Is it worth waiting for an upgrade to 24-105?

[lexonio]

I'm currently using 550D + Sigma 17-70 OS, but I plan to move to a FF body sooner or later (most likely I'll grab 5dmkII when mkIII gets released), and that's why I want to buy 24-105 now and use it on my cropped camera (as far as I know it's pretty good for APS-C cameras), but the lens is 4 years old and has some drawbacks, e.g. pretty pronounced distorsion at 24mm. So is it worth waiting to get it, or I'd better buy it now and save money for an FF body?

[awinphoto]

Or option C... buy it with your FF as a kit.  The lens is a few hundred cheaper when bought as a kit than if you paid ala cart.  But if that isn't an option, i'd recommend getting it and using your current lens for wide angle.  I dont see the 24-105 getting upgraded anytime within the next few years. 

[lexonio]

That would've been a great option if I lived in the US, but I am currently in Russia, and the situation here is quite different - I would actually save up to 100$ if I buy the body and the lens separately from different vendors. I could order the kit from eBay, but once again I'll have to pay something like 150-200$ to get it delivered, without a chance to test focusing capabilities of the specific kit.

Too bad we probably won't be seeing an upgrade to one of the most popular lenses out there. And thank you for your reply, it've been useful

[awinphoto]

No problem.  I didn't realize the camera and lens prices were so different over in russia.  I just assumed they would be different for your currency but somewhat proportional.  In that case, I'd recommend the lens.  It's not as wide as your current lens, so if you love to use the 17mm part, keep that lens for that range, but other than that, I love this lens and has been used 90% of the time on both my 7d and 5d2.  My second most used lens is my 17-40 then 50mm... 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

This is a relatively new lens, and not likely to be upgraded soon.  Ask again in 6 years.

[scrappydog]

I love the 24-105 f/4L on my cropped camera (60D).  It is my favorite lens.  I probably use it 80-90% of the time.  My only complaints are that it is not faster, and that there is distortion at 24mm.  I have only noticed the distortion on one or two occasions - not enough to complain about.  I highly recommend it.

[Michael_pfh]

I was using the 24-105 F4L IS for a year on my then 550D before I sold it in anticipation of the 24-70 F2.8L II. I was always happy with it and my only "complaint" was its comparably small aperture, however since it got IS its performance in less than ideal light situations is quite ok.

I also do assume that its successor cannot be expected before 2015 (guess based solely on gut feeling).

[CHL]

The 24-105 is IMHO a perfect walkaround lens. I sold my 24-70 when I bought the 5D MKII and got the 24-105 as a kit with the camera. It's light, easy to carry and versatile. A bit slow, yes, but on a FF you can compensate with higher ISO. Some distortion at the wider end but that can be fixed in PP (I use PTLens).

[cfargo]

No, buy it now as you would be waiting a very long time and missing a great lens.

[Maui5150]

Not sure how soon this lens will get updated.  Not a perfect lens, but I think Canon is focusing on ranges, and with the 24-70 and the 70 - 200 they have a nice range, as well as the rumored 200 - 400 coming out as well...

So to me the 24 - 105 seems like an overlap lens.  Don't get me wrong, I use this lens a lot, but I don't see it being addressed anytime soon. 

[well_dunno]

I will just be another one to repeat no update to be expected this lens in the near future. I have also used this lens on an aps-c body and was very pleased with the results. Yes there is distortion at 24mm and it's an f/4 - not a perfect lens but it does what it is supposed to and I am very pleased with the results, both on aps-c and FF.

24 mm is not very wide on aps-c though, so if you need the wide angle, you might need to use the Sigma...

Cheers!

 

[lexonio]

Oh, thank you for your replies, I'm happy to see a community as friendly and helpful as this one. I'll be getting the 24-105 first thing tomorrow. Thanks once again!

[D.Sim]

Bit odd that they don't bundle the 24-105 as a "kit" lens for the 5DII there...

But I think you've made a great decision getting it... Its a good lens, and since there have not been rumours of an upgrade... it might be a pretty long wait

[lexonio]

Well, they do, but the lens is immensely popular itself, so it's usually removed from the kit and sold separately. When it is sold separately, the price is of course different. So when you buy a "kit" you're basically buying a camera and a lens separately. Weird stuff, but that's how it works.

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I'm currently using 550D + Sigma 17-70 OS, but I plan to move to a FF body sooner or later (most likely I'll grab 5dmkII when mkIII gets released), and that's why I want to buy 24-105 now and use it on my cropped camera (as far as I know it's pretty good for APS-C cameras), but the lens is 4 years old and has some drawbacks, e.g. pretty pronounced distorsion at 24mm. So is it worth waiting to get it, or I'd better buy it now and save money for an FF body?

I would wait until you go FF. That way you might at least get it at kit discount price perhaps or maybe something better will be out by the time you finally go FF.

Personally I didn't think it was all that hot on a 5D2, although the IS, AF, range are very nice to be sure. I doubt it would really even work any better than you Sigma 17-70 OS does for you know on your 550D. And it won't go wide at all, which may be a huge negative for you for now.

My Tamron 17-50 was sharper on my 50D than the 24-105 (although the 24-105 wasn't bad on APS-C at all, just not quite as crazy super sharp if you looked really closely, on FF I didn't care for the mushy edges, CA, distortion on the wide side, you might need to pony up for the new 24-70 II if you want a zoom in that range and expect edge to edge goodness though on a high MP FF or look to the 24 2.8 IS prime or something). Even my Tamron 28-75 2.8 actually did a little bit better on FF, other than having a little bit worse contrast. It also has f/2.8, although the AF is slower, it doesn't have as much range and lacks IS.

That said some people do swear by it. I hated it though.

It's a weird lens in that it seems to be one of the lenses that most often appears on lists of people's favorite/best FF lenses and it is also perhaps the lens that most often appears on lists of people's least favorite/worst FF lenses haha. Not sure what to say. Maybe lots of copy variation. Maybe lots of differences in the way various people tend to shoot. Maybe lots of differences in people's expectations. Maybe all three. Canon's own MTF chart does appear to show terrible edge performance on FF though, much worse than that of the 24 1.4 II (or the upcoming 24-70 II and 24 2.8 IS) or the Zeiss 21mm.