Review: 24-105 f/4L IS II from Martin Bailey

[tron]

Not a reviewer I've read before, but here you go:

https://www.martinbaileyphotography.com/2016/11/07/canon-ef24-105mm-f4l-is-ii-lens-review-podcast-548/

Of note: "it looks to me as though the new 24-105mm is marginally sharper than the 24-70mm lens" -- and the 24-70 he was referring to was the f/2.8L II, which makes this an absolute whopper of a statement if true.

Color me highly skeptical until another source backs that up.

- A

and in related news... most people do not AFMA their lenses....

But the ones who test them in TDP, lenstip, photozone and lensrentals use live view so lack of AFMA has nothing to do with new 24-105 not being stellar. I believe the reviews of these 4 sites.

 

[LordofTackle]

Not a reviewer I've read before, but here you go:

https://www.martinbaileyphotography.com/2016/11/07/canon-ef24-105mm-f4l-is-ii-lens-review-podcast-548/

Of note: "it looks to me as though the new 24-105mm is marginally sharper than the 24-70mm lens" -- and the 24-70 he was referring to was the f/2.8L II, which makes this an absolute whopper of a statement if true.

Color me highly skeptical until another source backs that up.

- A

and in related news... most people do not AFMA their lenses....

But the ones who test them in TDP, lenstip, photozone and lensrentals use live view so lack of AFMA has nothing to do with new 24-105 not being stellar. I believe the reviews of these 4 sites.

Them I believe too, but no one of them claimed the new 24-105 being as sharp or even sharper than the 24-70 II, I believe!!

When I changed from the version I 24-105 to the 24-70 II that was an eye-opener. That lens is so much sharper and has so much better color and contrast

I never looked back and never used the 24-105 again.

 

[tron]

Not a reviewer I've read before, but here you go:

https://www.martinbaileyphotography.com/2016/11/07/canon-ef24-105mm-f4l-is-ii-lens-review-podcast-548/

Of note: "it looks to me as though the new 24-105mm is marginally sharper than the 24-70mm lens" -- and the 24-70 he was referring to was the f/2.8L II, which makes this an absolute whopper of a statement if true.

Color me highly skeptical until another source backs that up.

- A

and in related news... most people do not AFMA their lenses....

But the ones who test them in TDP, lenstip, photozone and lensrentals use live view so lack of AFMA has nothing to do with new 24-105 not being stellar. I believe the reviews of these 4 sites.

Them I believe too, but no one of them claimed the new 24-105 being as sharp or even sharper than the 24-70 II, I believe!!

When I changed from the version I 24-105 to the 24-70 II that was an eye-opener. That lens is so much sharper and has so much better color and contrast

I never looked back and never used the 24-105 again.

+1 Except from possibly cases where one have to carry one lens only and the task is not too important the 24-105 could do but I agree it's 24-70 2.8 II that I use most of the time. As far as 24-70 ii comparison that's why I said that I do not believe the specific photographer. If the 24-105 II is at most equal to vesion 1 and version 1 is worse than 24-70 2.8 II well then anyone can deduct the obvious!

 

[tron]

Can you check at the end of

https://www.martinbaileyphotography.com/2016/11/07/canon-ef24-105mm-f4l-is-ii-lens-review-podcast-548/

I copy an extract:

Martin Bailey
Posted at 11:04h, 18 November Reply

Thanks Rob!

The Mark I lens had a variable aperture, whereas the Mark II is a constant f/4, so this should no longer happen.



Do I miss something important or is something wrong with this guy?

 

[LordofTackle]

Ahm.....strange?
Did he compare to the STM version?

 

[tron]

Ahm.....strange?
Did he compare to the STM version?

He definetely "said Mark I lens" !!!!!!!!!

 

[LordofTackle]

Yep. It's strange. Maybe faulty memory? After all he states that he sold the Mark I several years ago....^^

But on that topic of changing light: can a lens that has a constant aperture (f-stop) have different T-stops at different focal lengths??
I'm aware that f/4 does not necessarily mean T/4 (usually they round the values a fair bit) but I don't know whether this means that the light transmission can change with focal length although the lens has a constant aperture...

 

[tron]

Anyway who cares! It's not a lens that will make us anxious to buy it anyway ;D

 

[LordofTackle]

Not really

 

[slclick]

He's delusional.

 

[cpreston]

Can you check at the end of

https://www.martinbaileyphotography.com/2016/11/07/canon-ef24-105mm-f4l-is-ii-lens-review-podcast-548/

I copy an extract:

Martin Bailey
Posted at 11:04h, 18 November Reply

Thanks Rob!

The Mark I lens had a variable aperture, whereas the Mark II is a constant f/4, so this should no longer happen.



Do I miss something important or is something wrong with this guy?

All of Canon's L zooms except for the 70-200 have a loss of light transmission while zooming if the aperture is not wide open. On the old 24-105, the loss was about a stop and a half zooming from 24-105. Mind you, this is only when the lens is not at f/4. For video, it is a real pain. If Canon, fixed this on the version II lens, it would be a big deal for some uses. Based on the comment at the end of the post, it doesn't appear that Canon has fixed this issue.

 

[awinphoto]

ahhhh the forum that never ceases to make my blood pressure rise lol... You know, the original 24-105 lens is a very good lens... To be honest, it's one of those lenses that is my most consistent and reliable lenses... Even more consistent than my 70-200. Yes my 85 prime is sharper than the 24-105, once again, the 24-105 is more reliable, and as a working professional, I can always increase sharpening in raw processing, if it's off, it's off. So to me, the new one has the lock which has been a pain in my side with the 24-105 for ths last 3 years with lens creep, and if it's marginally sharper, shoot that's enough right there to make me sell my current lens and buy the new ones... If you guys dont like it, that's on you... But for me and my use, this lens looks like a slam dunk.

 

[YuengLinger]

ahhhh the forum that never ceases to make my blood pressure rise lol... You know, the original 24-105 lens is a very good lens... To be honest, it's one of those lenses that is my most consistent and reliable lenses... Even more consistent than my 70-200. Yes my 85 prime is sharper than the 24-105, once again, the 24-105 is more reliable, and as a working professional, I can always increase sharpening in raw processing, if it's off, it's off. So to me, the new one has the lock which has been a pain in my side with the 24-105 for ths last 3 years with lens creep, and if it's marginally sharper, shoot that's enough right there to make me sell my current lens and buy the new ones... If you guys dont like it, that's on you... But for me and my use, this lens looks like a slam dunk.

This or any similar wrist band works just great to stop the lens creep!

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/834030-REG/LENSBAND_628586557901_Lens_Band_Black.html

 

[Crumpton]

I have a similar lens band but from a no-name manufacturer. It works well though.
I ordered mine from BestBuy with a Canon - EF-S 55-250mm. Too bad they does not ship outside of US and I had to use shipw.com package forwarding service to get mine in Europe. However this whole hassle worthed because I managed to get my lens $100 cheaper than here.