24-105 - Tempted

Since I sold the T2i with the 18-55 and Tamron 70-300, I have a gap in my focal length range and believe the 24-105 could fill it (it helps that I have a little cash put aside).

I would of course like the 70-200 f2.8 IS, but at the moment I can't warent that sort of cost (I know I could go non IS or f4, but I'll probably regret not getting the "best")

Maybe later in the year I could add a smaller L zoom and then sell on the Sigma, but for the time being I think I will have it covered.

I've had a look back through a lot of my photos and I don't appear to go wide that often or wide open. If I need to do a wide landscape I could resort to the Sigma, or even the Wallimex. At the other end, I do have a lot of shots at 70mm, and again at 100mm (and an awfull lot at 400mm)

Subjects are mostly wooland bird and waterfoul (weekend walks around the local reserve) - hence the 100-400, motorsport and the occasional landscape. I think the 24-105 is the right choice for me at the moment. (Flickr here for those interested in my "snaps")

I don't walk far, so carrying extra kit short distances is not really a big issue (that's why I drive a 4x4 ), although I might have to think about what lenses I take on a trip (or buy a bigger backpack).

I also believe the 24-105 will work ok with macro extension rings, well at least moreso than the Sigma.

Current:
Wallimex 8mm fisheye
Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4
Canon 100-400 L

Next
Canon 24-105 L f4.0

Future
maybe a wide angle Canon zoom
maybe a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS

Sorry for rambling on, but having now written the above, I think I'll go and buy one this weekend.

Feel free to confirm my reasoning, or throw a spanner in the works if you really have to.

Lawrence

the 15-85 is the better choice for your crop sensor.

I just rented a 15-85 for a trip to Italy next week and instantly noticed a difference between it and the 18-135 that I have (the 18-135 is probably sharp enough for my trip but I wanted the 15mm), not only is it sharper than your 18-55 but focuses faster and is silent. everything I read says it compairs favorably to the 24-105 iq wise for a little less money. It also has a better IS system (4 stop vs 3 stop I think), I could just not imagine having 24 be the wide end of a walk around lens on crop.

mike_311 wrote in post #15440330
the 15-85 is the better choice for your crop sensor.

Uh -- really? I use a 24-105L happily on my 40D without regrets. The OP noted:

Trugga wrote in post #15440266
I've had a look back through a lot of my photos and I don't appear to go wide that often or wide open. If I need to do a wide landscape I could resort to the Sigma, or even the Wallimex. At the other end, I do have a lot of shots at 70mm, and again at 100mm (and an awfull lot at 400mm)

so I do not get where your suggestion is based, why is the 15-85 better for the OP's stated target use on his 7D?

To the OP -- the 24-105 is a very good lens and I use it as a general walkaround on my 40D and really like it. I used to use a 17-85 but didn't use the wider end, and decided to get a 10-20 sigma for the few times where I wanted UWA. You have that covered already so I'd say "go for it".

I used a 24-105 on a 40D, then I switched to a 28-70L...
I realized, the 24-105 was a much better lens for me.

It a great lens.
Nice reach, you can use it for almost anything.
I shot Motorsport with it, portraits, landscape, etc...

Nice IS, was able to shoot 1/6@70mm handheld with it, has accurate focus, sometimes it misses tough...
(more often then the 70-200 f/4 L IS, but way less then the 28-135 USM)

I can only recommend it.

I love my 24-105. Very versatile lens. I've grown a little weary of reading things like "the 24-105 is for full frame sensors, you're better off with a xx-xx ef-s lens..."

It's all a matter of preference. 24mm is wide enough for a crop, IMO. Sometimes with Wider angles you get too much in the frame without really thinking about it at the moment of capture. Plus it's an L lens with great range and IS. What's not to love (on any camera body)?

The 24-105 is a good lens. If it fills the need for what you want why not, just grab one. I prefer it on my FF than on my crop body but that is just me, it is still a good lens on either body.

Trugga wrote in post #15440266
Since I sold the T2i with the 18-55 and Tamron 70-300, I have a gap in my focal length range and believe the 24-105 could fill it (it helps that I have a little cash put aside).

I would of course like the 70-200 f2.8 IS, but at the moment I can't warent that sort of cost (I know I could go non IS or f4, but I'll probably regret not getting the "best")

Maybe later in the year I could add a smaller L zoom and then sell on the Sigma, but for the time being I think I will have it covered.

I've had a look back through a lot of my photos and I don't appear to go wide that often or wide open. If I need to do a wide landscape I could resort to the Sigma, or even the Wallimex. At the other end, I do have a lot of shots at 70mm, and again at 100mm (and an awfull lot at 400mm)

Subjects are mostly wooland bird and waterfoul (weekend walks around the local reserve) - hence the 100-400, motorsport and the occasional landscape. I think the 24-105 is the right choice for me at the moment. (Flickr here for those interested in my "snaps")

I don't walk far, so carrying extra kit short distances is not really a big issue (that's why I drive a 4x4 ), although I might have to think about what lenses I take on a trip (or buy a bigger backpack).

I also believe the 24-105 will work ok with macro extension rings, well at least moreso than the Sigma.

Current:
Wallimex 8mm fisheye
Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4
Canon 100-400 L

Next
Canon 24-105 L f4.0

Future
maybe a wide angle Canon zoom
maybe a Canon 70-200 f2.8 IS

Sorry for rambling on, but having now written the above, I think I'll go and buy one this weekend.

Feel free to confirm my reasoning, or throw a spanner in the works if you really have to.

Lawrence

I'd go for a 15-85 IS myself (or tamron 17-50 2.8, although you seem to not care at all abotu f/2.8 and shoot more at the longer end). I always found the 24-105L to be one of the weaker L lenses and nothing to write home about. Sounds more like you need to focus on getting that long lens. Not sure the point of the 24-105? Just to get an L? Also whjy a wide angle L zoom? You mean like a 17-40L? On aps-c? why? I actually got rid of mine after trying a tamron 17-50 2.8. It seems like a weird ramble, more about how to manage to make everything into an L than anything else.

The 24-105 is a great lens, first on the 40D and now on the 7D. It's my everyday, 'swiss army knife' lens, as well as my primary landscape lens. It fits beautifully between the 10-22 (when I need, truly, wide angles) and the 100-400.

if you were to get a 24-105mm...i think swapping the 17-70mm out for an UWA wouldn't be a bad idea...

I think it's a great lens. I'm still a newbie and got somehow insecure about it after reading some reviews but those doubts were gone after shooting with it for a couple of times. If you're used to good primes you just need to avoid busy highlights in the background because the bokeh is not as good. But it's sharp enough for my needs and the images come out great imo.

Wow, quite a diverse response.

My main aim is to fill in the gap between 70mm and 100mm, the 24-105 appears to be the lens to fulfil this requirement.

Thank you for pro's/con's, but the positives confirm my investigation that this lens is the right choice for me at the moment.

Cheers
Lawrence

The 15-85 is a better lens than the 24-105, regardless of sensor format, it just won't work on FF. However, the OP already has that range covered. I would suggest one or the other flavor of 70-200. The f/4 IS, perhaps?

I am sorry to have posted in favor of the 15-85mm I had not read your question correctly. If you are just looking to bridge the gap between 70 and 100mm I think most people here would say you would be best served by an 85mm 1.8 and then save the money for something more expensive later on.

The 15-85 would be a nice lens for the crop camera, but the 24-105L would fill the gap is well. If you can live with giving up some on the wide end, I'd go with the 24-105.