July 31, 2014, 11:07:56 AM

Author Topic: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]  (Read 19817 times)

skitron

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #15 on: April 19, 2011, 12:16:52 PM »
I'm very happy with the sharpness, color and contrast from this lens.

Have you objectively compared the sharpness of it to a 100 macro or 70-200 or something else known to be sharp? The reason I ask is to help determine if the particular one I tried was just off or if it is a characteristic of the design. I may be interested in the existing one if a II doesn't materialize fairly soon and there is reason to try another copy.
5D3, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100L, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4 DG, Canon TC 1.4x III

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #15 on: April 19, 2011, 12:16:52 PM »

CR Backup Admin

  • Administrator
  • 5D Mark III
  • *****
  • Posts: 749
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #16 on: April 19, 2011, 12:26:26 PM »
I'm very happy with the sharpness, color and contrast from this lens.

Have you objectively compared the sharpness of it to a 100 macro or 70-200 or something else known to be sharp? The reason I ask is to help determine if the particular one I tried was just off or if it is a characteristic of the design. I may be interested in the existing one if a II doesn't materialize fairly soon and there is reason to try another copy.

I have all three lenses you mention.  The 24-105mm L is not quite as sharp as the 100mm L or the 70-200mm L, but it is close.  Its invalid, of course to compare a 4:1 zoom with a prime or a telephoto zoom, wide angles are not as sharp as telephotos.

If you want objective comparisons, there are plenty of sites to do this, I like photozone for comparisons.  The results on a crop or on a FF camera will vary as well, so when someone likes a lens on their crop camera, it may not be the same on FF.  Thats why so many user comments need to be taken in context to the body they use.

skitron

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #17 on: April 19, 2011, 12:39:24 PM »
I'm very happy with the sharpness, color and contrast from this lens.

Have you objectively compared the sharpness of it to a 100 macro or 70-200 or something else known to be sharp? The reason I ask is to help determine if the particular one I tried was just off or if it is a characteristic of the design. I may be interested in the existing one if a II doesn't materialize fairly soon and there is reason to try another copy.

I have all three lenses you mention.  The 24-105mm L is not quite as sharp as the 100mm L or the 70-200mm L, but it is close.  Its invalid, of course to compare a 4:1 zoom with a prime or a telephoto zoom, wide angles are not as sharp as telephotos.

If you want objective comparisons, there are plenty of sites to do this, I like photozone for comparisons.  The results on a crop or on a FF camera will vary as well, so when someone likes a lens on their crop camera, it may not be the same on FF.  Thats why so many user comments need to be taken in context to the body they use.

OK, that helps. I don't expect it to be like a 70-200 but I would expect it to be quite a bit better than a 28-135 or 18-55, which this one wasn't in terms of sharpness. So it sounds to me like it's worth another try if the II doesn't show up soon.

Of course its all relative but if a 18-55 was a "1" and the 100 macro was a "100" on a scale of sharpness, this particular 24-105 would have been about a "15" at best. Sound like yours might be about a "60" or "70" on such a scale? I would be happy with that.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2011, 12:46:56 PM by skitron »
5D3, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100L, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4 DG, Canon TC 1.4x III

t.linn

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 143
    • View Profile
    • You Must Have A Really Nice Camera
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #18 on: April 19, 2011, 02:13:34 PM »
whats wrong with the original 24-105L anyways?

My biggest issue with the 24-105 is vignetting at the wide end.  If I have a polarizer on this lens, it really functions more like a 28-105.  I find this very frustrating.  The barrel distortion at the wide end is also an issue for me—though it is one more easily fixed.

I tend to shoot at wider angles so, for me, anything above 50mm is a convenience.  I'll use it, but far less frequently that the wider end.  If there is going to be a compromise in quality, I'd like it to be at the long end of the zoom range.  It's the opposite with the 24-105.  (Having said that, this is the case with almost any zoom lens.  It's easier to engineer longer focal lengths.)

Based on the age of the current 24-105, I would be surprised if it is replaced.  It would take an additional feature, perhaps related to video, to justify a refresh.  I'm actually hoping that the 5DIII includes a new 24-70 f/2.8L II as the "kit lens".  That lens is past due.

neuroanatomist

  • CR GEEK
  • ********
  • Posts: 13617
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #19 on: April 19, 2011, 02:22:13 PM »
Of course its all relative but if a 18-55 was a "1" and the 100 macro was a "100" on a scale of sharpness, this particular 24-105 would have been about a "15" at best. Sound like yours might be about a "60" or "70" on such a scale? I would be happy with that.

The EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens, at f/8 in the center, is actually pretty darn sharp.   :P

My copy of the 24-105mm f/4L IS is reasonably sharp.  It's not as sharp as my other lenses in that focal range (4 L-series primes and the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II), but it's certainly not soft.  The trade-off in terms of versatility is worth it, to me.
EOS 1D X, EOS M, and lots of lenses
______________________________
Flickr | TDP Profile/Gear List

jhanken

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 115
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #20 on: April 19, 2011, 03:39:51 PM »
It has quite a bit of barrel distortion at 24, for one.

You know I think it does.  I never notice it until I use the default lens correction in Lightroom, it can make a significant improvement.  Then again, we always can use Lightroom, so...
5DIII, 60D, 24-105mm f/4 L, 85mm f/1.8, 70-200 f2.8L IS II, 70-300 f/4-5.6 IS USM, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, Sigma 35mm f/1.4A, Jupiter-9 85mm f/2

skitron

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 509
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #21 on: April 19, 2011, 03:41:28 PM »
Of course its all relative but if a 18-55 was a "1" and the 100 macro was a "100" on a scale of sharpness, this particular 24-105 would have been about a "15" at best. Sound like yours might be about a "60" or "70" on such a scale? I would be happy with that.

The EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens, at f/8 in the center, is actually pretty darn sharp.   :P

My copy of the 24-105mm f/4L IS is reasonably sharp.  It's not as sharp as my other lenses in that focal range (4 L-series primes and the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II), but it's certainly not soft.  The trade-off in terms of versatility is worth it, to me.

LOL, my bad for not specifying this was all at f/5.6 50mm for the zooms tested (plus this was an old non IS 18-55 II).
5D3, 70-200 f/2.8L IS II, 100L, 24-105L, Sigma 50/1.4 DG, Canon TC 1.4x III

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #21 on: April 19, 2011, 03:41:28 PM »

HughHowey

  • Rebel T5i
  • ****
  • Posts: 102
    • View Profile
    • My Author Site
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #22 on: April 19, 2011, 04:10:02 PM »
whats wrong with the original 24-105L anyways?

My biggest issue with the 24-105 is vignetting at the wide end.  If I have a polarizer on this lens, it really functions more like a 28-105.  I find this very frustrating.  The barrel distortion at the wide end is also an issue for me—though it is one more easily fixed.

I tend to shoot at wider angles so, for me, anything above 50mm is a convenience.  I'll use it, but far less frequently that the wider end.  If there is going to be a compromise in quality, I'd like it to be at the long end of the zoom range.  It's the opposite with the 24-105.  (Having said that, this is the case with almost any zoom lens.  It's easier to engineer longer focal lengths.)

Based on the age of the current 24-105, I would be surprised if it is replaced.  It would take an additional feature, perhaps related to video, to justify a refresh.  I'm actually hoping that the 5DIII includes a new 24-70 f/2.8L II as the "kit lens".  That lens is past due.

+1 for the 24-70. I'd rather have less reach and better IQ.
T2i ~ 28mm 1.8 ~ 50mm 1.4 ~ 15-85mm ~ 55-250mm ~ 100mm 2.8L Macro ~ 135mm 2L ~ 200mm 2.8L

traveller

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 655
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #23 on: April 19, 2011, 05:39:30 PM »
The only problem with a reverse zoom + hood design like the 24-70L, is that it makes the lens its maximum length at all times when the hood is mounted.  Not exactly a deal breaker, but for a lens like the 24-105L, one of whose advantages is compactness, it may be an issue. 

I would also think that if Canon did decide to redesign the optics (as opposed to fiddling with the electronics), they might also give it a bit more reach at the long end; perhaps a 24-120 (cf Nikon AF-S 24-120 f/4G) or a 24-135?

LetTheRightLensIn

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3310
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #24 on: April 19, 2011, 06:45:58 PM »
I'm very happy with the sharpness, color and contrast from this lens.

Have you objectively compared the sharpness of it to a 100 macro or 70-200 or something else known to be sharp? The reason I ask is to help determine if the particular one I tried was just off or if it is a characteristic of the design. I may be interested in the existing one if a II doesn't materialize fairly soon and there is reason to try another copy.

I have and it is not as sharp across the frame on either 50D or 5D2 as 100 macro or 70-200 2.8 noIS or 4 IS or a whole lot of lenses really. Tamron zooms are sharper too (17-50/28-75/70-200). 18-55 IS kit lens was too actually. In fact only stuff like the original 18-55 or the 18-200 and 28-135 and 28-105 and 75-300 and all that sort of stuff are less sharp (sometimes noticeably less so). That said, it's sharp enough on APS-C across the frame to not worry about it, you wouldn't notice unless comparing side by side, and it has rich color (lot more pop than the 18-55 IS kit). But the focal length also doesn't make so much sense on APS-C and when you get to FF it starts falling apart IMO.

On 5D2 it is all squishy and nasty at the edges and it doesn't let you see any fine landscape details or interesting patterns in mosses, bark, etc. Blechhh. Horrible distortion too although that is a lesser concern. A Zeiss 21 or canon 24 II or 24 T&S II or 35 2 or 1.4 and so on will blow it away, some of those look just as sharp as the longer lenses too. It is tricky to make a truly top notch wide prime for FF though. It would be interesting if they do come out with a 24-105 II and they manage to pull it off. That would be very nice indeed.

I think the 24-105 is the least sharp of all the current L lenses. Although some people swear it is sharp even edge to edge FF. Maybe they have low standards or maybe the QC is just simply awful for this design.




gmrza

  • 6D
  • *****
  • Posts: 497
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #25 on: April 19, 2011, 07:40:55 PM »


Based on the age of the current 24-105, I would be surprised if it is replaced.  It would take an additional feature, perhaps related to video, to justify a refresh.  I'm actually hoping that the 5DIII includes a new 24-70 f/2.8L II as the "kit lens".  That lens is past due.

That has been my thinking.  One of my concerns about the 24-70 is its field curvature (see the review on photozone.de).  An interesting question would also be whether an IS version of the 24-70 is feasible.  Given the f/2.8 aperture, I am not sure, however whether that would make the lens too bulky.  (Nikon doesn't have a 24-70 f/2.8 VR lens, so there may be a good reason for that.)
Zeiss Ikon Contax II, Sonnar 50mm f/2, Sonnar 135mm f/4

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2702
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #26 on: April 20, 2011, 01:47:46 AM »
I love my EF 24-105 f/4L IS. The only bad things I can say about it are:
1. Barrel distortion at 24mm is quite pronounced but fixable in Lightroom.

The best way to fix the distortion at the 24mm end of the lens is to take it off and mount a 17-40/F4 (or 24 prime) instead.

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2702
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2011, 01:50:38 AM »
Of course its all relative but if a 18-55 was a "1" and the 100 macro was a "100" on a scale of sharpness, this particular 24-105 would have been about a "15" at best. Sound like yours might be about a "60" or "70" on such a scale? I would be happy with that.

The EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS lens, at f/8 in the center, is actually pretty darn sharp.   :P

My copy of the 24-105mm f/4L IS is reasonably sharp.  It's not as sharp as my other lenses in that focal range (4 L-series primes and the 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II), but it's certainly not soft.  The trade-off in terms of versatility is worth it, to me.

"My copy of .. reasonably sharp." Why do words like this remind me of the micro-focus adjust story earlier this year?

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #27 on: April 20, 2011, 01:50:38 AM »

dilbert

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 2702
    • View Profile
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #28 on: April 20, 2011, 01:52:48 AM »
I have and it is not as sharp across the frame on either 50D or 5D2 as 100 macro or 70-200 2.8 noIS or 4 IS or a whole lot of lenses really.

Have you spent time tuning the micro-focus adjust parameters for this lens?

catz

  • Guest
Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #29 on: April 20, 2011, 03:27:51 AM »
I'm very happy with the sharpness, color and contrast from this lens.

Have you objectively compared the sharpness of it to a 100 macro or 70-200 or something else known to be sharp?

70-200 2.8L is much better lens than 24-105. I have both. Even on 1080p video the difference can be easily seen, there is no doubt on which scenes were taken with the 70-200 and which were 24-105 at 70-105 range. The biggest difference seems in contrast and color reproduction. For some reason, the 70-200 seems to end up with a slightly higher dynamic range and more vivid colors with same picture style settings and the overall color tone of the picture has more neutral tone on it by default. 24-105 is not bad either, it is much more neutral than e.g. 12-24 Sigma lens I have, might be the lens coating that causes this. 24-105 is also considerable sharper than the Sigma. However, the 70-200 is still the best lens I have.

I have no reason to trade my 24-105 though. It is still superior lens to non-L EF lenses and some Sigmas. I like the help of the IS on shooting video. The effect is not strong and not quite enough for stabilization but it takes away micro-shaking of hands/rig. 24-105 is also easy to carry around and it balances on steadicam (lightweight enough and 24 mm position works best for this purpose). I generally love the lens, but it is not as wonderfully astonishing as the 70-200 2.8L IS USM.

So 24-105 is my second best lens but I use it most of the time because I don't want to carry 70-200 everywhere because it is so heavy.

Edit: My sigma is 12-24, not 10-22. Sorry for typo.
« Last Edit: April 20, 2011, 06:57:12 PM by catz »

canon rumors FORUM

Re: EF 24-105 f/4L IS II [CR1]
« Reply #29 on: April 20, 2011, 03:27:51 AM »