convince me my 24-105L is good or bad

The shots look fine to me. You can increase the sharpness by stopping down some, especially since you were shooting in bright lighting conditions.

As this is my first L im not sure what im looking for in a lens to be honest. If you guys say its working as well as yours then thats all i really wanted to hear.
I know there isnt a great leap in IQ from my 28-105USM MKII but i just want to make sure it was focusing ok and was as sharp as it should be.
I admit im pixel peepeing but after spending £699 i felt i should while im in the time frame where i can take it back.
I know how dificult it can be shooting in bright light and that these shots arent a good test but thought i should ask anyway, just to put my mind at ease.
I do love this lens in all respects. it feels good on my 350D (soon to be a 400D) and it feels really well made etc and i feel it was worth the money as it will last me for a good few years.
Im going to take a lot of shots today stopped down as has been sugested as see if they come out better. i always have had a problem shooting in bright light like we are having in London at the moment. i know this affects all lens's so im not blameing the 24-105.

Again, thanks to all who replied

I plan on getting this lens after my 10-22mm i hope. Aslong as theres a big leap in IQ from my kit lens ill be happy

Ok, just wanted to let you know how helpfull you all are (again)
I went out yesterday and had my 305D set to -1/3 EC and i think it helped a lot.
I wont post more 100% crops, it boring for everyone but wanted to post a few full shots although they are all crops from the full image (if that makes sence).
Just need to brush up on some PP now to make them "pop"

Can anyone else explain this please

I also wonder how the 24-70 f/2.8 compared to the 24-105 f/4

Great shots BTW

If you do a search man itll turn up HEAPS of info. Ive had a look around and read it all and pretty much it comes down to what you need and what for. I myself and going to go with the 24-105 IS because i like having the little extra zoom. But from what ive read, they are pretty much neck and neck in IQ.

I would have liked to get the 24-70 f/2.8 because of the faster shutter but i like to shoot a bit longer (as you can see) and this was my only complaint with my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8.
I doo find i shoot almost open as i dont think f/4. is that fast but im growing to like this lens now that i have got used to looking at the shutter speed and forgetting about the IS if the subjects are moving.
I have noticed quite a few of my early shots were quite slow as i was thinking as i have IS i can slow down a bit and although i knew i couldnt when shooting moving subjects i kept fogetting to look and check the speed.
and thanks petrolhead for the comment

Dave, I can't see anything wrong with that initial shot. I also have the 24-105 and have been delighted with it. It's my main wedding lens and delivers superb results.

If you really want to put it to the test, mount it on a tripod and use ISO 200 or even 100, and do a group portrait under bright but shady conditions - no direct sunlight - which will give you nice shadow detail along with some clothing highlights. It's sometimes really hard to see what a lens is "doing" under bright lighting at higher ISO with the type of pixel peeping you're doing.

Thanks
Ill try that sometime but you lot have put my mind at ease.
I think i just panicked a bit and expected maybe more but i hadnt taken the bright sunlight in to account when i started the thread and i now see its the high contrast that is making the crop look soft.
No more peeping from me for a while

I got this at first, looked at my images from the 17-85 then at the ones from the 24-105....on screen or at 7"x5" you wouldn't really notice....but 100%.....WOAH....big difference, absolute sharpness in the unprocessed RAW file and colours to die for !

Neilyb wrote:
I got this at first, looked at my images from the 17-85 then at the ones from the 24-105....on screen or at 7"x5" you wouldn't really notice....but 100%.....WOAH....big difference, absolute sharpness in the unprocessed RAW file and colours to die for !

Now thats the kind of statement that made me paranoid.
I dont see that in mine, good yes, maybe better than most of my other zooms but nothing to go WOW over (yet) but as pointed out i think im being too fussy.

Stop peeping and enjoy the lens . It's a wonderful piece of glass. If you have to look that hard to find something wrong, it's probably not there.

If both you and the clients are happy, then the factory did a good job when they assembled and so are you in your picture taking. Have fun.

sapearl wrote:
Stop peeping and enjoy the lens . It's a wonderful piece of glass. If you have to look that hard to find something wrong, it's probably not there.

If both you and the clients are happy, then the factory did a good job when they assembled and so are you in your picture taking. Have fun.

Clients!!!! thank you very much. I knew having an L gets you respect

Nope, im just a proud father with 2 kids and a new Amex card but thanks.

The whole point of my post was that i didnt know if i was looking at somthing wrong but i do take your point and i will stop as from now.

Hey, the fact that you're trying this hard to perfect your craft gets a certain amount of respect . And believe me, those family members can often be the most demanding clients.

dave_bass5 wrote:
Clients!!!! thank you very much. I knew having an L gets you respect

Nope, im just a proud father with 2 kids and a new Amex card but thanks........

sapearl wrote:
Hey, the fact that you're trying this hard to perfect your craft gets a certain amount of respect . And believe me, those family members can often be the most demanding clients.

Yeah, thanks although my girlfriend (who would kill me if she knew how much i spent on the last two lens's) likes to encourage me by saying "put that bloody camera down and play with the kids"
hopefully ill move on to other subjects at some point. maybe even try and make a bit of money back but i have a very long way to go yet.