with all my other gear. Unless you really have a need for wider open, go with the f4 and don't look back.

If possible, go look at them all in a store (if such a thing still exists where you live) and check them out. I could not be happier with my lenses, but I also don't pixel peep :-)

I wish there were a store near me! The Best Buy near me is pathetic for options and the nearest real camera shop is an hour and a half. :/ Gas is $4.15 here so I really don't want to travel that far but I may have to.

Sirrith wrote in post #16003774 (external link)
The 24-105 is definitely not a "wow" lens. What it is, is the perfect walkaround general purpose zoom available for Canon FF cameras thanks it its relatively small size, light weight, constant aperture, weather sealing, fast AF, great range, IS and low price. If you have a crop camera, I would not recommend it because 24mm is not wide enough IMO. If you want a "wow" lens, look more into high end primes, they really will wow you. The Sigma 35 1.4 and Canon 135L are two of the cheapest "wow" factor lenses out there IMO. After those, it gets more expensive rather quickly.

I bought the 70-200 f4 IS as my first L lens. It did not wow me. It made me feel a bit ripped off in fact, I felt it was not worth $1300. So I returned it and bought the non-IS version, and that did impress me a lot. It was everything the IS version was (except for IS and weather sealing), at half the price. IMO if you're going to buy the f4 IS, never buy it new. I ended up buying a used one when I found a good deal and I'm much happier.

I was definitely considering used or refurbished.

DreDaze wrote in post #16003794 (external link)
you should really think about renting lenses...especially for the longer lengths...you can see if the size/weight of the lenses works out for you...instead of the f2.8 version I though, i'd consider the sigma, and tamron options...

you could also look at upgrading your 18-135IS to the STM version...there doesn't look to be a massive difference sharpness wise between it, and the 24-105L

also buy lenses for the camera you have now...no sense in buying for a camera you don't own...if you're terribly worried about losing money when you have to sell...buy used

Thanks for your suggestions. The STM version may be an option. Renting is also a good idea. I'd have to look at an online source and I don't know much about that at all. Any suggestions?


My name is Brenda ~Saved by grace, walking by faith
http://brendahoffmanph​otography.com (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
timbop
Goldmember
Avatar
2,976 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Apr 2007
Location: Southern New Jersey, USA
     
Jun 05, 2013 20:23 |  #28

lensrentals.com

You should be able to rent for a weekend for $50 or so. Or, you could also go the "buy and resell" approach with a used lens


Current: 2x5DM3, 8mm fish, 17-40/4, 24-105/4IS, 35/2IS, 70-200/4IS, 85/1.8, 135/2, 580's and AB800's
Formerly: 7D, 300D, 5D, 5DM2, 20D, 50D, 1DM2, 17-55IS, 24-70, 28-135IS, 40/2.8, 50/1.8, 50/1.4, 70-200/2.8IS, 70-300IS, 70-200/2.8, 100 macro, 400/5.6, tammy 17-50 and 28-75, sigma 50 macro & 100-300

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
NewCreation
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
3,214 posts
Gallery: 47 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 585
Joined Jan 2013
Location: Michigan
     
Jun 05, 2013 20:37 |  #29

timbop wrote in post #16003886 (external link)
lensrentals.com

You should be able to rent for a weekend for $50 or so. Or, you could also go the "buy and resell" approach with a used lens

Thank you and good thought on the buy/resell. I am getting pretty familiar with used prices so I would know if I can get my money back.


My name is Brenda ~Saved by grace, walking by faith
http://brendahoffmanph​otography.com (external link)
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
TheArchitect
Senior Member
Avatar
326 posts
Joined May 2009
     
Jun 05, 2013 21:05 |  #30

irishman wrote in post #16003714 (external link)
Pardon my French, but you guys are crazy. The 24-105 is so sharp at f/8 your eyes will bleed. I've had so many lenses in my life I can't count them all and if I could only have one lens this is it. Built like a brick, uber-useful range, tack sharp, handholdable down to a second. Hey, go take pictures of something other than a chart and then come back and talk. Don't talk trash about my 24-105 boy.

I love my 24-105 (perfect range for me) but mine isn't sharp like you describe. Sometimes I wonder if I should rent another 24-105 to compare it with mine. Probably just user error :)

Anyway, my 24-105 is on the camera 90% of the time and I think it's a great lens. Not as good as others but the perfect combo of IQ, versatility and size. As good as the 24-70 L's are I just can't imagine willingly giving up the 71-105 range. I don't like to change lenses unless I have to so switching to the 70-200 isn't ideal for me.




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

8,986 views & 0 likes for this thread
Ready to buy but want to say "Wow!"
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 montourauto
1050 guests, 266 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.