New Canon USM L Lens

in the market for a canon USM L zoom lens. I have a 60D body and a T2i. Was looking at the Canon USM L 24mm- 105mm at looks nice. I would be doing mostly lightning photography with it. I currently have a Tokina 11mm - 16mm wide angle lens and it's not very good for doing distant lightning photography so I'm looking for something good that is easy to focus on zoom and will turn out some really good lightning photos. The Tokina works great with my lightning pictures just as long as it not far away. Attached is a photo I took last week in AZ with that wide angle. Need ideas for a good zoom lens. Willing to spend around $800. Any suggestions? Thanks for any feedback.

First of all, nice shots!
Second, I love my 24-105. I find that 24 is a good "wide" distance as 105 is a good amount of reach. I used it for my lightning shots last years and it was a good choice.

If price matter, take a look at the Sigma 24-105mm F/4 DG OS HSM, same image quality !
The difference between the canon and the sigma is the weather seal on the Canon but the Sigma is less expensive

riverratmike wrote in post #17095079
in the market for a canon USM L zoom lens. I have a 60D body and a T2i. Was looking at the Canon USM L 24mm- 105mm at looks nice. I would be doing mostly lightning photography with it. I currently have a Tokina 11mm - 16mm wide angle lens and it's not very good for doing distant lightning photography so I'm looking for something good that is easy to focus on zoom and will turn out some really good lightning photos. The Tokina works great with my lightning pictures just as long as it not far away. Attached is a photo I took last week in AZ with that wide angle. Need ideas for a good zoom lens. Willing to spend around $800. Any suggestions? Thanks for any feedback.

Heya,

Don't waste your money on the 24-105. `L doesn't mean much on several of those lenses. You want speed of aperture. Don't limit yourself to F4 just because a red ring is on top. It's not a super duper lens by any means. The only good thing that SOME `L lenses offer is weather resistance (not sealing). But it doesn't matter if you're camera body isn't weather resistant too, so that's a moot point here. F4 just requires you use even more ISO to grab the lightning.

You won't need USM either. You likely won't be autofocusing at all. You'll likely being manual focusing to infinity via liveview.

When I do lightning, I try to go for 10~15 second subs. 20 seconds sometimes even. Just depends on conditions and depth of field based on focal length really. Wider angles allow for more depth of field for the aperture to infinity focus, than a narrow angle (telephoto) that when stopped down for depth of field, ends up being too dark for long exposure at night. Most of the lightning I've shot, was around 35mm~50mm on APS-C. But it's relative to where you are in relation to the storm. I find closer is better, since too far, and you just get haze and fog and the light of course falls off the further away you are.

Suggested zooms:

Tamron 17-50 F2.8 VC
Sigma 24-70 F2.8
Tamron 28-75 F2.8

Very best,

The 24-105 is the worst L currently available. Optically, the 28-75 is slightly better, but lacks IS. You'll get more range, and IS, with the 15-85. The only L-zooms I'd consider an upgrade to the 28-75 are the 24-70 II and the 24-70 4, well in that range, of course. To me, neither is worth the money.

great, thanks everyone for the input.

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17095366
The 24-105 is the worst L currently available.

Really? What's the basis for your comment/opinion?

I am a fan of the 24-105 f/4L. I think it is a good value.

Mine has served me well over the years. No lens is perfect, and if you have any skill you learn to get the most from a lens and also know its weakness.

If budget is no concern, you could buy a bagful of lenses and forget about the 24-105.

I would suggest checking out the canon 17-55 2.8 is. It doesn't have a ton of zoom, but it is an amazing lens and can be picked up for around $600 if your patient.

KLR-VA0501 wrote in post #17097828
Really? What's the basis for your comment/opinion?

I would not put it as the worst L lens...but it sure is in the top 3 worst L lenses, right up there with the 17-40. The 24-105 is very weak at 24mm with a lot of sharpness drop off in the corners as well as lots of distortion to the point buildings and trees really start to lean on the edges.

The latest 16-35 F4 L is a great lens, one that will replace my 17-40. I might also pick up the 24-70L which will cover my most shot range with zooms nicely.

Since you are using a crop body, 24mm-105 is kind of a weird range. You would be much better off with something else. 24mm isn't all that wide and 105mm doesn't reach out all that far.

My experience with the 24-105 says it is a good lens, I must speak up in its defense. While compared to other "L" lenses it may not be the number one, but I do find it to be quite adequate as a general walk-around lens and MUCH better than some third party lenses I've used. I would recommend it for general purpose outdoor use over many other lenses I've seen.

Keep in mind on a Crop Frame it does convert to a 38.4 - 168 so it is not very wide on a Crop Sensor camera. There are better choices for Crop Frame cameras, although not "L".

GeoKras1989 wrote in post #17095366
The 24-105 is the worst L currently available. Optically, the 28-75 is slightly better, but lacks IS. You'll get more range, and IS, with the 15-85. The only L-zooms I'd consider an upgrade to the 28-75 are the 24-70 II and the 24-70 4, well in that range, of course. To me, neither is worth the money.

Is the TDP sample FUBAR then? People here are seriously overstating the weakness of the 24-105L.

raptor3x wrote in post #17101164
Is the TDP sample FUBAR then? People here are seriously overstating the weakness of the 24-105L.

My views of the 24-105 is years experience shooting with it. I've got some great shots with the lens only to be disappointed when I print out a large print due to the not so sharp corners. I've also had some really nice shots from New Orleans that were taken at 24mm which are basically ruined due to the excessive distortion. Lesson learned, if I am out for serious photography, my 24-105 stays at home. It's ok as a walk around "snap shot" type of photography...but for anything I want to make nice prints from, I take other lenses.

ok, well now I'm really confused now. Might just go with a 17mm 55mm F2.8 for my 60D. The tokina 11mm - 16mm I have works very well with my 60D and takes really good photos but not good for distant lightning photography. Also I really like the focus window it has in it. Makes in a piece of cake to focus in the dark. So whatever I end up buying it will have to have a focus window. I have noticed alot of lenses like Tamron and Sigma don't have these.