Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens

[guntoter]

Choosing a new lens is a process not to take lightly. What ever you choose, you are stuck with for years to come (unless you find someone else who wants it).

I have a friend who is a professional photographer. He was advising me on lens purchases. He told me that if he could only have one lens it would be:
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens
However, in the few weeks that I have been on this site, no one has made mention of this lens that I noticed.

Does anyone have this lens? What do you think of it? Now that you have it, do you wish you had bought a different lens?

[faisal]

24mm is not wide enough on a crop sensor.....

[guntoter]

Of course he has a full frame. Even though I don't (and will not) have a full frame, I would naturally have other lenses. He was only giving his opinion of the "one best all around lens".
Still interested in people's experience with this lens. Does it fit your needs in most cases?

[jamison55]

On my 5D it is one of my most used lenses. The sheer utility of the lens makes it very useful to me. IQ is very good as well. It's also relatively light.

Having said that, on a cropped body, the 17-55 IS blows it away in useful range and IQ. It's about the same price, so if you are looking for a "one lens" solution that's the direction that I would look in.

[gilly]

I've got a 30D and you can see my list of lenses below.. The 24-105 is by far my favourite as a general purpose lens. Love it. Results are always fantastic. The IS is fantastic, Absolutely no regrets here!

Of course it's not all that wide - I've got the 10-22 for that. But I don't find it annoying that it's only 24mm at the wide end when I'm using it on the 30D by any means.

My next body will be full frame, that's why I've mainly chosen the lenses below. For a general purpose on a cropped body - consider the EF-S 17-55 2.8 IS. It gets great reviews. [EDIT - Jamison beat me to it and recommended it as well! But there you go - great minds think alike, and it's another great lens]

I wouldn't say your "stuck" with a lens once you've got it home - GOOD GLASS holds it's value very well, bodies don't.

[guntoter]

Good comments. Thanks guys. Several seem to think the 17-55 is a good crop choice, and I don't believe I will ever be able to afford a FF. The 50D is my next choice, Lord willing and the economy picks up.

[droopy1592]

Too bad the 17-55mm has an red ring price tag on it and I'm not that sure its' worth the price... but there's nothing on the market like it with IS going for it

[te1221]

Too bad the 17-55mm has an red ring price tag on it and I'm not that sure its' worth the price... but there's nothing on the market like it with IS going for it

It is well worth the price. I would buy it again in a heartbeat if I had a crop cameras my main.

[timmciglobal]

My main issue with 24-105 was it's rather busy bokeh. Otherwise it's a very sharp contrasty well built lens.

And yes I owned it.

Tim

[zmikers]

On a crop body, would this lens be just about right for portrait work? It seems to fit the bill in FL anyways, and being an L lens, the IQ should be fantastic. Or would you guys suggest primes for portraits?

[timmciglobal]

The bokeh is very distracting so I wouldn't use it for portraits.

Tim

[24Peter]

On a crop body, would this lens be just about right for portrait work? It seems to fit the bill in FL anyways, and being an L lens, the IQ should be fantastic. Or would you guys suggest primes for portraits?

On a crop body, it is indeed a good zoom lens for portraits. (And even for family photos, I find the focal length isn't too bad: wish it went a little wider but 24mm is surprisingly useful.) That being said, for professional portrait work, prime lenses are the way to go (I use 50 1.4, 85 1.8 and even 135 2.8).

I disagree with Tim - I don't find the bokeh distracting on the 24-105.

[shoey]

I've owned the 24-105, and still have the 17-55, so here's my take.

I loved the build quality on the 24-105 and was quite happy with the range most of the time. I liked the longer reach and found 24mm to be reasonably wide enough. I suppose its like the g9/g10 choice at the moment. Do you go wide or tele. Personally i find myself at the long end of the zoom far more than the short, but that said i do love the width of the 17-55.

I went with the 17-55 out of curiosity, and to be honest there are still things i like and dislike about both lenses, but the 17-55 has by far the better IQ, and you just can't beat the 2.8!!!

However, had i bought the 17-55 first and then tried the 24-105, i may have ended up keeping that instead.:confused: Maybe not:) Just wish the 17-55 had better build.

[guntoter]

These are great comments. I hadn't considered the 17-55mm before this. Now it is looking like a good option. I do find myself using the higher zooms a lot (outdoor sports), but I have lots of indoor sports too (karate) where that 17-55 f2.8 would be perfect.
Lots to think about.

[michaelb]

The 17-55 makes for sense on a crop sensor than the 24-105. I used to own the 17-55 and optically its a killer lens.

Now that I have the 5D and the 40D I've been using the 24-105 on the 40D some and I like it. Its not very wide for a one lens solution, but I've been shooting at longer FL's recently. I have the 10-22 for UWA however.

For a single lens solution though you can't beat the 17-55.

By the way, for karate you might want to think about the 85 1.8.

[guntoter]

By the way, for karate you might want to think about the 85 1.8.[/QUOTE]

I have a 28mm f1.8 prime, and a 50mm f1.8 prime. I find myself using the 28 more than the 50. However, I am usually a welcome photographer at the events and am allowed close access to the action.

I have had events where that wasn't the case, and the 85mm would have been perfect.

This pic was made with the 28mm f1.8 (no flash).