ConorBoyd90 wrote in post #16667457
Also the main reason I was attracted to this lens was because of the fact it was described as a good 'walk about' lens which is what I'm after. Is this the best lens for the price?
It would depend on what you want to do with it.
You're already covered in that range by your current lenses. The question to ask would be: what are your lenses not doing for you, and would the 24-105 do those things better?
When you buy a "L" lens like the 24-105, it won't necessarily get better photographs for you. You're primarily buying a more solidly built lens, weatherproofing and USM focusing. Are these things important to you? You'll also get a different range in a single lens. Do you often shoot in the 18-24 range? 24 mm isn't very wide on a crop camera. For some people, that's not important (e.g. it's not important to me), but for others it's a problem.
As for the potential for "better" images, the "L" lens will give you slightly better colour and contrast rendition than your current lenses (although that's correctable when you process your images). It will also give you constant f4 throughout the range.
I chose the 24-105 for my crop camera for several reasons. I photograph primarily living things (people and animals), and the range is ideal for that. I already owned a wide-angle lens (12-24 mm) for the few occasions when I need a wider view. Because I use the lens a lot in my home studio, I don't often need a very wide aperture (e.g. f2.8), so f4 is plenty for me. And I wanted a faster-focusing lens to be able to take action shots outdoors. The combination of these factors made the 24-105 a good choice for me.
Although the 24-105 does a wonderful job on crop cameras, it was made for use on full-frame cameras. There are lenses made specifically for crop cameras (the EF-S designation) that will give you a different and, some would argue, more appropriate focal range: 15-85 mm, 18-135 mm, etc. If you find you often use your current lens at around 18 mm, one of these may be a better choice for you. If you haven't considered them, you should probably take a look before making your decision.
The other thing to consider is whether you use your 18-55 or your 55-250 the most. The "best lens for the price" is a lens that you're going to use and enjoy the most, and that gives you what you find is lacking in your current lenses. If you find that you're doing a lot of sports photography, for example, it may be better for you to spend your money to replace the 55-250 with something that offers faster focusing (e.g. a 70-200). If you use your 18-55 the most and are satisfied with the range but want to experiment more with depth of field, then a zoom that offers constant f2.8 may be a better choice (e.g. Tamron 17-50, Canon 17-55).
The list of possibilities is endless. The 24-105 is a great lens and excellent value for money, but only if it's going to allow you to do the things you want to do. You've only had your current lenses for a matter of weeks. Before dropping large amounts of cash on more equipment, it's important to know what you expect to get out of your new lens. Then you can determine what is truly the best value for money.
