Canon 24-105IS

[ThatPhilBrettGuy]

Anyone got one? Just trying to find out how much better than the 28-135IS it'll be.

[nick_bbb]

It's probably my most used lens.

But I've never had the 28-135 to compare.

[bramley]

It's probably my least used lens.

It's pretty good i think, but whereas my 70-200, 50mm and 17-40 'do' stuff, the 24-105 is just a bit erm, boring tbh. Personally I wish I got the 24-70 instead, but even that might underwhelm me a bit, as it won't give the shallow dof that the 50 does, or the lovely look of the 70-200 at f2.8.

[m12_nathan]

I have both 24-105 and 28-135.

I think the 24-105 is better, faster focusing and that certain L something from the images, punch, saturation, whatever you want to call it.

Welcome to borrow the 24-105 if you can be bothered to collect it.

[pete]

On a 5D or 1DS it's a fantastic travel lens; you just need something for low-light to partner it, like a 35, 50 or 85mm prime. On a cropped sensor I'd imagine that the strange focal length range would be too much of a hindrance to be worth the premium over the 28-135.

Pete

[ThatPhilBrettGuy]

Thanks all. I suspect then that it's not going to be a big jump up from my 28-135IS. I seem to have a very good copy of the lens and even the 1DSmk3 works well with it. Thanks for the loan offer Nathan. I played with one in the shop and with a couple of back to back shots against the 28-135, it was a bit better. Not sure it's £650 better though....

Now, if Canon would make a light 28-135IS @ F2.8.....

[4hero]

bramley said:

It's probably my least used lens.

It's pretty good i think, but whereas my 70-200, 50mm and 17-40 'do' stuff, the 24-105 is just a bit erm, boring tbh. Personally I wish I got the 24-70 instead, but even that might underwhelm me a bit, as it won't give the shallow dof that the 50 does, or the lovely look of the 70-200 at f2.8.

Interesting.. I was going to get the 24-105 next and have a similar collection to you (70-200mm f2.8, 100-400mm, 17-40, 50mm, and a couple of others), but nothing much between the 17-40 and 70-200. What do you use as a walkabout lens?

[nick_bbb]

4hero said:

bramley said:

It's probably my least used lens.

It's pretty good i think, but whereas my 70-200, 50mm and 17-40 'do' stuff, the 24-105 is just a bit erm, boring tbh. Personally I wish I got the 24-70 instead, but even that might underwhelm me a bit, as it won't give the shallow dof that the 50 does, or the lovely look of the 70-200 at f2.8.

Interesting.. I was going to get the 24-105 next and have a similar collection to you (70-200mm f2.8, 100-400mm, 17-40, 50mm, and a couple of others), but nothing much between the 17-40 and 70-200. What do you use as a walkabout lens?

I have the 100-400mm, 17-40, 50mm and use the 24-105L the most.

ETA: On a 5D

Edited by nick_bbb on Monday 13th October 15:47

[Gemm]

I switched from 28-135 to 24-105. I thought I might miss the 30mm at long end, but I didn't really. It's just a superb lens, with fast focusing and sharp wide open. Having said that, 28-135 is still a great lens. It's extremely versatile, and if the money was an issue, anyone would be happy with it.

[RobDickinson]

24-105 is a solid lens.

Its nto exciting, not fast etc, but its sharp enough and covers a good range.

IMo its only real drawback is it doesnt do shallow dof and the bokeh is a bit off.

[bramley]

4hero said:

bramley said:

It's probably my least used lens.

It's pretty good i think, but whereas my 70-200, 50mm and 17-40 'do' stuff, the 24-105 is just a bit erm, boring tbh. Personally I wish I got the 24-70 instead, but even that might underwhelm me a bit, as it won't give the shallow dof that the 50 does, or the lovely look of the 70-200 at f2.8.

Interesting.. I was going to get the 24-105 next and have a similar collection to you (70-200mm f2.8, 100-400mm, 17-40, 50mm, and a couple of others), but nothing much between the 17-40 and 70-200. What do you use as a walkabout lens?

Hmm, good question. I'm not sure I really use a lens in a 'walkabout' sense. If I did, it probably would be the 24-105 just because it seems like the most appropriate choice. However, Rob's summed up my thoughts on it - it's good enough, but I just don't find it exciting. When I occasionally do use it, I always think to myself "yeah this is quite good" but I often wish I had better options on dof - maybe that's just down to what I tend to shoot though rather than a valid criticism of the lens.

[Stigmundfreud]

love the lens, most used lens but recently started to use my old 50mm 1.8 more :O Also just ordered an 85 1.8, however, the 24-105 is a fantastic lens with a brilliant level of quality

[LotusJas]

The 24-105 is probably my favourite lens. I also have 10-22, 17-40, 50 f1.8, 100 f2.8, 100-400 as well as a Sigma 12-24.