Canon 6D + 24-105 L combo not that great?

[ajperk]

I bought a 6D back in June with the 24-105, upgrading from a rebel. So far, I have been very impressed with the combo, very nice resolution and great contrast and colors. Sometimes the distortion and vignetting are noticeable, but usually not bothersome. I have found, however, that I generally get sharper images if I avoid modes such as Aperture Priority in favor of Manual or Shutter Priority where I can make sure my shutter speed stays high enough (I mention this because you had listed Aperture Priority as one of your settings). In my (admittedly limited) experience, I have found slow shutter speeds can easily rob images of sharpness, especially if you're looking for tack sharp pictures. Anyway, hope that is helpful. Maybe, as others have mentioned, you just got a bad copy.

Take care!

 

[distant.star]

.
It must be frustrating to go to an event, shoot a lot of pics with what you think is good equipment and return to find disappointing results. I sympathize with you there.

The only question you ask in your post is this: "Is the 24-105 really as bad as people say it is?" In response, I have to say I never saw this as a general reputation for that lens. As far as I know, it's a solid "L" lens with a pretty good reputation. Obviously, it's a lower end zoom so you're not going to get the same results you might with a good prime or with one of the high-end zooms (new 24-70L or the newest 70-200L).

If you owned the camera and lens you used there may be fewer variables. As it is, there are too many variables to suggest why you did not get the performance you hoped for.

I don't know anything about the company you rented the equipment from. Personally, I know I can trust anything I rent from LensRentals, but I haven't dealt with other companies. I'm guessing they probably did not do AFMA on the lens/body you got. I'm also guessing you did no AFMA on the equipment.

You mentioned using AV mode at f/8 through f/11. While you said "good shutter speeds" I don't know what that might be. You've never said what the actual shutter speeds were. My experience suggests shooting a fast-moving event, even in good light, would require lower apertures with shutter speed at least 750, ideally 1000 to be safe. You seem to suggest the problem is simply OOF, but I'd check to see if there is motion blur at play here.

I've been using a 24-105 on my 5D3 this year with adequate results overall. I've found it gets too soft for my liking above 70mm, but I also haven't done AFMA. It's easier just to use it like a decent 24-70. When I want to be sure of tack sharp, I go to the Sigma 35 f/1.4 or the Canon 135L or even the 70-200L.

I suggest if you're going to rent in the future, perhaps the new 24-70L would be a better choice. And you may want to talk to your supplier about how they match bodies and lenses -- can they do AFMA for you? It's not cheap to rent such equipment, and they have a responsibility to make sure you're satisfied.

 

[Loswr]

I had the IS on and was shooting at good shutter speeds...

RAW + JPEG, Aperture Priority, AWB, Center Weighted metering. ISO 100 - 400, f8-11.

What do you mean by 'good shutter speeds'? I was shooting in full afternoon sun yesterday, f/5.6 and ISO 400 for 1/1000 s, so in that light f/8-11 would be giving me 1/250 - 1/500 s shutter speeds - fine for static subjects, inadequate for cars in a drag race (too slow to freeze action, to fast for panning to show motion blur).

At f/8 with a fast enough shutter speed, you should certainly be getting sharp shots from the 6D + 24-105L combo, and if your subject was reasonably distant, the deep DoF should obviate mild misfocusing (which could be corrected with AFMA).

I don't know anything about the company you rented the equipment from. Personally, I know I can trust anything I rent from LensRentals, but I haven't dealt with other companies.

I've heard of borrowlenses.com, but have no experience with them. I would be tempted to use them, because they have a depot local to me which means no shipping costs. However, I know that lensrentals.com tests gear after it's returned from a rental, and adjusts/fixes it if necessary (lenses are tested on their optical bench). I also know that many rental outfits do not test their gear, but rather allow the next renter to discover a problem (not saying that borrowlenses does so, I have no idea whether or not they test the returned lenses beyond a basic, yes the AF and IS work, and it takes a picture).

 

[sdsr]

If you still have the lens, why don't you attach it to your 40D and see how it compares to whatever lenses you use on that within its range in similar conditions? It could be that the copy you rented is a dud, that it's not properly calibrated to the body you rented, etc. (lensrentals replaces its stock every two years and thoroughly tests them all when they return from a rental; I've no idea about borrowlenses). The 24-105 that came with my 5DII created excellent images on that and continues to do so on my 5DIII and 6D (and that's without any AFMA on any of them). Or maybe, as others have suggested, your speeds weren't adequate.

 

[bholliman]

Have you checked the AFMA?

+1 An AFMA issue between the lens and body would be my guess.

I have this camera and lens and have taken thousands of sharp pictures with the combo. This lens is best from 35-85mm. At 24mm it has noticeable barrel distortion and it is somewhat soft at the corners. But, overall its a terrific lens.

 

[Pi]

Is the 24-105 really as bad as people say it is?

Most people actually say that it is good. You are doing something wrong. Without samples , it is a guessing game.

 

[applecider]

How about some sample images so we can see what you are getting. Asking us to comment otherwise is just going to get generic answers.

Include the exif information, but be prepared to have comments critical to technique at least some of them.

So sample images to get closer to an answer to your question.

 

[J.R.]

Well, my signature doesn't say much but then, how do you define sharpness? My results with the same combo of 6D + 24-105 are reasonable.

 

[JPAZ]

FWIW, I sympathize with your frustration. When the opportunity to capture the image has passed and then you find the shot you took is not optimal, there is little to do, even with PP.

But, I have this lens on a 5diii (not the 6d but is FF) and when I get a shot that is not sharp, it is almost always my fault, not the hardware.

JP

 

[ForumMuppet]

While I do not have the exact copy of 6D and 24-105mm lens you were using to say for sure, I would guess it is more likely your settings than the camera/lens combo. It could also be track position and which focus settings you were using. The first thing I would do is never go into Av at a drag race. If anything it would be Tv and keep your shutter above 1/1600 unless panning. Then 1/250-1/400 would be best for top fuel. You could go down into 1/100-1/160 for Pro Stock or some of the eliminator categories. I actually crank up the shutter to 1/4000-1/8000 for the fuel categories. Examples here.

As many others have already requested, can you provide some of your images to debug along with the exif data or camera settings? That would help out a great deal here.

 

[drjlo]

Have you checked the AFMA? if so, maybe you just got a bad lens copy...

Max

+1. I would make sure to AFMA carefully both the wide angle and tele range of the zoom lens, as a specific body+lens combo can act unpredictably.

 

[RAKAMRAK]

What is good shutter speed? You say you used center focus point, but it was a "race" type thing, so did you use AI Servo or One Shot AF? And without looking at some of the photos that you think were not good enough it is difficult to give any opinion in the air. I have never used 6D, but I have rented 24-105 from my local renting place, and it has not disappointed me. Not sure where you got the idea that people say 24-105 is bad, but hopefully you were not expecting 24-70 MKII quality from it, right?

 

[J.R.]

Not sure where you got the idea that people say 24-105 is bad, but hopefully you were not expecting 24-70 MKII quality from it, right?

But f/8 ... my copy of the 24-105 is extremely sharp at f/8 and narrower ... but then when you compare to the 24-70 II, sharpness isn't everything.

 

[Oneand0]

I also have the 6D and 24-105mm combo. I have not used it to track anything really fast, but have used it for landscape at 5.6 and f11 and have been pleasantly surprised at the sharpness. It's not my sharpest lens, not as sharp as my primes, but definitely sharp enough to blow up my prints and get the job done. Time and time again when I get frustrated at something not being as sharp as I remember, I end up going out on another shoot and seeing it wasn't my equipment after all, just user error on that day. Don't make up your mind on that combo or that lens with your one experience, unless you really put it to a test with different settings. We really can't give you advice on your particular results without seeing it, or the data from exif. We can only swear by our own results on whether that lens performs well, or well enough. True sharpness will not show up until you print out your shots, or look at it on a very high resolution monitor.

 

[RAKAMRAK]

Not sure where you got the idea that people say 24-105 is bad, but hopefully you were not expecting 24-70 MKII quality from it, right?

But f/8 ... my copy of the 24-105 is extremely sharp at f/8 and narrower ... but then when you compare to the 24-70 II, sharpness isn't everything.

Exactly right @J.R., that is why I said "quality"..... some would say there is the "look" of the image, some would say "feel" of the image .... but anyway I think we can club them all together into "quality".

And to add one more think for OP, with f/8-f/11 aperture the shutter speed becomes even more critical (than wider apertures).

 

[CarlTN]

I rented a Canon 6D with the 24-105 L lens for a shoot on Saturday from BorrowLenses.com. I went up to New England Dragway for a NHRA event and shot a ton of images but when I got home and pulled the images in photoshop they weren't tack sharp. I shot both RAW + JPEG and used just the center focus point.

I had the IS on and was shooting at good shutter speeds but the images just weren't as sharp as I thought they would be from a full frame camera. Is the 24-105 really as bad as people say it is? I noticed on on some of the images that the center would be sharp but would quickly fall off on the sides even at f11.

With results like this I wish I hadn't rented it and just brought my old Canon 40D along. At least the results would of been better. Now I'm reconsidering if I should even buy a Canon full frame all together and instead get the 70D.

There's no panning mode for the IS on that lens, you should have had it switched off. Agree with others who have asked if you adjusted AFMA.

You should post some of these shots if you haven't already.

That said, I rented the 24-105 last year with a 1D4 body, and found the lens to AF a tad slower than I liked, on it.

The 6D is fussy about its AF, also. With all points active it might grab part of the subject you don't want. With center only, mine usually works better in servo mode. The servo AF menu gives several options, and without a bit of trial and error, it's hard to say if the default settings will be better for a particular subject or event (with a particular lens)...or whether tweaking these settings would be better.

For really fast action I've found the servo tracking to work better for subjects moving toward me, rather than away. If they move away slower there is no problem, but moving away fast it can lose tracking.

Frankly, for an event like that my 70-200 f/4 (non IS) would have been far better than the 24-105. It on my 6D is the AF champ of my lenses, beating the speed of that via my favorite lens, the 135 f/2...which is no slouch.

If you used AV mode, that was also a contributing factor to your problem. You should have used TV or M modes. AV mode defaults to a shutter speed that is too slow for action shots. I would have first tried manual mode and set metering to center weighted average.

For a bright daylit event, if you used TV mode, with ISO on automatic, you could have set shutter speed to 1/800 and you probably would have wound up with the camera setting aperture from f/7.1 to f/9. The advantage of this mode over manual is you can compensate exposure. In manual mode you can't easily compensate exposure, but can specify both aperture and shutter speed. In my aerial photography I set manual mode to 1/2500 and f/9, with my 70-200...and wind up with ISO's from 800 to 2000...which works perfectly on the 6D...as the noise at these levels is still like child's play for the 6D.

 

[pulseimages]

Here is a perfect example of the lack of sharpness I am experiencing. Also I photographed the drag cars and show cars while they were parked and engines shut off. I did not photograph the cars actually racing but thanks for jumping to that conclusion anyways.

This photo was taken at 1/250th of a second at f8. I focused on the Mooneyes fuel tank sticker.

 

[CarlTN]

Here is a perfect example of the lack of sharpness I am experiencing. Also I photographed the drag cars and show cars while they were parked and engines shut off. I did not photograph the cars actually racing but thanks for jumping to that conclusion anyways.

This photo was taken at 1/250th of a second at f8. I focused on the Mooneyes fuel tank sticker.

You're welcome! This is not the type of shot I would want to do at a drag race...haha. But maybe that's just me.

I don't see a sharpness problem in this image. Is it downscaled or a crop? If you wanted the body behind the tank to be sharper, you should have manually focused slightly deeper into the image after autofocusing on the tank...and then perhaps closed aperture a bit more.

 

[pulseimages]

Here is a perfect example of the lack of sharpness I am experiencing. Also I photographed the drag cars and show cars while they were parked and engines shut off. I did not photograph the cars actually racing but thanks for jumping to that conclusion anyways.

This photo was taken at 1/250th of a second at f8. I focused on the Mooneyes fuel tank sticker.

You're welcome! This is not the type of shot I would want to do at a drag race...haha. But maybe that's just me.

I don't see a sharpness problem in this image. Is it downscaled or a crop? If you wanted the body behind the tank to be sharper, you should have manually focused slightly deeper into the image after autofocusing on the tank...and then perhaps closed aperture a bit more.

I had to downscale it because this site only allows images to be 4096 KB. The Mooneyes fuel sticker isn't even sharp. Download the image and see for yourself.

 

[CarlTN]

Here is a perfect example of the lack of sharpness I am experiencing. Also I photographed the drag cars and show cars while they were parked and engines shut off. I did not photograph the cars actually racing but thanks for jumping to that conclusion anyways.

This photo was taken at 1/250th of a second at f8. I focused on the Mooneyes fuel tank sticker.

You're welcome! This is not the type of shot I would want to do at a drag race...haha. But maybe that's just me.

I don't see a sharpness problem in this image. Is it downscaled or a crop? If you wanted the body behind the tank to be sharper, you should have manually focused slightly deeper into the image after autofocusing on the tank...and then perhaps closed aperture a bit more.

I had to downscale it because this site only allows images to be 4096 KB. The Mooneyes fuel sticker isn't even sharp. Download the image and see for yourself.

I did download it and I don't see a problem. Do you own the Mooneyes company or something? Why is the sticker so important? If you were using center AF only and "focus recomposed", that could also throw the focus off. Again though, for this shot it's just not important anyway...is it?

You could have easily compressed the file a bit more and left it at full resolution, and come in way under 4MB...