24-105L f4.0 or 135L

Should I do it?

Can't afford both, but can sell my 135L for near full price (850), add $400, and get the 24-105L.

135L stellar but exotic for my uses. Use it about once every 2 weeks for a few shots then put it away but in a few months could get the 85 f1.8 or 50 f1.4 that would suit my (amature) portriat needs.

I thought the 135L would expand my creativity more, but mainly its shallow DOF (at f2.0) is hard to get used to and its not really long enough for a good tele. Is perfect for zoo or theater lense, but so would a 70-200 f2.8 that would also cover other needs.

I have a super sharp 28-75 f2.8 Tamron but would love to have IS, better & faster focusing, and a bit more of the wide and long without sacraficing anything in image quality.

2.8 is nice and I use it quite a bit, but I'm a beginner and it trips me up as often as it helps. Don't plan on selling the Tamron just because its such a good copy. If I don't find myself mounting the Tamron after 3 months, I may sell it.

My thinking; f4.0 will be equal on both lenses (Tamron vs Canon), and the Canon may even be better. Many more low light shots will come out due to IS. I'll get to explore 24mm more, and on the longer end, many shots that should be zoomed in a little more will be (with the 105 reach).

I'de truely feel emptier without the 135L, but I think the great walk-around IS L (24-105L) would put enough smiles on my face to compensate. And if it were spot welded to my 20D I probably wouldn't gripe too much.:p

Honore de Balzac, a famous french novelist, once wrote something to the effect that with the last kiss one knows what one is losing, whith the first kiss one knows not what's to come.

However, the 24-105 f4 has some very promising signs about it, and probably it would become welded to your camera (aply the butt weld instead of your "spot weld"...the former is stronger.)

If budget is a concern, as it is with most of us, collecting lenses that just collect dust becomes a liability.

A paperweight is still a paperweight, no matter how nice of a paperweight it is. Give it a good home and get the zoom

Yeah, I know. The 135L is seeing a steady 5% mounting alotment - and those shots do set themselves apart from the ever growing mound of same-oh-same-oh. However; the zoom just keeps calling. Maybe I'll feel flush enough to spring for another artsy purchase and get the 135L again some day - when the necessities are covered a little better.

And Petkal: This one passed your "doesn't rattle" test and everything!

Now for the hard part, finding a 24-105L.

I've had the 135 a few weeks, my other new lens has spent the most time on my camera. Even now i know that's going to be the case. But then the only reason i don't bring the 135 out when i bring my new lens (or my other lenses) out is because i need a new bag

NBEast:
For whatever it's worth, I have handled a 24-105 f4 recently, but no shots. This is what I saw.
* The weight and bulk resembles 17-40 which is good.
* The lens auto focused faster/more silently in a relatively dark camera store than anything else I have ever tried. Moreover, there was not even a hint of hunting/overshoot/targ​et creep in the AF function. But, but.....the AF was tried with the lens mounted on a 5D.......so that's how you should read into the previous AF comment.
* The zoom and manual focus rings turn nicely enough, but probably not as smooth and solid as your 135 prime.
* The finish seemed representative of other black L lenses.

Incidentally, the store staff would not let me do the rattle test, no idea why
Glad your 135 does not rattle....someone should then be lucky to acquire that great albeit a bit specialized lens from you.

Good luck.

Petkal wrote:
NBEast:
For whatever it's worth, I have handled a 24-105 f4 recently, but no shots. This is what I saw.
* The weight and bulk resembles 17-40 which is good.
* The lens auto focused faster/more silently in a relatively dark camera store than anything else I have ever tried. Moreover, there was not even a hint of hunting/overshoot/targ​et creep in the AF function. But, but.....the AF was tried with the lens mounted on a 5D.......so that's how you should read into the previous AF comment.
* The zoom and manual focus rings turn nicely enough, but probably not as smooth and solid as your 135 prime.
* The finish seemed representative of other black L lenses.

Incidentally, the store staff would not let me do the rattle test, no idea why
Glad your 135 does not rattle....someone should then be lucky to acquire that great albeit a bit specialized lens from you.

Good luck.

Thanks! 5D AF gets great reports. Don't think our local shops stock that yet. Still, if it matches the 17-40L AF for my 20D I'll take it.

Yeah, the 135 is gone. Now the wait. When will we ever ever ever see them available online. I'm feeling jazzed. The thought of mounting this baby (oops, "this is a family resturant ") .... maybe won't equal the 135L mounting thrill, but it'll happen so much more often. OK, I'll just stop there.:p

Sean-Mcr wrote:
I've had the 135 a few weeks, my other new lens has spent the most time on my camera. Even now i know that's going to be the case. But then the only reason i don't bring the 135 out when i bring my new lens (or my other lenses) out is because i need a new bag

Yeah, I'll be cherishing those few (maybe 300) 135L shots. I think the more valid measure of a lense is time spent with the results, not time mounted.

I like the Tamrac system. Minimal hassle. Wide straps on either side of the bag for hanging lense and accessory add-on bags. Only have the extra storage space when you need it. Not a pro outfit for carrying 10 items in, but nice for 2 lenses, camera, and a flash + some batteries and cards.

rattle test? eh?...

Thank's for the heads up on the bag, i've been looking at the crumpler backpacks, Brians hot tup and shrinkle. Not shure which way to go yet. Right now a only have a lowe pro nova two. Just about fit two lenses in, but the 135 can't be one of them or my 85 if i bring my 35, so new bag for sure

His earlier post. Two 135L's in a row that "rattled".

NBEast....have you orderd your 24-105 f4 yet ? It would not hurt to sit on it a while longer before you part with your money. There could be lots of lens test reports on the WWB real soon

Petkal wrote:
NBEast....have you orderd your 24-105 f4 yet ? It would not hurt to sit on it a while longer before you part with your money. There could be lots of lens test reports on the WWB real soon

Thanks. I'll at least wait until this "recall rumor" thing dies down, there could be a better lense coating in it for those who wait I'm thinking.

If it meets standards set by the 17-40L regarding color, sharpness, contrast, and AF, it'll be in my bag just as soon as supply allows. Oh, I should add flare to that list.

Hopefully they don't keep us waiting long!

This lens is a 28-135 IS on steroids. Even though tests show it only better in some zoom focal lengths, I believe that it will perform much better than the 28-135 IS. I love my 28-135 IS and when I can justify it (couple of months) I will have the 24-105L instead. And yes, I have a MIG welder to attach it.

The 28-135mm isn't even close. Not even remotely in the same league