Am I 'hurting' my 5D3 with the 24-105L

I find it strange you would say

with a gear list like this

As mentioned the 35art from sigma is really nice. I might also suggest trying a Tamron 24-70 2.8 as it has VC and costs $800 less than the Canon.

Hello Lapino
the same here
I tried and I could not be fall in love with the FF bodies
i sold my 5D3 twice and today i sold all my L lenses
and return to the crop
the FF bodies i have been tried are
5D2 , 6D , 5D3
they are so great but not for my use
now i can breath good

By the way i will wait for the 7D II when it comes
I love my old 7D

I feel that sensor tech has improved to the point where there are a lot of crop camera + zoom options that could easily replace a FF + 24-105L without much compromise and much more portability. Even though newer FF has ~2 stop ISO advantage over newer APS-C, you can find a crop 2.8 zoom combo that weighs about the same or less. Even an Olympus E-M1 + 12-40mm with the smaller sensor could substitute due to its better stabilization (about 1 stop more) and sharper lens, at half the weight of a 5D3/24-105L.

To me the only real reason to shoot FF anymore (unless you print large) is for shallower DOF. I still keep a 5D + 50 1.4 for this purpose but I use mirrorless for travel/walkabout use.

riotshield wrote in post #17135807
I feel that sensor tech has improved to the point where there are a lot of crop camera + zoom options that could easily replace a FF + 24-105L without much compromise and much more portability. Even though newer FF has ~2 stop ISO advantage over newer APS-C, you can find a crop 2.8 zoom combo that weighs about the same or less. Even an Olympus E-M1 + 12-40mm with the smaller sensor could substitute due to its better stabilization (about 1 stop more) and sharper lens, at half the weight of a 5D3/24-105L.

To me the only real reason to shoot FF anymore (unless you print large) is for shallower DOF. I still keep a 5D + 50 1.4 for this purpose but I use mirrorless for travel/walkabout use.

Great point. And this must be the reason why I'm moving toward primes.

Nothing will come close to a 5D and a 24mm 1.4 either which is my next lens.

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17134794
I have the 5D2 and the 5D3, the 24-105 is better on the 5D2, sounds crazy no ?
But in all case i was not very happy with the 24-105, i kept it because my wife love the range very useful for her, but me ... hum ... i'm a prime guy with very wide aperture )

Sounds like you might need to MFA it on the 5D3.

Honestly. Try the 40mm STM on your 5D III
It has good coverage and weighs nothing. You may start using your 5DIII instead of your EOS-M
Or if you need fast, try the 50L or Art lenses. love mine from f1.2 to f8.0 as a walk around lens.
While I love shooting wide open with this lens, I often walk around my town at f5.6 framing cars and houses haldheld.

I find that while a new zoom lens can be incredibly sharp, and can take a very wide range of photos;
the results are good, but not 'amazing' 'spectacular' or 'magical'

The 24-105, taking a portrait at 105mm f4, will not have a 'wow' factor.
The 85L and 135L lenses on the other hand do have this quality.
Perhaps is the OOF bokeh, even when stopped down, that creates this.

archer1960 wrote in post #17135897
Sounds like you might need to MFA it on the 5D3.

no
All my lenses are MFA on all my bodies and i do make a difference between a miss-focus/back/front focus and IQ
It's just some lenses are better with certain bodies
For example the 85 f/1.4 wide open is tremendously better on the 5D3 than 5D2
Do not make me wrong, 85 f/1.4 is already super excellent on the mark2, but it got a step up on the mark3

Zeiss 21mm.

Reservoir Dog wrote in post #17136312
no

For example the 85 f/1.4 wide open is tremendously better on the 5D3 than 5D2

Hmmmm, maybe it is just copy variation. I had both the 5dii and III. I did not notice any big difference in picture quality. Why do you think the camera body will make such a tremendous difference? Can you show us a typical example?

Just back from Paris and Ireland. Sure I used my 24-105 with great results. But the 5D Mark III with the 70-200 f/2.8 L IS Mark II is my comfort zone.

riotshield wrote in post #17135807
I feel that sensor tech has improved to the point where there are a lot of crop camera + zoom options that could easily replace a FF + 24-105L without much compromise and much more portability. Even though newer FF has ~2 stop ISO advantage over newer APS-C, you can find a crop 2.8 zoom combo that weighs about the same or less. Even an Olympus E-M1 + 12-40mm with the smaller sensor could substitute due to its better stabilization (about 1 stop more) and sharper lens, at half the weight of a 5D3/24-105L.

To me the only real reason to shoot FF anymore (unless you print large) is for shallower DOF. I still keep a 5D + 50 1.4 for this purpose but I use mirrorless for travel/walkabout use.

I've had an EOS M about a year, and I obviously prefer my FF for the things that it's better at. But for casual shooting and vacation photos I don't feel like I'm giving up a lot when I use my M. It doesn't have the bokeh, the fast focusing, etc. But if I shot the same vacation photos on my 6D and on my M and hung them on the wall, I doubt the average joe could tell them apart. For many things it just doesn't matter, and size/convenience/porta​bility become the priority.

The 24-105 is a great lens for the price. Sure, there's better out there but not much beats in terms of the price, IQ, focal range and size combination.

The 24-105 is not hurting your 5D3, you're just developing a more discriminating taste.

the 24-105 is just a crap lens... especially if you have a 5D3 you want something to compliment it like others said... a 50 1.4 is amazing or even 85 1.8
... you could probably sell that 105L and get both of those lenses and you'd be a happier man or woman... but with a 5d3 you should be able to get amazinggggggg pics with any lens!

I'm selling my Tamron 24-70 and replaced it with a 24-105. The colors on the canon are better and the AF is proving to me to be more reliable.

It's a fine lens and will be used for studio and vacationing. My wife has an EOS-M (so do I but its going for sale soon too) and It's nice and all but with vacationing and no flash use your gonna live at the higher ISOs. The 24-105 provides a great range.