Your thoughts on the 24-105L

should i shouldnt i

currently using the 24-85mm as my walkaround but there are instances where i require slightly longer reach.would be primarily a travel/walkaround lens.
i did consider the 24-70L but thats really heavy despite good low light performance and not really feasible as a travel lens. Would the 3 stop IS help counter the f4 much vs. the 24- 70's f2.8?

choices choices...sigh

Probably not preform better at gathering light of an f/2.8 Lens but the IS would be a + for slower shutter speeds. As an all around Lens for everyday use I'd think it would be an excellent choice ... use the Search function for lots of info and user results.

I can recommend the 24-105L as a walkaround lens. I am happy with this item both for digital and film. It is not overly heavy and balances well on my 5D and 1V.

This thread might be of interest: https://photography-on-the.net …t=122405&highli​ght=24-105

If you feel the 24-85mm is sometimes too short, then the 24-70 will be too short more often! I still have the 24-85mm which I will give to my dad for his birthday this year, as he currently uses a 28-90mm non-USM lens.

The 24-105mm is in a completely different league than the 24-85mm. It's a cracker of a lens. For travel and walk about, this is the best lens you can get from the Canon stable. Apart from (fast) action photography or possibly for full frame sensor cameras users, there is no reason to go for the 24-70mm lens.

Once you've got it and admire the extremely sharp, crisp images, you'll be wondering why you swithered about changing from your 24-85mm USM.

The biggest drawback is L fever!

It looks a superb lens if you can handle it being f4. To me you cant beat a fast lens,there is a guy over on the fm forum wanting to swap his 24-105 for a 24-70 witch he sold to buy the 105.He regrets selling the 24-70 as he needs that extra stop.But there again we all have our own needs.

they need to come out with a 24-70 f2.8 IS, that be awesome
but of course im probably ignorant to what it may take to do so.

The 24-105 would be awesome if it was f2.8

malla1962 wrote:
The 24-105 would be awesome if it was f2.8

that too but i was speaking of the 24-70.

malla1962 wrote:
The 24-105 would be awesome if it was f2.8

I'm not so sure. On that case it would be too heavy!

im planning to buy this lens probably....well..have to wait after tax time....

just wondering if it is worth all this $$,for a f/4 lens with extending barrel...hmm

we just had canon days at my local dealer. I was not to impressed by build quality. I could not deal with f4 either. IS is great, but not for stopping motion. It is a shame it is not 2.8. I would own it immediately.

and how much would that weigh? the reason the 24-105 is F4 because canon knows that the consumer doesn't want a 5-pound walkaround lens.

all this talk about f2.8 is a joke. most f2.8 lenses aren't even sharp at that aperature and i seldom shoot at 2.8 unless it is a necessity.

i'm in monterey now with my 24-105 and i'll be back with the goods .

ed rader