Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, reviewed by JM Photos

mkoller wrote in post #17529498
Also wanted to mention that any distortion on the extremes of the lens are handled nicely in lightroom 5 with lens corrections.

This!

I'll toss in my 2 cents on this lens as well. I got it years back when I first got the 5D2 kit. I got bored of it and sold it. It was missed in the bag after a few months. So when I decided to grab my second 6D, I got it in a kit since the price was too good to turn down. Such a solid lens and really can't go wrong. A quick example from my latest set,

IMAGE LINK: https://flic.kr/p/snL3​gy

The zoom range of this lens is fantastic on full frame. 24mm is wide enough to give that dramatic "wide-angle feel," and 105mm is long enough to do some casual portraiture or close-up sports. It's solidly built, and stabilized to boot (unlike the 24-70 II). Kit lens or not, it's a real winner. I feel it might be due for an update, since image sensors are getting better, but it's managed to do just fine even on newer full frame cameras (6D).

Great pictures using this lense.... Just had to say i have never seen that kind of mountain goat !!! Looks alien lol

What mountain goat?

JM Photos wrote in post #17706654
What mountain goat?

The Mountain Goat in this collection here:
https://www.flickr.com …39565564/with/8​386251871/

That was the link I posted in the post that LITTLEL was replying to.
I don't think it is an unusual type of Mountain Goat. It's the only type of Mountain Goat we have anywhere in North America.

I am fully satisfied with my 24-105; distortion is only a problem if you don't have a post-processing application and the IS is very handy.

Contrary to what I expected, I use this lens and my 7D Mk II for action/sport photo work all the time and it does a splendid job. Maybe the 24-70 focuses a little more accurately (due to the wider aperture and the camera's ability to use the high precision AF points), but I need that extra reach surprisingly often.

I am very happy with this lens on the 6D. As stated before, the slight distortion is fixed with LR easily.

sweet picture !!!

Just wish Canon would release a mk2 for this lens....
Sure, it's not perfect and has some flaws, but some people just bash about it because it's so cheap these days - thanks to Canon's kit bundling.
Anyway, I have one but decided to get a second lens with this range. The Sigma fits the bill....till the mk2 comes out

I'm lucky enough to have in my temporary posession 4 lenses that I have been evaluating. They are the Canon 24-105 f4L IS, Canon 16-35 f4L IS, Canon 35 F2 IS and the Sigma 35 F1.4 Art. Great fun but I'm cross-eyed from comparing hundreds of images taken with these lenses on a Canon EOS 5DS. So as not to get too technical and possibly boring suffice it to say the only one I'm keeping is.....drum roll and extended delay just like on the telly....the Canon 24-105 f4L. I surprised myself with this result as it certainly isn't the most expensive and generally receives mediocre to quite good at best reviews compared to say the 16-35 which has been well pumped up lately review-wise. To be fair I tend to concentrate on landscapes so the allure of f1.4 is lost on me somewhat but I do agree that the bokeh at that aperture on the Sigma was striking. Sharpness is important to me and the 24-105 performed on a par with all of the others which again was surprising. Is it possible that the results were affected/ improved by the huge 50mp sensor of the 5DS? I also surprisingly found the IS on the 24-105 to be equal to, if not better than, the newer 16-35. The Canon 35 f2 overall was pretty good but lagged behind in sharpness just a little. The Sigma suffered from inconsistent AF surprise surprise. All the images I have taken so far have been in a static environment using tripod, mirror lockup plus 2 second delay, remote shutter release and at all apertures and shutter speeds. I intend to continue with evaluation out and about with no tripod or other assistance but I don't expect my view to change radically. If it does I shall report back here.

I was going to get the 28-135 IS USM for my first EOS body(EOS 630), but the reviews I read on this lens were so good I decided to get it instead. Picked it up "white box" on Ebay for about 60% of what it sells for new. Should be here next week. Since you can't shoot at super high ISOs with film, the IS should be great on the 630. I've never had a lens with IS.

I too am a fan of this lens. Great versatility and plenty sharp. I get a kick of how maligned this lens is elsewhere on this forum. I've been seeing many recent comments about how poor the image quality is and how bad the distortion is, the 24-70 just 'blows it away'. Yea, right. After all, it's a 'kit lens' so, therefore, it's crap. Comments like these are born out of the tremendous equipment snobbery that exists in many here.

After owning and shooting this lens, and in fact many other non $2000 Canon lenses, I can say that I get fantastic results from the 24-105L.

saea501 wrote in post #17732117
I too am a fan of this lens. Great versatility and plenty sharp. I get a kick of how maligned this lens is elsewhere on this forum. I've been seeing many recent comments about how poor the image quality is and how bad the distortion is, the 24-70 just 'blows it away'. Yea, right. After all, it's a 'kit lens' so, therefore, it's crap. Comments like these are born out of the tremendous equipment snobbery that exists in many here.

After owning and shooting this lens, and in fact many other non $2000 Canon lenses, I can say that I get fantastic results from the 24-105L.

Well said!
I shoot many lenses that are well over $2,000......and I still get great results from my 24-105. It is definitely my primary "go-to" lens whenever I need to shoot at short focal lengths.