How bad is the 24-105?

[CarlTN]

I'm curious about the 24-70 f/2.8 L II though, because of the extra aperture, so I may yet buy one. But the 135 f/2 L is probably next. Oh, and the next EOS M when/if they ever get around to releasing it!![/font][/color][/b]

At or close to 105mm, certainly you will notice the 24-105 will lose contrast, sharpness, and color (compared to what it has below 70mm). This is especially noticeable outside of the center of the frame. That said though, again...it's nothing that post processing can't fix. For a 40+ MP sensor though, it would be less ultimate resolution than a sharper lens would be.

 

[mycanonphotos]

 

[CarlTN]

You've got flare...and what is the large dirt wall behind?

 

[triggermike]

"No doubt the Sigma will be optically superior"

? Nothing in that MTF chart that leads me to feel this would be so.

 

[mycanonphotos]

You've got flare...and what is the large dirt wall behind?

I know...I like that look dont you... thats the chaulk bluffs along the owens river in Bishop, CA

 

[Pi]

Nice shots of the Vanderbilt house-estate near Asheville, NC...good comparison also. I'm guessing the frontal shot is cropped a bit?

No, the 100L seems to be longer than the zoom at 100mm, and the zoom is at 96mm, actually.

So, this thread asks the wrong question. It's not how bad is it, it's how good is it?

It was a provocative title.

 

[Pi]

However if I take a single frame landscape shot with the 24-105 at 24mm, where the detail is small and far away, I am disappointed with the result when compared with a 24mm prime or the new 24-70 L IS.

I mentioned this at least three times. It is not a problem with detail far away, if you focus there. It just has smaller DOF (measured with a really small CoC).

The 'tests' you have done play to the strength of the 24-105. You have shot in its best focal length ranges at a stopped down aperture of subjects that are quite close to you and relatively easy to resolve, and you have compared it against ultra fast aperture primes which are not the best lenses for stopped down photography ( in the corners ) anyway. Then of course there is the huge compromise with the image size.

I have not done full tests of the 24-105, how many times do I have to repeat this? I had absolutely no intention to compare resolution, wasn't I clear enough since the beginning? You keep talking to yourself.

BTW, do you really believe that the Vanderbilt house was "quite close" to me? Really? And that the 100L is an ultra-fast prime? The full size is available now, feel free to pixelpeep. The differences in resolution are almost non-existent, the borders included, and the prime has a bit better contrast but not by much. And the long end is supposed to be a really weak spot of the zoom?

 

[JonB8305]

Re: A new set: comparisons with the 85L and the 50L

Is this Toronto?

Yes, both shots. Last summer, the weather was gorgeous, I had a great time (and I had to work there, too).

Second you are correct I know nothing about what you know about the 35L because you haven't presented any information in this thread that would tell me you have nothing more than limited hands on knowledge.

I have presented noting to tell you otherwise but you chose to believe what you wanted to believe.

Cool, I stayed at that Marriott a few months ago. I'm assuming those Kayaks are on Toronto island. Thats a gorgeous city.

 

[Magnardo]

Back and forth like gay marriage.

Those who like the honda,...24-105 please continue to like it.
Those that like good lenses,....also job well done.

To the dude advocating flare,....Sorry man,...you do not need flare to feel artistic.
In fact,....please try to be artistic without flare.
Exaggerated flare went out of style for at least 2 years now.
Same as making black and white photographs with one element of color in it.
Except for the people in Krakozhia,... everyone knows that by now.
"But did you know the pyramids were actually a mistake?" or,..." Did you know that some owls are not that smart?"

Good luck to all.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

The 'tests' you have done play to the strength of the 24-105. You have shot in its best focal length ranges at a stopped down aperture of subjects that are quite close to you and relatively easy to resolve, and you have compared it against ultra fast aperture primes which are not the best lenses for stopped down photography ( in the corners ) anyway. Then of course there is the huge compromise with the image size.

how many times do I have to repeat this? I had absolutely no intention to compare resolution, wasn't I clear enough since the beginning?

Well, you did deliberately choose a "provocative title" ... gotta accept some back lash like a man

 

[Northstar]

I don't see any meaningful differences, if your point is to show that a zoom like the 24-105 performs as well as anything else in normal shooting conditions then you have done so and that's a good point for everyone to keep in mind.

I think it's that simple.

Yes, the 24-105 in normal conditions is a fine lens and can hold its own even when compared to quality primes.

 

[Northstar]

Back and forth like gay marriage.

Those who like the honda,...24-105 please continue to like it.
Those that like good lenses,....also job well done.

To the dude advocating flare,....Sorry man,...you do not need flare to feel artistic.
In fact,....please try to be artistic without flare.
Exaggerated flare went out of style for at least 2 years now.
Same as making black and white photographs with one element of color in it.
Except for the people in Krakozhia,... everyone knows that by now.
"But did you know the pyramids were actually a mistake?" or,..." Did you know that some owls are not that smart?"

Good luck to all.

My head hurts after reading your post. ???

 

[Rienzphotoz]

Back and forth like gay marriage.

Those who like the honda,...24-105 please continue to like it.
Those that like good lenses,....also job well done.

To the dude advocating flare,....Sorry man,...you do not need flare to feel artistic.
In fact,....please try to be artistic without flare.
Exaggerated flare went out of style for at least 2 years now.
Same as making black and white photographs with one element of color in it.
Except for the people in Krakozhia,... everyone knows that by now.
"But did you know the pyramids were actually a mistake?" or,..." Did you know that some owls are not that smart?"

Good luck to all.

My head hurts after reading your post. ???

Ha ha ha ;D ;D ;D

 

[Magnardo]

If your head hurts,...go and and get an oil change.
It might run faster.

 

[jdramirez]

I have the cash to get a 24-70 mkii, but I don't think I will. I'm not that fond of the focal length and while I love s sharp lens, the 24-105 hasbeen more than sufficient for me

 

[canon1dxman]

I have the cash to get a 24-70 mkii, but I don't think I will. I'm not that fond of the focal length and while I love s sharp lens, the 24-105 hasbeen more than sufficient for me

Same here. I have had a 24-105 for many years and used it with a 1D3, 7D and 1Dx. It's not perfect by any means but it's, for me, a great all round lens that I have no intention of selling. I can live with it's minor failings. It's still worth as much on the used market in the UK that I paid for it new which speaks volumes.

 

[CarlTN]

Nice shots of the Vanderbilt house-estate near Asheville, NC...good comparison also. I'm guessing the frontal shot is cropped a bit?

No, the 100L seems to be longer than the zoom at 100mm, and the zoom is at 96mm, actually.

So, this thread asks the wrong question. It's not how bad is it, it's how good is it?

It was a provocative title.

Haha, ok...And you're saying the frontal shot is not cropped? Was this done with a crop camera? Seems like if you were on the observation hill with the walkway, at the other end of the "front yard", then the mansion would show smaller in the field of view (at least on a full frame camera at 100mm). I could be wrong...I've not visited there since I got into digital photography. Were these shot very recently?

 

[CarlTN]

I know...I like that look dont you... thats the chaulk bluffs along the owens river in Bishop, CA

Interesting bluffs, they look man-made. I don't really care for the flare, myself...it's a bit too pronounced, and has the look of it being unintentional...It's not a terrible picture though

 

[hwoarang5]

24-105 F4 is not bad at all if u match it with a great body like 5dmkIII, i love it... only draw back is the focusing softness issue which can be calibrated... apart of that its a awesome lens ...

 

[Pi]

Haha, ok...And you're saying the frontal shot is not cropped? Was this done with a crop camera? Seems like if you were on the observation hill with the walkway, at the other end of the "front yard", then the mansion would show smaller in the field of view (at least on a full frame camera at 100mm). I could be wrong...I've not visited there since I got into digital photography. Were these shot very recently?

Shot with FF, no cropping at all. 96mm vs. 100mm according to the EXIF. Yes, I was on the observation hill. Shot a week or so ago.