Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM

The Shaheen wrote in post #12414478
Congrats to the IS and the photographer... Great picture..

Checked it at 300%, can't see any obvious shake..

Careful there's some vignetting coming in from the top left and right corners..

Strange, as i presuming you shot this with an FF camera, looking at your gear..

You could also improve it a lot with some PP work, levels, contrast and some popping colours..

Thanks for the complements! In the 100% crop, it's not perfectly sharp, but as I said, it'll print up nicely.

The vignetting is from the circular polarizer I was using. It's odd in that it only shows up when the light angle is just right. I'll invest in a good thin polarizer one of these days, but if I print 8x10 (or any 4x5 equivalent,) it'll be gone from the shot anyway.

And absolutely, it needs some lovin' to make it 100%, but I'm focused on my print output these days, so I'll target for that when I do my next run.

And yes, this was shot on the 5D2. I really did agonize over this lens-buying decision. The 24-105 is not one of those lenses that gets the sentimental adoration that even the Sigma 50 and 85 1.4s do. And having shot with nothing slower than f/2.8 since starting in the DSLR world about two and a half years ago, I was VERY nervous about being limited to f/4. Some people even suggest that there's some copy variation with this particular design, to the point that they suspect sharpness issues. But I'd shot with the Sigma 24-60 in the past on my 1D3 and I really didn't feel that the 24-70 would give a broad enough range of focal lengths to be able to leave the 70-200 behind.

Having spent a week or so with it now, I know that my copy comfortably out-resolves my 5D2, and it is at the very worst my 2nd-sharpest lens to the 300 2.8, but I'd probably call it a tie. The contrast and color are excellent, it does a beautiful job with people, and it's light and compact enough to hang off of one wrist and not worry about it.

Just as I feel that the 16-35II is the best walk-around lens on the APS-H crop bodies, I think the 24-105 is nearly the ultimate all-purpose lens on the 5D2. And honestly, shots like that beach shot or the earlier macro shot I did are unexpected surprises for me with this lens.


The true irony in all of this is that I was originally in the pre-order for the 5D2 kit, and now it looks like that will be my primary rig. Well, it only took 30 months to come full-circle!

mitsu13gman wrote in post #12415288
The 24-105 is not one of those lenses that gets the sentimental adoration that even the Sigma 50 and 85 1.4s do

I think that's simply because it has been included with some bodies as a "kit" lens, and in some people's minds that makes it not really worthy, and its use a sign that the photographer isn't discriminating. But when I bought my 5D this lens wasn't packaged with it in a kit and I made a positive decision to buy it. I was a bit concerned about its performance at one point, but I was merely being paranoid and blaming my poor technique on the lens. I now think it's a superb lens.

Interestingly I don't regard the 16-35 as the "natural" lens for a crop body. For me that's the 15-85, another superb and under-rated lens (probably just because it doesn't sport a red ring).

SOOC

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jericobot/57255​63030/

Jericobot wrote in post #12417372
SOOC

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jericobot/57255​63030/
Beverage of Choice by Jericobot, on Flickr

SOOC, That's, Straight-Out-Of the Can is it??

I had to repost that picture again, proof that the IS works fine even after a can of beer (or maybe two)..

I agree that the 24-105mm suffers, because of being 'given away' as a kit lens... But my doubts were, because it was an f4 and it had a protruding zoom, the inner body extending when zoomed.. I swore ages ago, that i would never buy a lens that's less than f2.8.. This where the 24-70mm jumps in, with f2.8 and a considerable reputation amongst Landscape shooters, who don't usually need a Walkabout lens.. and the reach..

I used the Tamron 28-75mm for 4 years on a 20D body and a Full Frame... Superb lens optically, but again with extending zoom and a plasticky body, making it feel more flimsy somehow..

To me, 16-35mm f2.8 MII feels like a combination made-in-heaven on a full frame body... Some who own it would swear, that's one of Canon's sharpest lenses.. Even better than the 70-200mm f2.8 IS USM... I couldn't take any crap shots with lens and i tried hard, even after few beers.. I find the distortion on it is part of the fun..

I can understand though, someone who owns a cropped body, would feel the same about the 15-85mm, which seems to get 9/10 in all the reviews i have seen.. Yes i think there's a snobbish value with the L lenses..

I also think there's too much emphasis on 'Sharpness' these days, maybe we are being spoilt by pin-sharp lenses.. If you look at the best pictures in the history of photography, most of them were out-of-focus, but they had "Content'..

I hope i am not opening another can-of-worms here..

Hey guys, just a painful story to tell:

About a month and a half ago, before I left France to return home, I picked up a Zeiss 35-70 and decided to sell my 24-105 (with which I had frankly never been that happy...I don't feel right with an all-purpose zoom anymore). I got it pretty cheap, as it suffered from the traditional serious zoom creep and had a cracked focus window, so I put it on the market for 500€, or a bit over $700 (around $50 less than I paid). I was very honest in the ad, and immediately had a bunch of people jumping at it given that $700 is a ridiculously low price in Europe.

So I finally decided on this guy who seemed very nice (he teaches at a school very near to another school at which I once taught), and who was willing to drive 2.5 hours (and pay cash) to me just to get the lens. So he shows up with his girlfriend in tow, we sit and talk for about an hour about photography, and we both leave thrilled at the whole deal. He gets a huge bargain, and I don't have to stick the 24-105 in my bag for the plane home! I even offered to ship him a replacement for the cracked focus window when I got home (they cost around $10).

So weeks go by, I arrive home, and I get an e-mail from him. Apparently the zoom creep bothered him more than he'd though, so he tried to repair the lens himself. He of course broke off a piece (from his description, one of the big contact ribbons) and rendered it useless. He just sent it off to Canon, where they'll repair it "for a large price." That e-mail made me physically sad!

Moral of the story: lens repair is for people who know what they're doing!

i successfully repaired the first lens i took apart i don't think i'd touch an L though......

That's usually the cheapest way to get a second lens - dismantle one. You usually have enough parts left over after you're reassembled it to make another.

This is a hand held 1 sec exposure at the Orange Empire Railroad Museum. I had the lens mounted on my 1Ds Mk II. Aperature was f4 and iso 400.

Nice shot gene

^^ i agree.. my first look... saw the seats and thought hdr... nice colors...

the tiger, shot last saturday

Nice looking Jaguar ^

From the Chino Planes of Fame airshow(Southern California)