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: 145 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
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
Superb, all-around lens for travel and more!, Sunday, 31 May 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.3
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
4.0
When I took an Alaska vacation in 2007, I did not have the Canon 24-105 lens. What I took with me was the Canon EF-S 10-22mm , the Canon EF 50mm f1.4 and the Canon EF 70-300mm DO - all excellent lenses. But so many times I found myself switching lenses, or having to make do with what I had which was either too wide or not wide enough.
This year, when I visited Japan, I had added the Canon 24-105, and it stayed on my camera almost all the time. Admittedly, I was not taking pictures of whales and glaciers this time, but I found the 24-105 extremely versatile. Not only that, but it is relatively compact and not too heavy. It balances well on my Canon 40D.
Of course, versatile is nothing if the lens is poor. This lens is NOT - when I bought it some months ago, I could instantly see an improvement in clarity and color over the Canon EF 28-135mm I had started out with some years earlier. The 28-135 is a fine lens, don't get me wrong, but it's not an "L".
I run a web site for a no-kill cat shelter and take pictures of the cats up for adoption each week. I'm usually about 2-3 feet away from them and before had been using the 10-22 with mixed results. Now I use the 24-105 and it works fabulously - with detail and sharpness that are incredible.
I've seen many reviews heaping praise on the Canon 24-105 f/4 L, and I'll just add to it. It's a keeper!
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
DISTORTION !!!, Thursday, 28 May 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
3.3
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
2.0
L-series? I don't think this lens is worth to be named L-series.
Too much distortion at 24mm on full-frame cameras. Poor bokeh even at 105mm. The lens does not have a 28mm position. I don't undersand Canon engineers. They can built masterpieces. Why don't they sit down and redesign this lens? Image Stabilizer is good, but optical quality is always better.
Why should you care what I think?
My relationship with this item: I own it Where did you buy this item?: store Price paid: 1,100 When did you buy this item?: 12 months ago
Conclusions at a glance
Would you recommend this Item: No Pros: Sharp, color, IS Cons: Distortion, no 28mm position
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
DISTORTION at full frame !!!, Wednesday, 27 May 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
3.5
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
2.0
I can't understand why Canon-technicians do not work on the distortion problem. The SW correction means you had to crop the picture. Another point of criticism is the lack of the 28mm position. Why?
Why should you care what I think?
My relationship with this item: I own it
Conclusions at a glance
Would you recommend this Item: No Pros: Sharpness, color aberation control, AF Cons: Distortion at full frame on 24mm, no 28mm position
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
DON'T WASTE YOUR MONEY !!!!!, Sunday, 24 May 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
1.3
Sharpness
2.0
Build Quality
1.0
AF Speed
1.0
Value for Money
1.0
I purchased this lens back in September 2008. After a few months I noticed that my pictures were not at all sharp and seemed to be getting fuzzier and fuzzier. By March 2009 I finally realized that it was the lens and not my ineptitude as a photographer.
I shipped the lens to Canon for repair, at a cost of about $40 for shipping and insurance. They found some problems, adjusted the lens and shipped it back to me under warranty, all in a few days. It "seemed" ok at the time, but is now is getting fuzzier and fuzzier again. I just returned from a trip and all the pictures I took the last day are too blurry to be worth showing to anyone. This is not what I would expect from a lens that costs more than $1,000. I'm going to see if I can get Canon to exchange the lens. This is very, very frustrating.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
WOW what a lens....., Saturday, 09 May 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.0
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
4.0
I have the 24-70 F2.8 lens and just purchased the 24-105 F4 lens. The new(for me) 24-105 is a very nice lens to use as a all around lens. It is lighter than the 24-70. It's almost a perfect lens... if only it was a F-2.8 lens.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
I love this lens., Wednesday, 06 May 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
My stock lens had been a Sigma 18-200 and I was getting excellent results with it until I added a Canon 100-200mm zoom. The difference in quality between the two lenses was very noticable so I tried the 24-105mm and love it. It is heavier than the Sigma, but the results are very good. Autofocus is fast and locks on very well, the f/4 lets in lots of light even on the top end and is very functional across a wide range of photo uses. If I was putting together a lens/camera body combination for the first time, this is the combination I would go with.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
Very sharp, Tuesday, 05 May 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
I bought this as a replacement walk-around lens for my 28-135mm IS, which I had for about 4 years. I was pleased with this older lens and held off buying the more expensive 'L' cause I didn't think it could be that much of an improvement. I'm extremely pleased with this new lens - it focuses quickly, is not that much bigger or heavier than the 28-135, and the f4 throughout the range is nice. Also, I appreciate the added 4mm on the wide end, and don't miss the extra 'reach' that I thought I might. BTW, I'm using this on a FF Canon 5D, and use it mainly for landscapes, but also some interior work. I'm not one for doing endless focus 'tests', or for pixel peeping (I prefer to go out and shoot like I normally would and judge the results), but since I read that some have said the lens is sharp in the middle, but can be soft around the edges at varying f stops and zooms, I decided to run a few quick 'tests'. Basically shot same subject outdoors at 24mm, 70mm and 105mm, all at f4, f5.6, f8, and I was extremely pleased with the results. Not much difference wide open or at f8, or wide vs. zoom. Center 'may' be a little sharper than edges, but not by much in my case. Perhaps I have a great copy. Extremely pleased with this lens!
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful
A Fine lens..., Thursday, 30 April 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.3
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
4.0
Value for Money
4.0
This lens isn't the sharpest lens in the kit but it is great for a general purpose walk around lens. It is light and fast focusing with very good image stabilization. I essentialy traded a sub standard 70-200 2.8L IS for this lens and never looked back. The 24-105 produces much better images than the 70-200. I realize that in most cases that won't be true, but it was in mine!
I took some pretty good shots of the March shuttle launch with the lens, but I do wish I had a Canon EF 100-400mm f4.5-5.6L IS USM Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Camerasfor that purpose.
Most photos on my pbase site were taken with this lens. Not sure if I can post a link, but if not just go to pbase dot com and search for Phodeaux if interested.
LINK: http://www.pbase.com/phodeaux/galleries
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
One Great Lens, Saturday, 25 April 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
This lens has lived up to all the reviews, great all around lens. The IS is better than expected, much better than my 17-85 IS lens that it replaced.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
2 of 4 people found the following review helpful
A decent, not great lens, Wednesday, 11 March 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
3.5
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
4.0
I must start with a disclaimer: the so called "normal range" (24-28 -> 70-105 mm) lenses -turned out not to be my cup of tea. I had two copies of 24-105, one used I traded my 24-70 for on FM (a big mistake), and the brand new one I bought as a kit with 5D. I had a brand new lens and the used one at the same time so I had to sell one of them. I sold the new one for the used lens was sharper. I then bought a used 17-40 f/4... and found that the 24-105 had no use anymore. I had the 17-40, 24-105, 50/1.4 and 70-200 f/4 IS. Initially, I tried to take 24-105 instead of 70-200 with me for its versatility. Every single time I did, I regretted it. The 70-200 is far superior in the overlapping region, and offers more reach, the 17-40 offers far wider range and much better contrast and even better Resolution in 24-40 range (yes, I was lucky to get a great copy of this lens), and 50 f/1.4 is superior at 50 mm in terms of resolution (when stopped down to f/2.8 -f/4), bokeh, lightness and compactness. What did I need the 24-105 for? I went on and sold it.
To be fair, it's a decent lens. The images are reasonably sharp and have decent contrast (although inferior to the aforementioned lenses), and the image stabilization is really useful in 70-105 range indoors. This lens does everything well, but nothing great. The bokeh is somewhat distracting; subject isolation is limited by its relatively slow max aperture, for flashless indoor shots the aperture is too slow to stop action (and with a flash you can use any cheap lens stopped down with the same results). At least 24-70 provided better bokeh and was one stop faster. It was a better lens, although I wouldn't buy it again having this range covered already (I don't care for 40-50 and 50-70 mm gaps). Not for $1200, and the need to carry this brick.
And I wouldn't buy just a decent lens for $1100. For a grand, I expect my lens to be great.
How would I rate this lens? Well, let's see. If 70-200 f/4 IS deserves 5 for optical quality, and 17-40 deserves 4, I'd say 24-105 deserves 3.5. Let's add half a point for image stabilization. All right, 4 it is.
As for the value for the money, if you are still thinking of buying this lens new for over a grand ($1100 as of today), just do yourself a favor: for the same amount of money take a used 17-40 (around $550), a used 70-200 f/4 (non IS, around $450-500) and a used or new 50/1.8 (around $80). You cover far greater range and with much better quality. Plus, some low-light indoor ability of 50, and great portraits with 70-200 at 200 mm (about the same background Blur as 100 mm f/2 would provide, at least for distant backgrounds). Well, you lose the IS, but that's all.
I won't subtract any points from my rating for poor value for the money, you know yourself what it costs, I rate performance only.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
Great walk around on 5D, Saturday, 07 March 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.5
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
I am not a pro and only comment as a hobbyist. It's an L lens, with the L build quality, contrast, color, clarity, AF, consistency and reliability. Don't expect it to beat the primes though. It's still a zoom. Of the three f4.0 L zoom from Canon, I found the 70-200/f.4 to be the best. I got the non IS version for its price and light weight and the top notch IQ. This 24-105 sits in the middle as far as IQ goes. And it has a very effective IS feature that is extremely helpful in real world use. I didn't notice any drain on my batteries. It's the best walk around day light lens on 5D for me.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Excellent lens for the price, Saturday, 07 March 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.0
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
3.0
AF Speed
3.0
Value for Money
5.0
I got this lens used from a fellow professional photographer who was upgrading to the 24-70mm f/2.8. In the 6 months of using this lens, I have found it to be excellent for portraits and even landscape work. The IS is a great feature and works very well. I love not having to have a tripod in lower light situations.
The only reason I do not give this lens 5 stars is the lack of sharpness wide open. The lens, for the price and build quality, should be sharper when wide open, but the sharpness dramatically improves at f/5.6 and higher. The IS also drains my battery much faster than a non-IS lens. This isn't a huge problem, but it is a consideration.
However, overall, this lens is a great purchase for anyone wanting a versatile lens for portrait work and as a walkabout lens. The tonal quality and sharpness at f/5.6 or lower is fantastic, and the IS is a big bonus for those of us with unsteady hands who need to use tripods otherwise. The build quality is fantastic, and the weather sealing is a huge bonus when working outdoors on a regular basis or for traveling. I've never had sand or dust get into this lens, and I've taken it with me almost everywhere.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Excellent lens for the price, Saturday, 07 March 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.3
Sharpness
3.0
Build Quality
4.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
I got this lens used from a fellow professional photographer who was upgrading to the 24-70mm f/2.8. In the 6 months of using this lens, I have found it to be excellent for portraits and even landscape work. The IS is a great feature and works very well.
The only reason I do not give this lens 5 stars is the lack of sharpness wide open. The lens, for the price and build quality, should be sharper when wide open, but the sharpness dramatically improves at f/5.6 and higher. The IS also drains my battery much faster than a non-IS lens. This isn't a huge problem, but it is a consideration.
However, overall, this lens is a great purchase for anyone wanting a versatile lens for portrait work and as a walkabout lens. The tonal quality and sharpness at f/5.6 or lower is fantastic, and the IS is a big bonus for those of us with unsteady hands who need to use tripods otherwise. The build quality is fantastic, and the weather sealing is a huge bonus when working outdoors on a regular basis or for traveling. I've never had sand or dust get into this lens, and I've taken it with me almost everywhere.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
4 of 4 people found the following review helpful
best L lens for all around purposes, Thursday, 19 February 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
5.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
4.0
this is my 2nd L lens (17-40 was my first) and it stays on my 40D all the times now.
Was this review helpful to you?
Report this review
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful
Wow!, Thursday, 19 February 2009
Overall rating (weighted)
4.8
Sharpness
4.0
Build Quality
5.0
AF Speed
5.0
Value for Money
5.0
I probably should test this lens more before writing a review, but I have been so excited so far! I paired this lens up with a 40D. As soon as I decided to go the SLR route, I decided to put the money into a good "walk-about" lens. If I wait a few years, I can always get more quality for any set price range from the camera perspective since the technology is still evolving.
I have not been dissapointed. The quality of the pictures are awesome so far. Nice, sharp details. I do need to take it out and check it under more conditions, but I figure the current indoor pictures I have taken of small pieces of jewelry are done in pretty poor conditions to start with. I am hoping it gets better from here.
The only down side is the total weight between the camera and lens makes me wonder how happy I am going to be when I go out hiking with this. But the sturdy construction compared with the lower end models makes the weight tolerable under normal conditions.
