...and now the 24-105 F4L IS!

If I'm wrong, someone please correct me; I've heard so many comments (somewhere else - not on this forum) that this or that body has better DOF than another body.

For years, depth of field (DOF) was ONLY a function of: focus distance, focal length and f/stop. It used to have nothing to do with the quality of the lens, its glass, or the camera body. That being said, the crop factor will have something to do with it, as crop factor affects the effective focal length. I often wonder if some people confuse DOF with bokeh (read the bokeh thread).

With the 24 - 105, the DOF for a given focus distance and f/stop, will be better at the wide end than at the long end of a given lens. The longer the focal length, the shallower the DOF. Good thing to keep in mind when trying for large or small DOF.

The calculators at these links are fun to play with and educational (Barnack has to be downloaded and installed).

http://www.stegmann.dk​/mikkel/barnack/
http://www.dofmaster.c​om/dofjs.html

As always, if I'm OTL (out to lunch), please say it.

Glenn NK

I've used the 24-105 F4L IS for just over a year now, and it is the most useful and convenient standard lens in my collection, it's hardly ever off my camera - reasonably sharp - reasonably light - reasonably small - unreasonably priced.

Congrats on an awesome lens, enjoy

Thanks to all wishing me well with my new lens; I'm enjoying it a lot and love going through learning curves again, with some knowledge to hand

Calicokat, you have some serious kit!

Another vote FOR the 24-105.
Had it about a year and still impressed.
Great lens.