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 18 Feb 2017 (Saturday) 10:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

24/105 F/4 L compared to the 24/105 F/4 L II what is the major differance ????

 
Lbsimon
...never exercised in my life
Avatar
2,613 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 227
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Boston, MA
     
May 31, 2017 11:20 |  #31

CanonPriceWatch offered a brand new I for under $600 (the US version in a white box). I got it yesterday. I decided that the improvements in version II are not worth $500 price difference.


5D Mark IV | 6D | S110
EF 17-40L | EF 24-105L (two) | EF 70-200L F4 IS | EF 100-400L II | EF 85 1.8 | EF 50 1.8 STM | Canon 1.4x III | Canon 1.4x II
Yongnuo 685 | Nissin Di622 M2 | Nissin Di422

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,206 posts
Gallery: 44 photos
Likes: 1311
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
May 31, 2017 11:40 |  #32

One, other note: The v1 lens was recently discontinued by Canon, which means it will fall off of their 'supported' lens list. Not that I've ever needed repairs for my v1, but it's something to consider if you're at the point of buying into one new.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ascenta
Senior Member
Avatar
483 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 188
Joined Sep 2005
Post edited over 1 year ago by Ascenta.
     
May 31, 2017 11:56 |  #33

Yeah it's another decision for those looking at the lens for the first time. For me upgrading, it was easy after all that experience. After using v1 for 11 years, I'd easily recommend spending the extra even though the upgrade isn't amazing. Mine was still in mint condition after all that time. For the extra $500, you're paying about $45 extra per year for the new one if you keep it as long as I did. Not bad. Even less for me since I got $360 on a trade-in.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lbsimon
...never exercised in my life
Avatar
2,613 posts
Gallery: 17 photos
Likes: 227
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Boston, MA
     
May 31, 2017 14:02 |  #34

Ascenta wrote in post #18367466 (external link)
Yeah it's another decision for those looking at the lens for the first time. For me upgrading, it was easy after all that experience. After using v1 for 11 years, I'd easily recommend spending the extra even though the upgrade isn't amazing. Mine was still in mint condition after all that time. For the extra $500, you're paying about $45 extra per year for the new one if you keep it as long as I did. Not bad. Even less for me since I got $360 on a trade-in.

I think you are missing a point. I am not saving $45 a year for 11 years , I am going to spend "saved" $500 on something else now!!! :lol:


5D Mark IV | 6D | S110
EF 17-40L | EF 24-105L (two) | EF 70-200L F4 IS | EF 100-400L II | EF 85 1.8 | EF 50 1.8 STM | Canon 1.4x III | Canon 1.4x II
Yongnuo 685 | Nissin Di622 M2 | Nissin Di422

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ascenta
Senior Member
Avatar
483 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 188
Joined Sep 2005
Post edited over 1 year ago by Ascenta.
     
May 31, 2017 14:07 as a reply to  @ Lbsimon's post |  #35

Understood; not missing the point at all. I was obviously giving a very specific example here. Also saying that I wouldn't miss the $500 later on. I'm not taking it with me :)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FuturamaJSP
Goldmember
Avatar
2,227 posts
Likes: 81
Joined Oct 2009
     
Jun 01, 2017 06:49 |  #36

It depends on whether you are satisfied with your current lens or not.
I am still using my 8yr old EF 24-70 f2.8v1 because I am still satisfied with the results I am getting with it despite all the positive reviews of the newer vII.
Of course I will upgrade at some point but right now I believe I am more in need of an uwa like the 11-24L


They asked me how well I understood theoretical physics. I said I had a theoretical degree in physics. They said welcome aboard! - Fallout New Vegas
blah blah blah
DA (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,063 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 2838
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Jun 02, 2017 00:33 |  #37

umphotography wrote in post #18281462 (external link)
Canon screwed up on this 25-105 V2 release. What a waste of an update. there is NOTHING there despite what your focal charts will show you

Really, nothing? Or do you mean to say nothing that interests you?

I ask this because it seems to me like they upgraded the Image Stabilization from 3 stops to 4 stops. . That difference is very appealing to me, and would make a noticeable difference in some of the types of photography that I do. . When I can afford to do so, I will upgrade from the V1 to the V2, for no other reason than to gain this extra stop of IS, which is of great importance to me.

.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wallstreetoneil
Goldmember
Avatar
2,085 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 1197
Joined Nov 2014
Location: Toronto Canada
Post edited over 1 year ago by wallstreetoneil.
     
Jun 02, 2017 02:43 |  #38

Tom Reichner wrote in post #18368863 (external link)
Really, nothing? Or do you mean to say nothing that interests you?

I ask this because it seems to me like they upgraded the Image Stabilization from 3 stops to 4 stops. . That difference is very appealing to me, and would make a noticeable difference in some of the types of photography that I do. . When I can afford to do so, I will upgrade from the V1 to the V2, for no other reason than to gain this extra stop of IS, which is of great importance to me.

.


Everytime I read these 24-105 V1 vs V2 discussions I am amazed that the biggest improvement in the lens is never mentioned. The fact that it isn't mentioned I think speaks in many ways to who owns the lens and how it is used.

The new lens is basically 1 full T stop faster in terms of light transmission - the old lens was brutal making the lens basically a 24-105 F5 not an F4 - the new lens is now an F4 lens from a light transmission perspective.

If you combine better light with better IS you have a better lens - ie equivalent to the Sigma except with weather sealing.

The challenge the new lens faces is that this type of FL and F4 speed leads to it being a travel type lens where weight and price are real issues and where the Gen 1 lens shines.

The one ? I have about this lens is why does it apparently score so low on perceived megapixels when placed on a 5dsr.


Hockey and wedding photographer. Favourite camera / lens combos: a 1DX II with a Tamron 45 1.8 VC, an A7Rii with a Canon 24-70F2.8L II, and a 5DSR with a Tamron 85 1.8 VC. Every lens I own I strongly recommend [Canon (35Lii, 100L Macro, 24-70F2.8ii, 70-200F2.8ii, 100-400Lii), Tamron (45 1.8, 85 1.8), Sigma 24-105]. If there are better lenses out there let me know because I haven't found them.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Chris ­ Bellamy
Junior Member
20 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Aug 2012
Location: UK
     
Jun 02, 2017 07:23 as a reply to  @ wallstreetoneil's post |  #39

Their copy seems to have problems around 70mm especially (?focusing/faulty), which is supposed to be the stronger part of the long end. It also scores lower for pMP on the 5Dsr than on the 5DIV, which is weird (14 vs 15). The pMP scores seem occasionally to throw out some very counterintuitive numbers and I've found it difficult to understand what that means, given its one copy - ? checked for faults or not - and an undefined metric. The corresponding numbers for the sigma 24-105A are a little hard to credit (25/20) relative to some good zooms (100-400L II, 24-70f4L) & primes (85 f1.8, 200 f2.8II) that score lower.
Thanks for the T-stop info, I'd not noticed that at all: agreed, you'd have thought it would have been better picked up on.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wallstreetoneil
Goldmember
Avatar
2,085 posts
Gallery: 14 photos
Likes: 1197
Joined Nov 2014
Location: Toronto Canada
Post edited over 1 year ago by wallstreetoneil.
     
Jun 02, 2017 08:40 |  #40

Chris Bellamy wrote in post #18369003 (external link)
The corresponding numbers for the sigma 24-105A are a little hard to credit (25/20) relative to some good zooms (100-400L II, 24-70f4L) & primes (85 f1.8, 200 f2.8II) that score lower..


- the 85 1.8 & 200F2.8 are old lenses so not surprising at all
- the 24-70 F4 is a compromised design to make it small and light so again I'm not surprised

- the 100-400Lii is however a bit of a surprise because I own it, follow the tread of pictures posted using it, and that lens is mega sharp, so my only thought is that the very large zoom range may be the issue

The Sigma, 24-105 F4 OS is however not a surprise at all. I own it, I have tested it thoroughly on the 5DSR, and I can say this with absolute confidence - the lens is a stunner on the 5DSR - it never misses and the detail captured is incredible - even handheld. The Sigma is in fact the single lens that I can guarantee a near 100% handheld tack sharp hit rate with the 5DSR - and my long experiment testing all my L glass on the 5DSR caused me to sell much of it and the Sigma has remained as my goto studio type portrait lens with this camera. I attribute its excellent mating with the 5DSR to a few things in equal parts (the heavy weight of the lens and its size provides great stability, the OS is excellent, the light transmission is excellent and the center 2/3rds of the frame are extremely sharp and perfect for portraits)


Hockey and wedding photographer. Favourite camera / lens combos: a 1DX II with a Tamron 45 1.8 VC, an A7Rii with a Canon 24-70F2.8L II, and a 5DSR with a Tamron 85 1.8 VC. Every lens I own I strongly recommend [Canon (35Lii, 100L Macro, 24-70F2.8ii, 70-200F2.8ii, 100-400Lii), Tamron (45 1.8, 85 1.8), Sigma 24-105]. If there are better lenses out there let me know because I haven't found them.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RDKirk
Adorama says I'm "packed."
Avatar
12,756 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 410
Joined May 2004
Location: USA
     
Jun 02, 2017 09:59 |  #41

Wilt wrote in post #18282167 (external link)
simplified business school analysis:

[A. Cost of development + B. factory tooling costs]/number of units expected to be made + C. per-unit material cost + D. support cost

For the old lens developed over 10 years ago, much lower development cost and factory tooling cost than identical lens designed and tooled today at inflated amounts.
So while C and D might each save some money per unit, far greater costs of A and B overwhelm C and D.

If Canon is merely keeping its engineers busy, rather than laying them off, it is better to put them to work on redesigning a lens. So maybe the simplistic "How long has the design been around?" determines which lenses get the remake effort.

So then you have to ask yourself "WHY?...if new lens performance is not head and shoulders better than the old one?" In some cases, redesign results in good changes. In other cases, redesigns result in more of same...mediocre. Look at how many times Canon has redesigned the 75-300mm zoom! The bean counters run the numbers, they throw the new costs into the calculator, and the managers make decisions based on getting reasonable return per unit. It's the marketing guys who get stuck with the challenge..."It's not much better, it costs us twice as much...how do we get consumers to swallow the new price?"

It might merely be Canon trying to churn up new business, since so many of the 'old' lens is out there, and just maybe one can strive to get GAS-infected consumers to respond.

:rolleyes:

[edit] ...so, per Elton, "new in box version I has a list price of (I believe) $999. A new in box version ii lists for $1099" (B&H pricing confirms this) and is not ALL what was stated, 'the lens is twice the price"

Canon CEOs have stated explicitly that a significant purpose of their redesign effort is to reduce production costs by more production-efficient design. In some cases, they've said it's a matter of a redesign that brings more component manufacture in-house, again to reduce costs or to bring more of the design under their control.

So it might be that very little of the purpose of an update might be anything the user can discern, and they've already acknowledged that.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,038 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 1798
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jun 02, 2017 10:12 |  #42

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #18368912 (external link)
Everytime I read these 24-105 V1 vs V2 discussions I am amazed that the biggest improvement in the lens is never mentioned. The fact that it isn't mentioned I think speaks in many ways to who owns the lens and how it is used.

The new lens is basically 1 full T stop faster in terms of light transmission - the old lens was brutal making the lens basically a 24-105 F5 not an F4 - the new lens is now an F4 lens from a light transmission perspective.

If you combine better light with better IS you have a better lens - ie equivalent to the Sigma except with weather sealing.

The challenge the new lens faces is that this type of FL and F4 speed leads to it being a travel type lens where weight and price are real issues and where the Gen 1 lens shines.

The one ? I have about this lens is why does it apparently score so low on perceived megapixels when placed on a 5dsr.


agreed here. This was the only significant improvement I could see....and thats due largely to the new IS system that I can determine.....same for the 100-400 update. The IS is phenominal.

Wasn't enough for me to step up on the 10-400 either


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
umphotography
grabbing their Johnson
Avatar
10,038 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 1798
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington
     
Jun 02, 2017 10:14 |  #43

wallstreetoneil wrote in post #18369047 (external link)
- the 85 1.8 & 200F2.8 and old lenses so not surprising at all
- the 24-70 F4 is a compromised design to make it small and light so again I'm not surprised

- the 100-400Lii is however a bit of a surprise because I owe it, follow the tread of pictures posed using it, and that lens is mega sharp, so my only thought is that the very large zoom range may be the issue

The Sigma, 24-105 F4 OS is however not a surprise at all - I own it, I have tested it thoroughly on the 5DSR, and I can say this with absolute confidence - the lens is a stunner on the 5DSR - it never misses and the detail capture is incredible - even handheld. The Sigma is in fact the single lens that I can guarantee a near 100% handheld tack sharp hit rate with the 5DSR - and my long experiment testing all my L glass on the 5DSR caused me to sell much of it and the Sigma has remained as my goto studio type portrait lens with this camera. I attribute the excellent mating of the 5DSR with the Sigma to a few things in equal parts (the heavy weight of the lens and its size provides great stability, the OS is excellent, the light transmission is excellent and the center 2/3rds of the frame are extremely sharp are perfect for portraits)


agreed. If I were going to buy a new 24-105 It would be the Sigma. Its a better lens than the current L and the old L for this focal legnth

Great Great Glass


Mike
www.umphotography.com (external link)
GEAR LIST
Facebook (external link)

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

7,228 views & 19 likes for this thread
24/105 F/4 L compared to the 24/105 F/4 L II what is the major differance ????
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 macui
410 guests, 379 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.