The infamous 24-105L...

Anyone working pros out there using this lens extensively for their work? How far have you pushed the limits, especially in terms of shooting FF and in challenging light?

I found some excellent examples here, but would love more feedback. Thanks.

http://www.zangenberg.​net/foto/index.php?id=​237&page=1

Are you not going to run into problems shooting wide open with this lens as its vignette's wide open?

Yeah, I'm really interested in this as well. I'm trying to decide between this one and the 24-70L, which I'm leaning towards for its wider aperture. I've actually seen quite a few wedding photogs shooting with a 5d and the 24-105L, and I've really been intrigued, but I've seen far more support for the 24-70L here and on other boards. I'd love to hear about people's experiences shooting weddings with this lens.

I've shot one wedding with it so far and doing another one tomorrow.

I really like it, the range on the 5d is perfect. Currently coupled with a 70-200 2.8 and looking to add the 16-35 2.8 soon. To be honest, if I needed low light shots in that range I'd probably go with the 50 or 24 primes.

It does vignette badly at f4, but I've always burnt the edges in anyway, so it doesn't worry me too much. It even removes a step of the workflow!

Having said that, the light is good at the moment, when it starts dropping I'd probably be grateful for the 2.8 of the 24-70

I used it a week ago at a wedding with natural light at evening. At f/4 and iso 200, I was able to get 1/125 speed in the shade (more than enough for bride groom portraits side by side). The F/4 provides enough shallow dof for creativity as well. If I needed to go to 2.8, I had my 30D with it on next to me.

Jon Rouston wrote in post #3827938
To be honest, if I needed low light shots in that range I'd probably go with the 50 or 24 primes.

It does vignette badly at f4, but I've always burnt the edges in anyway, so it doesn't worry me too much. It even removes a step of the workflow!

Having said that, the light is good at the moment, when it starts dropping I'd probably be grateful for the 2.8 of the 24-70

I've got both of those primes, so I've got the extreme low light stuff covered. However, I'm more interested in a versatile mid-range zoom that will afford me more flexibility and will meet the challenges if or when the lighting situation changes dramatically and I don't have time to swap lenses without risking missing good shots (I'll have a back-up body for that contigency as well). I'd consider the 24-70, but the focal range of 24-105 is so much more appealing, especially considering I can make full use of the 580ex flash coverage (24mm - 105mm extendable to 17mm).

I have both the 24-70L and 24-105. But I don't use it on FF... I have absolutely NO interest in full frame.

On a 1.3 its ok... I wish it was a touch wider than 24mm.
I have found the 24-105 to be sharper. Canon has my 24-70 now as it's my second bum copy. I've never liked this lens much and these QC problems aren't helping. Right now I am missing the extra stop of speed in really dark receptions. It also seems to help a lot with focusing too... when it's really dark, like a first dance, the 24-70 can lock focus much easier. When shutter dragging for dance shots, the 2.8 aperture allows me to use a half decent shutter speed.. like 1/13 or so. F/4 is around 1/6 and that is just too dark slow imo... the highlights get way too messy.

I honestly don't find the bokeh to be stellar on either, but it is definitely nicer on the 24-70 than the 24-105, which can get jaggedy and nasty.

The range is also much nicer going to 105. I find I use the 70-200 a LOT less when I have the 24-105 as a primary lens. Good for ceremony, as people don't move much, so you can use low shutter speeds.

All in all, when my 24-70 comes back (and confirmed it works half decently) I'll likely go back to using that as my primary. It just seems to be able to handle more situations than the 24-105.

picturecrazy wrote in post #3828276
I have both the 24-70L and 24-105. But I don't use it on FF... I have absolutely NO interest in full frame.

On a 1.3 its ok... I wish it was a touch wider than 24mm.
I have found the 24-105 to be sharper. Canon has my 24-70 now as it's my second bum copy. I've never liked this lens much and these QC problems aren't helping. Right now I am missing the extra stop of speed in really dark receptions. It also seems to help a lot with focusing too... when it's really dark, like a first dance, the 24-70 can lock focus much easier. When shutter dragging for dance shots, the 2.8 aperture allows me to use a half decent shutter speed.. like 1/13 or so. F/4 is around 1/6 and that is just too dark slow imo... the highlights get way too messy.

I honestly don't find the bokeh to be stellar on either, but it is definitely nicer on the 24-70 than the 24-105, which can get jaggedy and nasty.

The range is also much nicer going to 105. I find I use the 70-200 a LOT less when I have the 24-105 as a primary lens. Good for ceremony, as people don't move much, so you can use low shutter speeds.

All in all, when my 24-70 comes back (and confirmed it works half decently) I'll likely go back to using that as my primary. It just seems to be able to handle more situations than the 24-105.

Sounds like the 24-70 is a clear winner. Although the focal range of the 24-105L is more preferable, I do have the 70-200 or 85 to call upon when needed. The last sentence of your paragraph is what really matters.

"It just seems to be able to handle more situations than the 24-105."

That's all I needed to hear. Thanks.

Lord_Malone wrote in post #3827674
I found some excellent examples here, but would love more feedback. Thanks.

http://www.zangenberg.​net/foto/index.php?id=​237&page=1

Thanks, I am the one who took those shots. I like the 24-105 a lot. I use it wide open most the time and find it sharp and reliable. There is slight wignetting at f4, but many shots you dont notice it, and it is easy to correct in Lightroom. Most of these shots where taken with 24-105 http://www.zangenberg.​net/foto/index.php?lis​t=31 and a lot of them are with no flash (check exif). But for low light you do need ISO 800-3200, but 5D handles that pretty good. Since getting a 20D as backup/extra cam, I mainly keep 24-105 on 5D and 85 1.8 on 20D. I would like to try shooting with 35L 1.4 and 85 1.2, but I am holding out for my big lottery win before buying those

Zangenberg wrote in post #3828668
Thanks, I am the one who took those shots. I like the 24-105 a lot. I use it wide open most the time and find it sharp and reliable. There is slight wignetting at f4, but many shots you dont notice it, and it is easy to correct in Lightroom. Most of these shots where taken with 24-105 http://www.zangenberg.​net/foto/index.php?lis​t=31 and a lot of them are with no flash (check exif). But for low light you do need ISO 800-3200, but 5D handles that pretty good. Since getting a 20D as backup/extra cam, I mainly keep 24-105 on 5D and 85 1.8 on 20D. I would like to try shooting with 35L 1.4 and 85 1.2, but I am holding out for my big lottery win before buying those

You've done exceptionally well with this lens. Your shots are the primary reason why I'm considering it in the first place. I'm not at all concerned with vignetting. I rather like the effect for some shots and sometimes add it in post-processing anyway. And I know it's easily corrected in LR. I'll take a long hard look at both lenses before making a final decision. I never really had a desire to own another mid-range zoom after I sold my beloved old 28-80L, but now I find that it would be quite beneficial for me to re-acquire one.

The 24-105 bokeh and lack of speed, which means wandering focus in low light, made me sell my 24-105 and stick with the 24-70. I do hate the size of the 24-70 though... I'm even thinking about selling it and just going tamron 28-75, as I prefer my primes.

I have used the 24-70 for sports on a 30d and you can crop and crop and crop on my copy. One of the best lenses I have ever bought..

A mate of mine uses the 24-105 on his 5D, it's an incredibly sharp combo, but does vignette a little at F4. I don't care about that, I usually add a vignette anyway, it just saves me post processing time. I don't like it below about 40mm as there's distortion, which is one reason I don't want full frame myself.

I have used the 24-105L for an entire wedding from start (bedroom getting dressed) to the end (reception at night, inside, dim lights) and have any no issues. With proper flash indoors and really nice outdoor lighting - I didn't need to change the lens, which saves me time and dust.