The Canon Zoom Lens EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM, which was designed to complete the f/4L zoom series lineup, is a standard zoom lens covering a wide range of focal lengths, from 24mm wide angle to 105mm mid-telephoto. The lens incorporates an Image Stabilizer (IS) that gives the equivalent effect of a shutter speed three stops faster, allowing the handheld capture of shots that would otherwise be blurred by Camera shake.
The EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM delivers the high-Contrast, high-definition images for which Canon's L-series is renowned. Three Aspherical lens elements (two replica, one glass mold) combined with Canon's proprietary Super UD (ultra-low Dispersion) lens element effectively correct Chromatic aberration throughout the entire zoom range to realize outstanding image quality. Designed to meet the needs of professional and experienced amateurs for a wide range of photographic subjects, the new lens offers Full-time manual focusing, which enables users to focus even in the AF mode, and a durable dust-resistant construction, ensuring unfailing performance even under harsh conditions.
When manoeuvarability is important and the lens quality is crucial, this L-class lens stands out a popular lightweight standard zoom, with very high quality opics. The Canon lens has built-in optical image stabilisation whitch is a very popular choice amongst serious photographers. The 24-105mm range is ideal for general photography and the 24mm field of view is not only great for full size sensors like the 5D, but also still gives a wide view or cropped sensor. Although there are better optics but at this price this is good vaule for the money.
Why should you care what I think?
My relationship with this item: Editor review
Conclusions at a glance
Would you recommend this Item: Undecided Pros: Great glass and focal range at a sensible price. Cons: Could be fatser.
Last updated: Thursday, 26 June 2008
User Lens Reviews
Average user rating from: 167 user(s)
Overall rating (weighted)
4.4
Sharpness
4.4
Build Quality
4.4
AF Speed
4.4
Value for Money
4.4
Add new review
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
Beautiful warm photos from a wondeful all-around l, Thursday, 22 April 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
Despite all the technical metrics, the real measure of a lens boils down to the subjective question: does it take good photos? The EF 24-105L not only takes good photos, it takes beautiful ones, notably nicer than several other well-regarded lenses in the same price range.
As an avid amateur, I don't make a living from my camera, but the results matter a great deal to me. After reading every review I could find, I bought three well-regarded lenses to try on my Canon Rebel T1i. This EF24-105L, the new Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD, and the very-well reviewed Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM. Both of the EF-S lenses are newer models than the EF 24-105L and are designed for cropped-sensor cameras.
The short: The 24-105 turned out warmer, more beautiful photos in both indoor and outdoor usage, capturing vibrant, accurate colors. The IS works well and is much quieter than the newer IS in the Canon EF-S 17-55mm. While some sort of external stabilization is necessary, it works reasonably well for low-light photography. And the colors...grasses are green, skin tones look healthy, my cat's fur gleams, and every color pops. The best results of any lens I've tried on my Canon DSLR so far.
On my cropped-sensor camera, there's very little visible fall-off in sharpness at max aperture of f/4 (although there is some softness); never enough that I found myself dialing down the aperture for that reason.
As for the other lenses, I really wanted to like the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM, but it seemed to take unusually few "keepers" in similar shooting situations to the EF24-105L. The captured colors were a little cooler, and the IS comparatively very loud (audible without putting your ear to the lens). All of this was enough to offset the wider-angle and the bigger aperture, so back it went (at the thousand-buck mark, I want my glass to impress me!).
The Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM UD was solid all-around but without the oomph I'd expect for 80% of the price of the EF24-105L. It's lighter-weight and has a wider angle, and the IS is a newer generation, but pictures were less rich and didn't pop the way the 24-105L's do. A great walk-around lens if I didn't have the direct comparison to the 24-105L, but only worthwhile if the price difference (or few ounces weight-difference) is make-or-break. I kept this one as a backup (or for travel), but find I never want to swap it in place of the 24-105L.
I also considered the well-reviewed Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM, but its lack of IS and much greater weight turned me away since much of my usage is handheld.
And since the EF24-105 is an L series, Canon includes a lens-hood and a structured storage bag, both nice quality.
The cons are what you'd expect: it's a large, heavy, expensive lens, with only a maximum aperture of f/4. It's big enough to draw comments when you take it out in casual settings. But, it's much lighter than other L lenses, and only few ounces heavier than EF-S lenses I tried. The aperture is a limiting factor in low-light photography (tripod or flash or other method required, even with the IS), but the results are consistently very good when properly stabilized. I've used it in a number of bars and other low-light situations.
The EF 24-105L has pretty constantly stayed on my camera since I've had it, turning into my walk-around lens, my portrait lens, my landscape lens.
This is my first L glass and I love it! We thought long and hard before spending this much money on a lens. I'm glad we did and my wife loves it too. I clearly understand why professionals use good glass. I wouldn't want anything less for my own photos.
This is my first macro lens and second L lens. It is true that buying your first L lens does infect you with the L lens fever :) I tried it out with both a 40D and a 5D MKII body and the lens works beautifully on both. I did not feel that the hybrid IS worked that well at macro levels - a tripod is still a necessity but as a portrait lens it worked beautifully producing crisp pictures in a dim room at 1/8 sec with no Blur. That was better than the 24/105 f4L IS which did have a little Bit of blur at that level. I also noticed that the IS did not make as much of a noise as the IS system in the 24/105L. For macro shots the clarity was amazing, case in point - in the first test shot I took of my computer keyboard I noticed that the photograph had a big red textured dot on it. My initial reaction was that it was a problem with the lens until I took a close look at the keyboard, and yes there was a tiny piece of red paint on the key. All in all, a highly recommended lens.
A good, Sub-L walkaround lens, Friday, 02 April 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
4.0
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
5.0
I got it as the kit lens with the 5D Mk II.
It's not what's popularly termed as a "prosumer" lens. It's more like an "amateursumer" lens. Leica and Zeiss glass users would find this lens laughable.
I'd only like to add a few things to the review pool:
The distortion is minimal, and it's easy to overlook. It's not a problem at all. DXO version 6 will correct it.
Chromatic Aberration is clearly visible, and it looks cheap on such a high-end, pricey lens. This is why I consider this lens less than the "L" designation that Canon uses on their top-of-the-line lenses. But never fear, the Eos 5D Mk II comes with Canon's Digital Photo Professional that corrects this problemo.
Haven't used it enough to make an informed decision on whether or not I think it was worth the money, however this was the cheapest place I found it and it was delivered as promised.
Tamron 17-50 does better than this one...sorry, Sunday, 07 March 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
1.5
Sharpness
1.0
Build Quality
2.0
AF Speed
1.0
Value for Money
2.0
HI, try again and now with this lens, after comparing different shots at same apertures with tamron 17-40 wich is haf of the price i found that the expensive lens takes less quallity than the cheap one,,, well i guess i will keep trying....
Tamron 17-50 does better than this one...sorry, Sunday, 07 March 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
1.3
Sharpness
1.0
Build Quality
1.0
AF Speed
2.0
Value for Money
1.0
HI, try again and now with this lens, after comparing different shots at same apertures with tamron 17-40 wich is 3 times cheaper i found that the expensive lens takes less quallity than the cheap one,,, well i guess i will keep trying....shame on canon
I was debating getting the 24-70 or this; I got this, and so far I am not disappointed. I like IS and don't often use wider apertures; besides, I already have a Tamron 28-75, which is a very nice lens, and much lighter than the 24-70.
Anyway, the 24-105 really does make a good "walkaround" lens, and the IS is very cool (just give it a second to kick in when you push the shutter halfway). On a 5D, the range is very useful, and I combine this with a 70-300 IS, which is also very nice on a 5D.
Some will complain about lens distortion, which this lens has at the extreme ends, but that is easy to fix in DXO or photoshop lens correction utilities. Many pictures will not need it.
The thing I have seen is that with wider angle lenses (in general) is that it matters where you point the camera, in terms of perpective control. For example, when shooting a building, pointing up (to get the top of the building in view) creates a lot of perspective distortion; I will need to back up so I can keep the focal plane vertical or get a tilt-shift lens (which I may do, anyway).
This is my daytime walkaround lense. The range is pretty good with the crop factor on my xsi. Great build quality, nice color, and contrast. No complaints - you really do get what you pay for here.
My Standard Walkabout Lens, Thursday, 07 January 2010
Overall rating (weighted)
4.0
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
3.0
I actually owned the Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras before this lens which I used as a walkabout lens on my 40D. Then I upgraded to the 5D, which can be unforgiving on less-than-"L" lenses and I really noticed the bad IQ with the 28-135.
I've owned this lens over a year now and have to say the 24-105 image quality is superb, and build quality is what you'd expect from am "L" lens. I wish the lens was faster like the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM Standard Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras but I guess what you give up in speed, you gain in reach. Since I find myself zooming in a lot, it's more useful to me than the 24-70.
There is some slight Vignetting at 24mm especially wide open at f4. I can't complain much since I shoot raw and just use the slider in the "lens correction" portion of ACR to correct it.
My one and only complaint about this lens (why only 4 stars) is the lens hood doesn't seem to fit property. It's very tight to get on and off, I almost worry about the long-term effects on the turning portion of the zoom, but I try to be careful.
I had tried this lens first on the 5DMII and thought the IQ was terrific. I then tired it on the 40D and although not as great as on the 5DMII the difference from my non "L" lenses was appreciable. When I purchased my 7D I was hoping this was the kit lens so that I could take advantage of the discounted price, but unfortunately it wasn't part of the package. I payed full price for it and that is my only complaint. The IQ doesn't seem to be as good on the 7D (a cropped sensor) as is on the full frame 5DMII, but is still much better than the 17-55 mm that I used as my everyday lens for the 40D. For the price, I think it could have been better than an f/4.0 -especially for indoor low light situations. It's quiet and focuses quickly. Overall, I think it's a great lens and if you can swallow the price then you won't regret getting it.
12 of 12 people found the following review helpful
Canon EF 24-70mm vs. 24-105mm IS: Read this if you, Friday, 20 November 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
I am a hobbyist and this review is for people like me. What I mean by that is that I take pictures for fun and nobody buys my pictures. I mostly shoot landscape, nature, and portraits of family, friends, and relatives. I will refer to 24-70mm as the 70, and the 24-105mm IS as the 105. I first made the mistake of buying the 70, then I returned it with a hefty restocking fee and bought the 105 - I don't have the slightest regret and I could not be happier. I'm taking my time to write this review so that you can spend your hard earned money wisely. Let's analyze the trade-off between the two: * Both lenses have excellent build and image quality. So these are not differentiating factors. * The one and only advantage of the 70 is the one smaller f-stop. For me, this means more blur when I shoot portraits, so this is all good. * The advantage of 105 over the 70 are as follows: - You get an extra 35mm, which is 50% more zoom. I like this. - You get a 3-stop IS. For me, this is a great advantage, because I rarely use tripods and IS saves the day. I would choose the 105 over 70 for the IS alone. - The 105 is 10 ounces lighter and close to half an inch shorter. The last part is the most important part: that additional 10 ounces make a heavy lens TOO HEAVY, and that extra length makes a big lens TOO BIG. Carrying the 70 on my 50D was a pain. I can assure you, the 70 is just too heavy to walk around and take pictures for fun. The keyword here is "fun". The 70 is a pain, the 105 is fun. The 105 is still heavy, but not too heavy. It's still big, but not too big. After having the 70 for a few weeks, I lost all my joy for shooting. It just made me very uncomfortable (and I'm 6-foot 2). When I replaced it with the 105, it did make a difference. I enjoy taking pictures now, once again. Pros might like the 70 because they need it for their professional work. But if you're shooting just for fun, stay away from the 70 and get the 105.
Excellent All-Purpose Glass, Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.0
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
5.0
When purchasing the Canon EOS 5D Mark II, I had the option of purchasing it with this lens as part of the package. The combined price represented a savings and the focal-length range of this lens offers a practical, wide selection of options.
The f/4.0 opening at first does not seem very "fast" but all my prime lenses are not much faster, and none of my vintage primes offer auto-focus and image stabilization. This combined with the extreme ISO range of the 5D Mark II renders the f/4.0 of little concern. I have not yet been in a situation where I could not make an image with this lens - even in near-darkness!
It's a huge heavy lens, which means it's not going to be as convenient as that little cigarette-pack-sized point-and-shoot 10x zoom, but if you place convenience over all, you probably aren't in the market for this type of gear anyway. This is convenient in a different way - photographic flexibility, spanning ultra-wide to short telephoto.
As with all Zoom lenses, there are compromises to be made. Not fast, not small, it's also probably not as sharp as a fixed focal length lens. But add up the cost of a 24mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, and 105mm, and see if perhaps the value of having them all in one lenses doesn't tip the scale in favor of a lens perhaps not perfectly sharp, in favor of something you will likely be able to render many images without fumbling and breaking the bank.
And that's not to say this lens is soft by any means. Sometimes I think all the hype about sharpness, beyond practical limits, is just one-upmanship. It's the image that matters, and not everything is always sharp is it? I have uploaded some images to show the flexibility of this lens on the 5D Mark II, as employed by my eyes.
