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

<a href="http://www.flick​r.com/photos/40147749@​N06/3748380302/" title="Sandiego Condo with Fixedgear bike by keviikev, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.stat​ic.flickr.com/2423/374​8380302_c217190fa5_b.j​pg" width="1024" height="731" alt="Sandiego Condo with Fixedgear bike" /></a>

I still love the vibrant colours of this lens..

A few people shots SOOC

I'm sold. However, it seems this lens is out of stock everywhere. Is this normal? Anybody know why?

Thanks

My guess is that Canon's lens factory/factories set up their assembly lines in a rotating fashion and switch from model to model as needed.

Either that or they're going to replace it already.

I bought mine last month from Canoga, only place I could find it in stock. Been tempted to sell it so I can get a 24-70 instead.

anthony11 wrote in post #8336820
My guess is that Canon's lens factory/factories set up their assembly lines in a rotating fashion and switch from model to model as needed.

Either that or they're going to replace it already.

I bought mine last month from Canoga, only place I could find it in stock. Been tempted to sell it so I can get a 24-70 instead.

I hope it's the second one. I would love to be able to say i'm saving up for a 24-105 2.8 IS

Heh! Have you ever lugged the 24-70 f/2.8? If so, imagine it longer and heavier, as well as more expensive by quite a bit, and you'd have an f/2.8 24-105.

I do enjoy using a 24-70 for certain shoots, but the big reasons I like the 24-105 for my main walk-around lens include lightweigh/portable. Of course the IS helps, etc, etc.

I rented a 24-70 -- didn't seem all that much different to lug than the 24-105.

anthony11 wrote in post #8337681
I rented a 24-70 -- didn't seem all that much different to lug than the 24-105.

Yeah, it is strange how some people find it too heavy, and others don't seem to mind.. It must all be in the mind.

What tonylong is implying is if the 24-105 was available with a f2.8 aperture, it would be a monster compared to the current f4 lens.

Burnaby wrote in post #8339113
What tonylong is implying is if the 24-105 was available with a f2.8 aperture, it would be a monster compared to the current f4 lens.

I understood what he said. I was talking of the 24-70..

I think the 24-105 is the perfect weight, not too heavy not too light. Although, which one would i rather have? That's a different question

Here are a couple from this past week:

Gibbo wrote in post #8340461
I understood what he said. I was talking of the 24-70..

I think the 24-105 is the perfect weight, not too heavy not too light. Although, which one would i rather have? That's a different question

Gotcha!