Looking for EF 24-105 f4L aftermarket replacement...

[jhpeterson]

While I don't think anything else compares to L glass, in terms of both optics and construction, you might consider Canon non-L lenses from the recent past.
While my experience, too, found the 28-135 IS a little wanting (with use, I noticed too much play in the barrel, especially when zoomed out to the long end, so the lens was never sharp).
But, a couple other lenses that cover close to the range of 24-105 gave me better results. Both the 24-85 and 28-105 are capable performers, especially considering their price on the used market (though I would want to test to make sure you have a good copy). While they don't offer IS, and their maximum aperture drops from f:3.5 to 4.5 at the long end, I've had more than adequate results.
No, they don't quite measure up to the build and optical performance of the 24-105 L, but, at a small fraction of the price, might work well for your use.

[awinphoto]

Just for the sake of curiosity, I browsed around for good CURRENT 3rd party lenses for Tokina, Tamron, and Sigma...  Sigma had a 24-70 2.8 listed on adorama for 824.  However looking at the MTF it is CLOSE but falls slightly short of the 24-105, AND, people on the reviews saying some were sharp, some had to send to sigma multiple times to be calibrated, one even going as far as saying it's a paperweight.  For an extra few hundred, the 24-105 smells like a rose...  Plus the sigma likely doesn't have the same construction and such... Then you have Tamroms version of the 24-70...  on adorama it's listed for more money than the 24-105 at $1299...  The 24-105 is listed at 1150 new...  There's one published review so far, 3 others that are unpublished or so it seems.  There are older lenses and other 3rd party lenses but reliability, warranty, and finding a good one could be even harder....  Those are your options...  you get what you pay for. 

Tokina, whom I think typically construction wise best rival L lenses, dont have a general purpose lens that zooms beyond 50 and all lenses are optimized for aps-c cameras. 

[jasonsim]

I would save yourself lots of time and pain sending a Sigma or Tamron in for adjustments or sending it back for refunds etc.  I've been there and done that.  I ended up with a 24-105mm L that I found used and like new for around 800.  You can find one at that price these days. 

You have not mentioned what other lenses you do have.  Perhaps you would be better suited with a Canon 50mm f/1.4, if you already have a super wide and a telephoto zoom such as a 70-200mm.

If you need a zoom and cannot swing for the 24-105 L, I would recommend getting a 28-135mm used fir around $250 and the get Nik Software's Sharpener plugin.  That might hold you over.

[dstppy]

I'm with everyone else in that there's no real 'cheap 24-105'.

Honestly, I think this lens would retail for $1400+ if it came out today and didn't have the benefit of being a high-volume kit lens.

Look at the good non-L zoom lenses, they're basically the 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM and the 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM -- neither have a low price tag, and those are EF-S (you mentioned wanting FF as well).

Look at the desirable non-Canon zooms, you have the ultra-wides, which are both non-ef AND not that cheap, and then there's that new Tamron SP 24-70mm Di VC USD, which looks awesome, but we're back at high price.

Honestly, for the range you're not going to find a better deal.

Now, people have mentioned primes, which I'm more and more warming up to as I get better at photography, better images at around half the price.  Do you have access to a possibly loaner 24-105 that you can narrow down what FOV you would favor?

 

[SpareImp]

I had a EF 24-105mm f/4L on my 5D Mark II, but wasn't happy with the image quality. I had to stop it down to about f/8 in order to get decent sharpness. Wide open, it was pretty soft. I bought it second hand, and may have gotten a bad copy, but it's a story worth telling(?). Sold it (without any complaints) and bought a new Tamron SP 28-75mm f/2.8. Stopped down to f/4, it's as sharp as my copy of the EF 24-105mm at f/8, but at one third of the price. However, it does have a bit slower AF. I would try it out in a store.

[dstppy]

I had a EF 24-105mm f/4L on my 5D Mark II, but wasn't happy with the image quality. I had to stop it down to about f/8 in order to get decent sharpness. Wide open, it was pretty soft. I bought it second hand, and may have gotten a bad copy, but it's a story worth telling(?). Sold it (without any complaints) and bought a new Tamron SP 28-75mm f/2.8. Stopped down to f/4, it's as sharp as my copy of the EF 24-105mm at f/8, but at one third of the price. However, it does have a bit slower AF. I would try it out in a store.

I can't help but wonder if it could have benefited from MFA.  I've been meaning to run FoCal over my existing lenses, but so far I've lucked out and had no real issues with my lenses.  Still, I wonder if the 5DmkII would be even more amazing with adjustment.

[brianleighty]

I had a EF 24-105mm f/4L on my 5D Mark II, but wasn't happy with the image quality. I had to stop it down to about f/8 in order to get decent sharpness. Wide open, it was pretty soft. I bought it second hand, and may have gotten a bad copy, but it's a story worth telling(?). Sold it (without any complaints) and bought a new Tamron SP 28-75mm f/2.8. Stopped down to f/4, it's as sharp as my copy of the EF 24-105mm at f/8, but at one third of the price. However, it does have a bit slower AF. I would try it out in a store.

I was going to say the same thing regarding the 28 - 70. That's about the only one I know that's full frame in the range he's looking at. I've never tried it before. I know Roger over at Lensrentals always says it's a great bang for the buck but looking at the charts on The Digital Picture isn't very encouraging. I actually got my 24-105 when I got my 5D Mark II kit. Over all I really like it. Sure I wish I had a wider aperture but I can see why people like it so much. I still have my Canon 28 135 as well. Still not sure what to do with it. It's obviously not as good but at such a low price that I could sell it at I'm still trying to decide whether to sell it or just hold onto it.

[SpareImp]

Yeah, my impression is that the 24-105mm is a great lens, based on what I’ve read. But again: the copy I had didn’t convince me. It possibly could’ve benefited from MFA, but after I was aware of the problem I did some tests with manual focus, aided by LiveView, and it was still pretty soft wide open. I really want to try a new copy now, to see if I was just a bit unlucky. After all, the build quality was excellent and I do miss the weather sealing.

Regarding the Tamron 28-75mm, you are depending on getting a good copy. I did, and was also able to buy a wider prime for landscape-photography for more or less the money I saved/made from the purchase and selling of the 24-105mm. I would definitely try the Tamron out before I buy it. They do make some great lenses, but are often overlooked because of a lower re-sale value, inconsistent quality control and not-as-great build quality. I’ve read online about photographers doing blind-tests with the Tamron 28-75mm and the Canon EF 24-70mm, without being able to find a clear winner. These specific photographers skill levels are unknown, however.

[awinphoto]

Yeah, my impression is that the 24-105mm is a great lens, based on what I’ve read. But again: the copy I had didn’t convince me. It possibly could’ve benefited from MFA, but after I was aware of the problem I did some tests with manual focus, aided by LiveView, and it was still pretty soft wide open. I really want to try a new copy now, to see if I was just a bit unlucky. After all, the build quality was excellent and I do miss the weather sealing.

Regarding the Tamron 28-75mm, you are depending on getting a good copy. I did, and was also able to buy a wider prime for landscape-photography for more or less the money I saved/made from the purchase and selling of the 24-105mm. I would definitely try the Tamron out before I buy it. They do make some great lenses, but are often overlooked because of a lower re-sale value, inconsistent quality control and not-as-great build quality. I’ve read online about photographers doing blind-tests with the Tamron 28-75mm and the Canon EF 24-70mm, without being able to find a clear winner. These specific photographers skill levels are unknown, however.

I wonder off hand maybe there was some fungus or maybe the lens was dropped by the original owner and moved an element or two?  That's one of my pet peeves...  The last lens, way back when I bought used on ebay, the lens stunk of cigarette smoke (an old tokina)...  It took literally a month for the smell to fully go away after cleaning it over and over... It operated just fine but for the first few shoots it was obnoxious.  Couldn't be happier with my copy of the 24-105 for what I use it for...