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

saaFOTO wrote in post #17138997
the 24-105 is just a crap lens...

Sorry, this is simply not true...just regurgitated internet drivel. See my post above.

Mfa on my body was -11 at tele and +2 on the wide end, sounds like you prob need to MFA yours.

lapino wrote in post #17134672
The last few months, I've been using my mirrorless cameras way more than my 5D3. Main reason is I'm somehow not so happy anymore with the iq of my Canon. The lens I use most is the 24-105L. I also have the 70-200IS/F2.8 which is amazing but way too heavy for daily use. But I'm wondering if I'm doing injustice to my 5D3 using the 'inferior' 24105L. I am very much considering to sell the lenses I have now and invest in something that might give me better iq and is better suited for my pictures (lots of indoors, kids).

Any advice? I was thinking about the 24-70/F2.8 (which I still find very expensive), or maybe a prime like the Sigma 50/1.4.

Are u obsessed with lens sharpness?

My 24-105 is sharper than any pics of 24-70 version 1 I've seen.

I've had about 10 lenses for most of the last 5-10 years, including the 24-105.

I find that I stick to one set for a few years, then cycle into something else, then rediscover some old jewel at the bottom of the bag.

I was down on the 24-105 for a few years but about 3 years ago it got back into my good graces. IMO; it's a workhourse delivering reliably acceptable images with a good range (esp. on FF). Bokeh and contrast not particularly special but not terrible. I haven't had trouble with sharpness; at f4 it's more forgiving than others. Great event lens for situations that f4 works on.

For artsy work; I agree with the prime folk. Prime has a distinct IQ advantage.

saaFOTO wrote in post #17138997
the 24-105 is just a crap lens...

maybe it's just you that can't make sharp photos with it

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17140021
maybe it's just you that can't make sharp photos with it

That's the truth. I have seen a LOT of crappy photos come out of my camera and the 24-105. But that's because the exposure was slow or the focus was off or something else. Put the cam/lens on a tripod, shoot a wall and you'll get super sharp resolution.

I get what the OP is saying. Previously I had the 5D II and the 24-105mm and was never wowed by it. I couldn't put my finger on as to why I didn't care for the combo; color, contrast, sharpness all good, but I just wasn't impressed. When I sold my 5D II, I included the lens in the sale as I wasn't attached to it.

I was going to purchase a 70d and 17-55mm f2.8 when the same week, the 6d with 24-105mm was at a great price everywhere. It seems like it was less than a $100 more for the 6d bundle than what I intended to buy. I couldn't resist and figured I would sell the lens.

However, I love this lens on the 6D! The images pop and I am so happy with it. The lens rarely leaves my camera; where before, it rarely left my bag.

So I understand when the OP says he is just not that impressed with it on his camera while it is a great lens to so many others. Its just a personal preference thing.

saaFOTO wrote in post #17138997
the 24-105 is just a crap lens...

Wow, talk about hyperbole! The only thing that is "crap" is your statement. The 24-105L has a few shortcomings, but it is a perfectly capable lens for certain purposes. It's terrific as a general landscape lens, for instance.

It sounds to me like you mostly use your lenses stopped down. From what I can see, a 5D series camera has one major advantage that your mirrorless camera cannot duplicate: it's full frame. That allows for less depth of field. If you don't shoot for shallow depth of field, I'd say go for the mirrorless setup.

Few crap gears, more crap "photographers", including myself

lapino wrote in post #17134672
The last few months, I've been using my mirrorless cameras way more than my 5D3. Main reason is I'm somehow not so happy anymore with the iq of my Canon. The lens I use most is the 24-105L. (...) I'm wondering if I'm doing injustice to my 5D3 using the 'inferior' 24105L.

It's difficult to give advice without knowing exactly why you're not happy with the IQ you're getting right now. The gear you have is more than capable of producing wonderful IQ, and in my experience the 24-105 is very far from "inferior".

Can you post a couple of examples of the IQ that's making you unhappy? It would make it much easier to recommend a solution that will address your problem.

ceegee wrote in post #17140565
It's difficult to give advice without knowing exactly why you're not happy with the IQ you're getting right now. The gear you have is more than capable of producing wonderful IQ, and in my experience the 24-105 is very far from "inferior".

Can you post a couple of examples of the IQ that's making you unhappy? It would make it much easier to recommend a solution that will address your problem.

Well, considering that the 5D II was used for Vogue and other fashion magazines and also for the official presidential portrait of Barack Obama for a few years, the 24-105 f/4L that he has might have a problem and need to be repaired.

I'm just guessing because the lens should be fine for producing publication quality images, and the camera body should be fine as well.

lapino wrote in post #17134672
The last few months, I've been using my mirrorless cameras way more than my 5D3. Main reason is I'm somehow not so happy anymore with the iq of my Canon. The lens I use most is the 24-105L. I also have the 70-200IS/F2.8 which is amazing but way too heavy for daily use. But I'm wondering if I'm doing injustice to my 5D3 using the 'inferior' 24105L. I am very much considering to sell the lenses I have now and invest in something that might give me better iq and is better suited for my pictures (lots of indoors, kids).

Any advice? I was thinking about the 24-70/F2.8 (which I still find very expensive), or maybe a prime like the Sigma 50/1.4.

Yes, you are hurting the camera. It's a pity she isn't being loved by the owner as it should. Send it to me and I'll take good care of her.

I use that same combo without any trouble, although I would say that in certain conditions that lens isn't as sharp as some of my others.

That's a great body, but put a crappy lens on it and you'll get crappy results. the 24-105 is far from crappy, but you get the idea. If it's really bad, Canon can calibrate the lens to the body. I've never done it.

- JK www.thatverynextthing.​com