PhotoZone Review: EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM II

[jd7]

How funny would it be if the only thing another 24-105L being offered teaches us is that physics is, in fact, physics. 4.5x FL multiplier zooms don't cut the mustard like 3x multiplier lenses do.

Consider: I have not heard more people extol the virtues of the 24-70 f/4L IS in its entire lifecycle to date than I've heard since 24-105 f/4L IS II testing came out.

- A

At the risk of being pedantic ... isn't the 24-105 more like a 3.4x FL zoom rather than a 4.5x? It starts at 24 mm, and goes up by 81 mm, making the ratio 81/24 = 3.375x FL?

 

[tron]

How funny would it be if the only thing another 24-105L being offered teaches us is that physics is, in fact, physics. 4.5x FL multiplier zooms don't cut the mustard like 3x multiplier lenses do.

Consider: I have not heard more people extol the virtues of the 24-70 f/4L IS in its entire lifecycle to date than I've heard since 24-105 f/4L IS II testing came out.

- A

At the risk of being pedantic ... isn't the 24-105 more like a 3.4x FL zoom rather than a 4.5x? It starts at 24 mm, and goes up by 81 mm, making the ratio 81/24 = 3.375x FL?

What kind of logic is that? With that logic a 35-70 zoom lens is a 1x ;D

Sorry you have to divide 105 by 24...

 

[Deleted member 7828]

A fixed focal length lens would be 1x

24-105 is 105/24 = 4.375x zoom

24-70 is 70/24 = 2.92x, often rounded up to 3x zoom

 

[ahsanford]

A fixed focal length lens would be 1x

24-105 is 105/24 = 4.375x zoom

24-70 is 70/24 = 2.92x, often rounded up to 3x zoom

Yep. I just use 3x and 4.5x to keep it simple, but yes, that's the rub.

- A

 

[jd7]

A fixed focal length lens would be 1x

24-105 is 105/24 = 4.375x zoom

24-70 is 70/24 = 2.92x, often rounded up to 3x zoom

Yep. I just use 3x and 4.5x to keep it simple, but yes, that's the rub.

- A

Fair enough, I got that one wrong! I was thinking about the range of the zoom (as a factor of the widest focal length), but now I think about it more you were referring to a focal length multiplier, and that does make sense if it is simply the factor by which you have to multiply the shortest/widest focal length to get the longest focal length.