Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

I've only had the lens a week and so far I'm very happy with it seems very sharp even at f/4.

I recently shot a party solely with 24-105 on a 5DII:

Here are few shots from my visit to Marfa Texas. All handheld shots

Prada Store - Marfa Tx

1.

Just a few shots i got when ther was a fly in at the local air stip on the weekend

Here is one from Yesterday.....

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

KoenigNazgul wrote in post #7092382
We totally got a bad copy with our 5D mk2 at my work. We shoot facing down with the camera parallel to a table with flat rocks on the table. We level everything out so it is a flat focus plane. Our corners are just mush with this lens. I brought in my 50mm f/1.4 and 100mm f/2.8 macro and tested f/4-11 between all three lenses with the 24-105 zoomed in to match the primes.

I've heard from numerous people that the quality control for this lens is just not up to par. If you get a good copy it's great, but the bad ones are crap.

This is the only image I have easy access to right now. It's one I prepared to show my bosses.

I just got this lens. My copy does the same as yours. What did you end up doing with it? Send it back, send it in for repair, just curious because I'm really questioning what to do with it.

JVS, what does the code UX made in 2009 have to do with it? I also have a copy that I got on Friday which I am quite unhappy with. The pix are noticeably soft with out any pixel peeping. I've turned the IS off, its on a tripod, studio work, I'm just SAD. I really wanted this lens.

Thinking of trading up from my 17-40 to a 24-105. I LOVE my 17-40 but I'm coming to the realization its just not a walk-around. Does anyone think losing the 7mm on the wide end is a disadvantage to gaining 65mm on the long end? I wish I could get both, but I just can't afford the overlap, at least for the next few months.

Icy Bokeh

maranelloboy05 wrote in post #9666074
Thinking of trading up from my 17-40 to a 24-105. I LOVE my 17-40 but I'm coming to the realization its just not a walk-around. Does anyone think losing the 7mm on the wide end is a disadvantage to gaining 65mm on the long end? I wish I could get both, but I just can't afford the overlap, at least for the next few months.

If I had to choose between the two I'd have to go for the 24-105 (on a 5D) -- I'd miss the longer focal range for a walkaround lens. I have a 16-35 but it is not used as much as the 24-105.

tonylong wrote in post #9666666
If I had to choose between the two I'd have to go for the 24-105 (on a 5D) -- I'd miss the longer focal range for a walkaround lens. I have a 16-35 but it is not used as much as the 24-105.

Agreed! I sold my 17-40 because it wasn't being used enough due having the Tamron 28-75 as my walk-around lens. Having 105mm on the long end would be sweeet and sacrificing a few mm on the short end would be worth it to me.

jdlloyd67 wrote in post #9666734
Agreed! I sold my 17-40 because it wasn't being used enough due having the Tamron 28-75 as my walk-around lens. Having 105mm on the long end would be sweeet and sacrificing a few mm on the short end would be worth it to me.

I third that, 24mm is still pretty wide on full frame. I still want a 17-40 though. I should probably stop lurking around the lens forum.

I should say, though, that the choice for the 24-105 applies to me for shooting full frame. If I was shooting a 1.6 crop, I'd probably reverse the choice because having the ability to shoot wide is important. Silly, isn't it? But other people have different preferences. And, on my 1D3, which is a 1.3 crop, I'm happy with either!

Thanks guys, will probably look at trading up in the next week or so, I guess worst case scenario is I go back to my 17-40.