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

I'll admit I'm "biased" toward Canon lenses. I've found them to be consistently good and I haven't wanted to gamble with the other makes. So, for ultra wide on a crop body I went for the EF-S 10-22 and was quite happy using it with my 30D. When I went with the 5D Classic I picked it up with the 24-105 "kit lens", what a great kit!

For the ultra-wide I went for the 16-35, I was quite happy with the lens! Sadly, I recently had to sell it but not for any fault on its own!

Jef96 wrote in post #15670786
Just a thought...as you're on a crop sensor, have you considered the EFS 10-22mm? OK, it's not L glass, but it will give you the super wide angle of view that the 16-35 gives on full frame.

Sorry Jeff my error, I didn't notice that my sig' was incorrect (I'm pretty sure I changed it but there ya go) - correct now ... full frame.

sharad.medhavi wrote in post #15653328

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …harad_medhavi/8​470885322/
5D3_7667L4 by Sharad Medhavi, on Flickr

Always nice images sharad

rogertb wrote in post #15674262
Sorry Jeff my error, I didn't notice that my sig' was incorrect (I'm pretty sure I changed it but there ya go) - correct now ... full frame.

Ah, in that case the EFS 10-22 mm is not an option. It's therefore a good copy of a 17-40 or contain your enthusiasm and save up for the 16-35 MKII

Sirrith wrote in post #15655944
Just to update, my lens is at Canon and they have sent me confirmation that the repair will be carried out under warranty. Remains to be seen if they actually fix the problem

Hey, thanks for the info. My lens has the same codes that you mentioned. I took a few test shots, but wasn't able to tell any differences that clearly. Is the blur beyond f4.5 really clear? I used 1/15, because at slower speeds the photos came out shaky once in a while. Is there an official word out on this?

I did buy my lens just a few days ago (Adorama), but I guess the codes are all that matters.

Bianchi wrote in post #15674277
Always nice images sharad

Thanks Bianchi. I am glad you like them.

Sniper258 wrote in post #15665086
I'll contribute and I hope you will like my work.

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/45938553@N08/8​499093484/
Yanbu beach by ialahmadi, on Flickr

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …/45938553@N08/8​436090798/
9T6C4879 copy by ialahmadi, on Flickr

Very nice pictures. Beautiful!

spesmeadeus wrote in post #15670251
On from a wedding to day, very fun couple!

You got it right. The picture looks awesome!
I am sure they would relish this one for life.

Thorrulz wrote in post #15667705
I was in Omaha last week and tried out the Sigma 85 f/1.5, Canon 50 f/1.4 and the Canon 24-105 f/4 IS USM. Out of the three the 24-105 took the pics I was happiest with. I am and always will lean towards primes, but this zoom will really work quite well in my basement studio for taking pics of the kids and grandkids.

A test shot of my daughter taken with the 5D/24-105 f/4

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Did I mention I picked one up here on the forums new for $700?

This is a nice portrait, and is very sharp. It lays at rest any concerns about sharpness of this lens used wide open. We won't need any more details on a persons face. Look at the iris!

sharad.medhavi wrote in post #15678556
Thanks Bianchi. I am glad you like them.


Very nice pictures. Beautiful.
!

Thank you for your complement

Excelisus wrote in post #15678164
Hey, thanks for the info. My lens has the same codes that you mentioned. I took a few test shots, but wasn't able to tell any differences that clearly. Is the blur beyond f4.5 really clear? I used 1/15, because at slower speeds the photos came out shaky once in a while. Is there an official word out on this?

I did buy my lens just a few days ago (Adorama), but I guess the codes are all that matters.

Hi, yes the blur is quite clear, it forms a sort of zig-zagging diagonal blur in one direction, which doesn't look like normal camera shake that usually wobbles all over the place. 1/15 should still be visible, but slower will exaggerate the problem more and make it more visible. Try bracing yourself against something (just don't use a tripod) to eliminate camera shake. It is entirely possible of course, that your lens works perfectly fine

I definitely made a mistake by not getting the kit... I'll have to see if I can go back and change that this week

gregr2 wrote in post #15682715

IMAGE LINK: http://www.flickr.com …regandmellina/8​530205467/
Morning walk by Greg and Mellina, on Flickr

Love it.