Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic Review

According provided by Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic thanks to Roman Tomchenko.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

The Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic (abbreviated as Canon 24-105 / 4 L) is a good professional all-round zoom lens for Canon EOS full format cameras. Canon was the first to present a lens with such parameters to the public. After 5 years, Nikon pulled up and released its Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 4G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical Nano Crystal Coat.

In general, Canon has a fairly extensive lineup of professional 'L'-series lenses with a constant maximum aperture of F / 4 (list in order of publication):

  1. Canon EF 70-200mm 1: 4L USM 1999
  2. Canon EF 17-40mm 1: 4L USM 2003
  3. Canon EF 24-105mm 1: 4L IS USM 2005
  4. Canon EF 70-200mm 1: 4L IS USM 2006
  5. Canon EF 8-15mm 1: 4L Fisheye USM 2011
  6. Canon EF 24-70mm 1: 4L IS USM 2012
  7. Canon EF 200-400mm 1: 4L IS USM Extender 1.4x 2013
  8. Canon EF 16-35mm 1: 4L IS USM 2014
  9. Canon EF 11-24mm 1: 4L USM 2015
  10. Canon EF 24-105mm 1: 4L IS II USM 2016

The Canon 24-105 / 4 L often goes as a base (i.e., whale) lens to some Canon cameras in the upper price range. In such a kit, its cost is much lower than the cost of a separate purchase. Over time, the Canon 24-105 / 4 L was loved not only by photographers, but also by videographers and became a fairly popular and successful lens.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Key Features:

The full name of the instance from the review Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic Ø77mm Macro 0.45m / 1.5ft Image Stabilizer Canon Lens Made in Japan 4461761 UA0627
Basic properties
  • Dust and moisture protection
  • Canon SSC (Super Sspectrum Coating) - special super spectral coating of optics
  • EF (Electronic Focus) - built-in electronic focusing system, also these letters designate lenses for use on full-frame cameras of the Canon EOS system
  • L (Luxury) - premium lens
  • FTM (Full Time Manual Focusing) - constant manual focusing
  • USM (UltraSonic Motor) - ultrasonic motor
  • aspherical- aspherical elements in the optical scheme
  • Super UD (Super Ultra Low Dispersion) - the presence of extra-low dispersion elements in the optical scheme
  • IS (Istomach Stabilizer) - image stabilizer
  • IF (Iinternal Focusing) - internal focus
Front Filter Diameter 77 mm, plastic thread for filters
Focal length 24-105 mm EGF for Canon APS-C 1.6x cameras is 38.4-168 mm, EGF for Canon APS-H 1.3x cameras is 31.2-136.5 mm
Zoom ratio 4.375 X (usually they say simply - 4.4)
Designed by for digital cameras
Number of aperture blades 8 rounded petals that form a fairly even hole
Tags focusing distance in meters and feet, focal lengths for 24, 28 (indicated by a dot), 35, 50, 70, 105 mm, bayonet mount tags and hood mounts. There are also tags for working in the infrared spectrum for 24, 28 (indicated by a dot), 50, 70 mm
Diaphragm from f / 4 over the entire range of focal lengths to f / 22
MDF 0.45 m, maximum magnification ratio 1: 4.3
The weight 670 g
Optical design 18 elements in 13 groups, 3 aspherical elements (in the optical scheme, the aspherical elements are shown in green, one element is made of molded glass, the other two are copies made using augmentation plastics glass-based) and 1 Super UD Element (shown on the optical diagram in blue, the image is clickable)canon-zoom-lens-ef-24-105-mm-4-l-is-usm-ultrasonic-lens-review-optical-scheme
Lens hood Canon EW-83H
Manufacturer country MADE IN JAPAN
Period Since August 2005, in August 1016 has been updated to version Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4L IS II USM
3D view View ->
Prices in modern online stores

Finding accurate information about how long-lasting hybrid aspherical elements made using plastic extensions is very difficult. Personally, I don’t make much difference what is in the middle, if only it worked well and for a long time.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Assembly

The lens is well assembled and has dust and moisture protection, as befits all professional lenses. The focus and zoom ring are rubberized. The body is made of plastic on the outside, with a metal bayonet, but most likely with metal internals. The extending part of the case frame consists of only one part. It is pleasant and weighty to the touch, its weight is 670 grams, Canon 24-105 / 4 L uses large professional filters with a diameter of 77 mm. In the hands, according to the tactile sensations of the build quality, this Canon 24-105 / 4 L loses a little to the old monster Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USM.

The copy that I had on the review has one unpleasant feature - spontaneous change in focal length under its own weight... When you carry the camera on a shoulder strap, the frame of the body lengthens spontaneously, and when you shoot birds over your head, the lens trunk shortens spontaneously. In addition, the lens does not have a focal length lock. For a professional lens, this behavior of a retractable barrel frame, I consider a mortal sin! At the same time, when the focal length is changed, the spontaneous departure of the lens trunk works as a 'hydraulic amplifier' and sometimes you 'fly over' the focal length that you wanted to install.

When changing the focal length, the rear lens moves in the middle of the lens body like a pump - it draws in and pushes out air. This behavior of the rear lens is called 'effect' of a vacuum cleanerwhich can increase the amount of dust that accumulates in the camera. The frame of the case from the side of the rear lens is made in the form of a 'movie' hood.

When working with the lens, I was very annoyed by the plastic switches on the lens, which change their position tightly, and switching them is unpleasant. And another unpleasant feature that I encountered was that the zoom ring is too close to the camera mount. When changing the focal length, the lens is inconvenient to support with the left hand, and the fingers of the left hand are pinched under the protrusion of the built-in flash when used on Canon 550D.

Some users complain that the zoom ring travel is very small in the wide-angle range (24 to 50 mm), which makes it difficult to comfortably set the desired focal length. But personally, I did not feel any discomfort from this.

There is a bayonet mount mark and a mark on the case for quick installation of the hood. The lens uses a plastic hood Canon EW-83H, which is fixed in special grooves located near the front lens of the lens and when zooming moves with the retractable frame of the housing. The hood can be installed in the opposite direction for transportation. Unfortunately, I got a Canon 24-105 / 4 L review without a lens hood, who has a similar lens, please unsubscribe in the comments on how much it is in demand in the work.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Stabilizer

The lens has a built-in image stabilizer IS (Istomach Stabilizer). Stated that the stabilizer can compensate up to 3 stops by shutter speed (You can shoot at shutter speeds 8 times shorter). In fact, the stabilizer works well, stationary objects without any problems can take off at shutter speeds up to 1/15 of a second. I used a lens on a cropped camera, with heavy full-format cameras threshold excerpt should still increase.

There is a 'Stabilizer ON / OFF' switch on the case. A slight clicking sound is heard when the stabilizer is turned on - this is normal behavior for this lens.

During sight through JVI with the stabilized 105 mm focal length on, the picture 'freezes' pleasantly and does not twitch.

The stabilizer itself works quite quietly, but when shooting video with the image stabilizer turned on, the camera’s built-in microphone records noise from the stabilizer and can be heard during playback.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Focusing

Canon 24-105 / 4 L uses Canon USM (Ultrasonic) focusing motor and focuses quickly (I would even say very fast). Focusing is quiet enough. On camera Canon 550D Often there is re-refocusing, but most likely this is due to the simple focusing system of the camera itself (details here).

The Canon 24-105 / 4 L is not a parfocal lens - it does not maintain focus during focal length changes. To check this, it is enough to focus on the 50 mm focal length in manual focus mode and change the focal length to 70 or 105 mm, while focusing on focus will be lost.

During focusing, the front and rear lenses remain stationary, as the lens uses internal focus. The front lens also does not rotate during zooming. It is possible to use any filters without problems.

The minimum focusing distance is only 45 cm, while you can shoot Macro with 1: 4.3 magnification... By and large, the inscription 'Macro 0.45m / 1.5ft 'on the lens just talks about MDF, and not about the true macro opportunity. Canon 24-105 / 4 L has a window with a scale of distances in meters and feet. There is no IPIG scale, but there are labels for working in the infrared spectrum. In manual focus mode, the ring rotates 120 degrees, when it reaches the extreme positions it does not rest, but continues to slide, without affecting the focus.

There is only one switch on the lens barrel, which is responsible for the focusing mode - 'AF / MF' (automatic / manual focusing). Canon maintains continuous manual focus control in auto focus mode 'AF' FTM (Full Time Manual Focusing), which implies that you can rotate the focus ring at any time. But, in fact, according to the instructions manual focus is available after focusing on the subject in single-frame autofocus (ONE SHOT AF).

A little bit about FTM in real conditions:

Example: the lens is set to focus mode 'AF', using the FTM feature, I focus manually, but as soon as I press the shutter button, half-pressing the same button makes the camera refocus as it wants. If you continue manual focus / focus correction with the shutter release button half-pressed, then there is a 'fight' for focus control. It turns out that with your hands you rotate the focusing ring in one direction, and the camera moves the focus to the other. This is especially noticeable in the 'AI Servo' focus mode. In the 'One shot' and 'AI Focus' modes, the conflict is present only until the moment when the camera itself does not focus as it wants, after which the focus ring becomes obedient only to the photographer. The focusing speed of Canon 24-105 / 4 L is very high and the automatic very quickly knocks down the manual focusing on which the photographer could work for several minutes. This is very annoying and you have to switch the lens to 'M' mode, thereby destroying any benefit from FTM mode. On the other hand, manual focus control is always present and, as it were, the very name 'FTM' promises nothing more.

In comparison, Nikon lenses that have a similar feature called M / A (manual focus priority), turn off the auto focus when starting the rotation of the focus ring. Automatic focusing becomes priority again only after pressing the focus activation button again and only if the focus ring no longer rotates manually. There are no fights for focus control between the camera and the photographer. This is very convenient, and when you switch to Canon, you immediately feel the inconvenience of the FTM.

It is possible to make the FTM work as I would like to do if the focus activation function is removed from the shutter button and assigned to another button, and do not press this button during manual focus / focus correction. In this case, you can focus manually at any time, and when you press the shutter button, there will be no conflict between the camera and the photographer for access to focus control. Usually the activation of auto focus is programmed with the 'AF-ON' button (for those cameras on which it is), or the '*' button.

Maybe I'm just picking on FTM just because a similar function with Nikon lenses works more logically. It is also surprising that no one describes such conflict situations. Anyway, work FTM does not contradict the data from the instructions.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Diaphragm

The lens diaphragm consists of 8 rounded blades. On closed diaphragms, the circles in the blur zone turn out to be fairly even, but still the faces of the polygons can be seen (example on f / 8.0) 8 aperture blades are also available in the old Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70mm 1: 2.8 L USMbut the new Canon 24-70 / 2.8L II and Canon 24-70 / 4L already have 9 aperture blades.

Maximum f / 4 aperture is available over the entire range of focal lengths. F / 4 is exactly 1 stop (2 times) less than F / 2.8. Aperture closes to F / 22.

Image quality

I used the lens only on a cropped camera Canon 550D, therefore, I could not fully see the possibilities of the lens. However, the lens is sharp enough at f / 4 throughout the focal length range and in the center and even around the edges of the image (considering the cropped camera). “Sufficiently” sharp means that the sharpness is not too pretentious given this super zoom with moderate aperture... If you close the aperture, the sharpness increases and does not cause any complaints at all. But what catches the eye is a rather strong distortion at 24 mm focal length.

Canon 24-105 / 4 L tolerates side and back light well. In backlight, it creates very little glare and "bunnies". The contrast is also at a good level, which is not surprising for not particularly fast lenses. Chromatic aberrations in the zone of sharpness, they are well compensated, but in the zone of blur, violet and green glows are strongly visible near contrasting details. The lens has a mediocre design and is poorly suited for some kind of creative expression. In general, as for such a zoom lens, the image quality is at a good level.

Here link to the archive with the originals - 1.4 GB, 60 photos in .CR2 format (RAW) from the camera Canon EOS 550D. During shooting was used safety filter Kenko Pro1D Protector (W) 77mm Made In Japan. All photos in the gallery are reduced on-camera JPEG.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Red Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic Red Ring

My experience

To be extremely honest, the Canon 24-105 / 4 L is weakly "pulling" the 17.9 MP matrix Canon 550D at F / 4 (in terms of a full frame, this will be 46 MP). At closed apertures, this is a very good lens. At the same time, the Canon 24-105 / 4 L is practically devoid of what photographers call “drawing”. Ultimately, the Canon 24-105 / 4 L is a technically well-balanced lens for those who don't want or can't mess with the heavy “older” 24-70 / 2.8 models.

According to their characteristics, the closest to Canon 24-105 / 4 L are Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105 1: 3.5-5.6 IS STM, Canon Zoom Lens EF 28-135mm f 3.5-5.6 USM IS и Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-70 1: 4 L IS USM.

On a crop, the Canon 24-105 / 4 L is inconvenient, since 24 mm is no longer wide enough. There is no such alternative for Canon APS-C 1.6x.

I was asked to compare this Canon 24-105 / 4 L with Nikon's analog - Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1: 4G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical Nano Crystal Coat... In short, the lenses are very similar and both are good enough. Due to the fact that the Nikkor has no problems with the trunk (at least a copy from the review), a little longer in focal length and has a convenient zoom ring, it seemed to me more pleasant to work with. In any case, these two lenses are the workhorses of many photographers and are quite successful in their respective market segments.

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic prices

Lens prices in popular stores can look at this link, or in the price block below:

Comments on this post do not require registration. Anyone can leave a comment. Many different photographic equipment can be found on AliExpress.com.
Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic

Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic on Camera Canon 550D

Results

In general, the Canon 24-105 / 4 L is a good professional lens with fast focusing, normal image quality, image stabilizer and maximum aperture F / 4 over the entire focal length range. It can be a great versatile everyday lens for many photo tasks.

August 25, 2016 Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic updated to version Canon EF 24-105mm f / 4L IS II USM

Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram.

Add a comment: Eugene

 

 

Comments: 172, on the subject: Canon Zoom Lens EF 24-105mm 1: 4 L IS USM Ultrasonic review

  • Vladimir

    Thanks for the great review. Can he try to replace the 85mm f / 1.8 fix?

    • Arkady Shapoval

      He can try, he cannot replace. 2 with the tail stop of the aperture and the picture will not be taken from the air. Radically different lenses.

  • Pastor

    An excellent overview, it has been lacking for a long time - the whale elka on ff is one of the most popular canon lenses. By the way, for the sake of reliability, you can add a fresh Canon EF 4-11mm f / 24L USM to the f4 line. Although the price for it ... it's better not to remember.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Fixed

  • Yarkiy

    And with me this lens in the backlight caught huge hares and completely refused to focus, crawled back and forth even on contrasting objects. And when shooting a video with sound, I clicked autofocus quite hard. But I caught the truth and focus quickly, faster than Nikon.

    And what a manner of calling f4 professional, I have two f4 glasses from Nikon and none of them are prof. does not pull at all.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Nikon N AF-S Nikkor 200-400mm 1: 4GII ED and Canon EF 200-400mm 1: 4L IS USM are quite professional lenses.

      • Yarkiy

        Of course, all this is true, and everything that is longer than 200 mm may well be with f4 and f8 and it’s not necessary to be prof. But, up to 200 mm, and even more so up to 100, to design f4 and equip it with attributes prof. devices, IMHO is not fair.

        We somehow left with a friend for a photohunt in old Jerusalem. The friend has an old 40d kenon and CANON EF 24-70mm f / 4L IS USM. He is pleased to the ears, he would have given $ 1300. He says that there is no plot and place where he would not have had this wonderful glass. I do not argue, I agree, the lens is really cool.
        Here we go into the temple of the Holy Sepulcher and begin to search for stories, but there is very little light, dark, in a word. He twisted the settings and merged, the ISO is weak on 40d, 1600 in total (without expansion), he went in short to sit on the street, and I took out 35mm 1,8 and shot it for my pleasure.

        You understand, no one is against f4, in the end, a sharp lens can be forgiven much, but is it worth calling it a professional and luxury class just for the sake of sharpness. Why then not call professional 18-140, he is no less harsh than 24-70 or 24-105. Yes, he is DX, but so what if he is optically no worse?
        Or my old man is 70-210 f4, he is quite sharp even despite what was done back in 1987, and the picture gives the one that these Kenon elks never dreamed of. But for some reason, no one is in a hurry to stick a gold ring on it and declare it professional.
        I don’t know if I managed to get my point across, I’ll only add that Kenon would have a better face by offering them as simple and financially more affordable.

        • Oleg

          Here, rather, marketing for the full frame: those who have less money, those who have more f4, 2.8. Unfortunately, this is the company's policy. Nikon has a full-frame carcass plus, say, 24-120 will be more expensive. The choice is at those and at those all rests on the price. I don’t even know that both companies have 24- zoom… is there a full frame less than $ 500?

          • Arkady Shapoval

            Nikon has two old Nikon 24-50mm 1: 3.3-4.5 (D) AF Nikkor and another Nikon 24-120mm 1: 3.5-5.6D AF Nikkor, of course only used, but can be found for a penny.

        • Pastor

          Well, the darkness of 24-105 and 24-70 is compensated by a stub. In theory, the exposure at 1.8 and the exposure at f4 with the stub will be approximately the same, or even in favor of the stub, if you set the same ISO. In addition, you can set the shutter speed at 24mm longer than at 35mm. Here, rather, the problem of canon is that they do not pump the matrices of their crops in terms of high ISO. Nikon succeeded in this business abruptly, that's why you have a lot of good shots, while your colleague has few. And besides, no one bothered your friend to set exposure compensation, shoot in equal and then highlight in the editor :)
          By the way, my personal experience suggests that for photographs of static objects with a lack of light, it is better to take stable glass than light glass. Maybe my hands are shaking or I'm just too sorry for the stubs, but choosing between 50 1.4 and 18-105vr for an evening walk, I would rather take 18-105vr, I will have more sharp shots with him.
          As for professionalism, in my opinion, here, in addition to marketing, reliability also pays for the type. That you can shoot in the rain, hit and in the cold not be afraid for autofocus and stub. True, in fact, even the former top-end 24-70 2.8 in Canon often breaks down, and sometimes even with amateur use. I had one with almost no focus - from old age something was worn out or it just happened. At the same time, the aging Nikon 50 1.8d works without problems - that's what a screwdriver means :)

          • Dmitriy

            you have a dx or fx

            • Pastor

              Both that and that.

    • Antosha

      I didn’t crawl, and backward did not focus. Everything to the point. By the way, for some reason, it’s for me (maybe because of the old 450d) that it just focuses exactly on the central point. Overall, the lens is good. Especially, in combination with the price of the printed version. Even on the crop. What are colors, constructive, range, cool stub and good sharpness (like for zoom, naturally).

    • Yuri Molchanov

      I now have Sigma Art 24-105, so I also found the same scene where he crawled back and forth, but I did not get sharpness. And Sisma Art 50mm was brought in right away. I think this is a fee for the zoom.

  • anonym

    That's why I love Radozhiva. Thank you Arkady for the most honest and unpaid reviews.
    The lens is a rare gmo. Like everything called Canon. Arkady simply defeated him.
    The lens is vacuuming. Catching hares. Elongates under its own weight. There is a fight with the photographer for focusing! And the fact that he pinches his fingers under the built-in flash is generally a shame and disgrace to Keno! And then there are the clever people who say "pyadvak tears everyone up" God, I feel sorry for you.
    And this is an L-class technique! Red rings rule! The main thing is to write on the L lens and that’s it, every canonist will idolize this masterpiece. Yes, it is simply impossible to shoot with such a lens, even if you were Henri Cartier Breson, before you take a shot at IT, you need to keep in mind a bunch of nuances: look if the trunk has left, fight for focus, is there a backlight? Be careful not to pinch your fingers! and just now press RUNNING, catch the moment that has already been missed! ohhhhhhh, for what skin tone, belissimo! gracios!

    • anonym

      More plastic lenses! Generally!

    • Arkady Shapoval

      You are too categorical. Yes, and I did not "smash" him. Quite a working lens.

    • anonym

      This is how Elquie is made for Canon -

      • anonym

        ... and this is how Nikkor does it!

        • anonym

          Therefore, the Canon is suitable only for ...

          • Arkady Shapoval

            Flood less, if we continue in the same spirit, the branch will be cleared. Have you agreed?

    • Andrei

      if you are so smart, why are you hiding?

      • Alexey

        Just comrade anonymous confused the forum. And on those forums where a friend usually "speaks", most likely it is not customary to give his name.
        But I thank Arkady from me, because I thought for a long time what kind of lens it was, weighed all the pros and cons, but there are few places to find an objective review with conclusions.
        Thank you.

    • Eddy

      I would like to see your SHIDEVERS, you will not throw off the reference?)

      • Pastor

        A person who understands football is not necessarily a football player. A person who understands cars is not necessarily a Formula 1 pilot. A person listening and criticizing music does not have to have a platinum album on their back. But a person with a camera criticizing another must necessarily have a folder of “masterpieces”? I do not mean that the one who unsubscribed above is adequate, everything is obvious, I mean that the judge does not always have to go through the same thing as the defendant in order to judge. In addition, the person expressed not the final objective verdict, but simply his opinion. Even if it does not coincide with mine and yours, you should not ask for masterpieces for this. Still, pictures, films and music can be criticized not only by the best artists, directors and musicians. Let us not deny the opportunity to speak out and photographers who do not have good shots in their portfolio.
        P.S. I repeat, I do not protect the author of the previous post, as a whole I am on your side :)

        • Eddy

          I understand your train of thought, BUT I cannot agree with you. I think that before you write something, you need to talk about it. Otherwise, you get mediocrity, of which there is a lot in our time. Imagine how a blind man will tell another blind how the world looks like ...

          • Pastor

            It turns out that there is no one to judge the powerlifters at the Titan Cup - Malanichev and Yarymbash are already on stage, and the rest do not hold out :) Forgive me for a highly specialized example, but it can be extended to other things. Of course, if you mean the judgments of those who do not understand at all, then they do not carry a semantic load. But in general and on the whole, completely untalented critics can judge and argue about the beauty of Pushkin's poetry. Of course, when a person who has been engaged in photography all his life suddenly decides to discuss seismic activity in the Kuril Islands - it will be strange, but I don't think that the forum will tell him - first write your Ph.D. in geology, and then say :) Another thing is that the weight of the phrases of a layman is below weight the words of a professional. Therefore, we all here read and shake Arkady's articles, and we just look through the comments of anonymous authors. Although both Arkady and the anonymous unsubscribed above seem to have expressed an opinion, only Arkady's opinion turned out to be interesting and useful to many.

        • Lynx

          but what about “SpIrva dobasey !!!! 1” ??

          • Pastor

            Yes, there is a gorgeous article on this topic on Lurka. It is a pity that the lurk was frozen ...

            • Lynx

              nothing, it works like never

        • Peter Sh.

          I am sure that a techie who knows all the photo equipment through is not required to have any masterpieces. Moreover, often some maesty of photo painting cannot or will not want to explain why, what, and how.

          Those. There are lots of examples where without the help of a knowledgeable techie, I wouldn’t figure it out myself. But you need to understand, otherwise you will not get the optimal result.

          • Lynx

            about!

        • Vyacheslav

          I really liked your statement “a judge does not always have to go through the same thing as a defendant in order to judge” ☺ I'll take it on board!
          And about 24-105 - I have been using it as a staff for 4 years already. I share Arkady's opinion completely. At first he pleased with colors and versatility, but upset with a certain soapiness. There is definitely no razor in it. And now I increasingly pay attention to his mediocre drawing and think about replacing it.

    • varezhkin

      about pinched fingers amused ... apparently the canonists are not so capricious ..

    • rm1954

      Anonymous, and you have not tried to LEARN to photograph using your KNOWLEDGE in photography (and not relying on AUTO-mode). As I suppose, none of the cameras has a “masterpiece” mode, for some reason you need to set the shutter speed, aperture, ISO (and other settings) in relation to the situation;)
      To scold 24-105 / 4 for its "shortcomings" is to scold oneself for the inability to competently use the available technology. The 24-105 / 4 is a very UNIVERSAL lens, but it should also be used as intended. For example, I have EF 5L / 3, 35L / 1.4, 50-1.2L / 17, 40-4L / 24, 105-4L / 70, 200-2.8L / 100-400, TS-E 4.5L / 5.6, Sigma on 24Dm3.5 85 / 1.4EX and 105 / 2.8EX Macro, and on the 70D, respectively, - EF-S 60 / 2.8 Macro, Sigma 10-20 / 3.5EX, 18-35 / 1.8Art, 50 / 1.4EX and EF 50 / 1.4. Each of the listed lenses has its own purpose.
      Someone will express their opinion that such a number of glasses is already too much (and - for "rich buratin"), but, nevertheless, I consider 24-105 VERY WORTHY glass in my optics arsenal.

  • Lera

    Hello everyone! We had to test at full frame. Lenses for ff show themselves better than on crop. In general, the pictures are full. There is not enough Nikon color rendering and some kind of goodies, although there is enough plastic and volume.

  • Yuriy75

    They sent for a review a dead lens, a test on the crop. And everyone sings the praises of Nikon. Not sporty somehow. Despite this, the review is good.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Now you know what happens to L-kami!

      • Yuriy75

        It’s possible to get a Mercedes in a year :)
        This is a whale for a full frame, and a superzoom, I think, should not be classified as a professional technique - it is rather an advanced amateur one. This lens is equipped with 5DII and 5DIII which have dust and moisture protection, so it is logical that the kit lens is a match for them.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Well, yes, I have it written in the review.

        • anonym

          Yuriy75 you write “shouldn't be considered a professional technique - it's rather an advanced amateur” then why the hell is there a red ring on it and a pretentious letter L?
          I think so "I called myself a load-climb into the box." Called L-koy so match, and do not catch the hares with the outgoing trunk, and do not pinch our Arkasha's fingers once you are L-ka. And since when did these shameful Ls start fighting for focus with Arkady? who gave them the right? After all, who is the photographer? L-ka or Arkady?

        • Lynx

          pff .. Merc can be taken in 5 seconds .. enough to go to the oncoming traffic.

        • anonym

          exactly match! mediocre lens + mediocre cameras ...

      • Oleg

        Arkady a, you can supplement the review with several frames in a full frame, especially at extreme values ​​of 24 and 105 mm

        • Arkady Shapoval

          You can send it.

          • Dmitry K

            5d, noooooooo !!!

  • anonym

    I use the Nikon technique, that’s what I noticed that Konon’s blue and blue are much nicer, softer if I may say so

  • Scarecrow

    Thanks for your review. The 550D is a great camera after all. As for the lens, in my opinion it is quite passable. In any case, it is no worse than Nikon's analogue.

  • Paul

    I used this glass with 550D, now at 6D, I am satisfied. Glass is perfectly assembled. My copy has already fallen twice from the height of the table to the floor and remained intact. In general, the lens from a part has become a cult for shoemakers. The same popularity with the same 24-120 among the Nikonists - no.

    • Lynx

      Nikonists just have plenty to choose from;)))

      • varezhkin

        +1

      • varezhkin

        why didn’t they take the first nickel into battle?

        • Lynx

          where to get the first nickle? what for?

          • varezhkin

            sorry, the comment was not posted there :). He was addressed to Arkady.

            • Lynx

              and .. well, I’ll answer then anyway .. the first nickle was sold by arkady to donate money for Sony-Ala for testing mirrorless lenses.

              • varezhkin

                mlyn, sorry ... I somehow liked the color of his kamdzhipeg.

              • Arkady Shapoval

                Yes, it was.

            • Lynx

              well, everything flows, everything changes.

    • Vitaly

      That's right, Nikon has plenty of lenses in this range, while Zapop has almost no alternative lens. You can, of course, try to replace it with Canon 28-105mm 1: 3.5-4.5 USM or Canon 28-135mm 1: 3.5-5.6 USM IS, but one of them does not have a stub, and the other, frankly speaking, is extremely nasty. So it turns out that there is simply no replacement for one single lens in this focal range. There is nothing to choose. It's like in the old days beer was of the same brand - Zhigulevskoye and that's it, so here - 24-105 and that's it. Although, I am impressed by the focusing speed of 24-105, and the sharpness of the non-killed specimens, especially the latest version, is very much very much.

      • anonym

        Spit that the lens is bad, but what a skin-ooo! Any Canonist would say :)

        • Lynx

          The lens does not affect skinton.
          If you are fat, then do it with knowledge of the issue.

          • anonym

            Skinton is influenced by the Canonist! the more canonical, the more skinny it turns out!

    • anonym

      ... and because Nikonists do not take this ... 24-120!

  • Oleg

    People flood, Canon & Nikon, a review on a specific lens. Personally, I like it, but not so much to buy it. Therefore, 24-70 / 2,8 was bought. I don't understand why, for an honest review, which says that the 24-105 / 4 is quite suitable for everyday tasks as an advanced kit lens, say that Nikon is better. To each his own.

    Arkady, thanks for the excellent and honest review.

    • Novel

      That's just the point, it's just a daily workhorse for a full shot - nothing more.
      And to expect from him a picture of a fix or top-zoom without a stub and with a 1,5 times smaller focal range is silly ...

      PS It fully fulfills its value.

      • Novel

        PPS The lens is slightly "posed", because has been working daily for 4 years ...

  • Jury

    Thanks for the review. It will be necessary to send you a Sigma 24-105 Art.

    • Gordey

      but it’s sensible)))
      I will look forward to

    • Antosha

      Very interesting lens

  • Gordey

    I do not like him. I went along with the 5m mark - the picture is terrible. I put a cheap fifty kopeck 1,8 and was given a marvel with a sharp, contrasting and bright picture.

  • Photographer

    It is enough to open any sane photo site to understand: Nikon and Nikkor are better than Canon! And - objectively better! And who shoots with what - it's his personal choice! And crooked hands are found in both camps ...

    • anonym

      We take the best tested cameras of the same class ...

      • Vitaliy U

        I, personally, a Nikonist, but I am for justice. What are you showing here unnecessary "tests"? The picture by color (and especially the skin tone), Mark3 is better at times than d810. There are a LOT of examples of this in the network.

        • anonym

          A good skin tone is correct development! With an adequate monitor and eyes ...

      • anonym

        ... and now the current novelties have been tested ...

        • Arkady Shapoval

          50 MP, pfff ...

      • anonym

        both are worse.
        Panasonic LC20 steers

    • Ivan

      Aggressive nikonists are already plagued by flood and foam from the mouth.
      The whole monitor is splattered inside!

    • Pastor

      It is enough to look at the pool of Presidential photographers (or just reporting), take a look at sports photographers and understand that Canon is better than Nikon :)

      • Vitaliy U

        Canon is better than Nikon only in COLOR (skinton), and even then not all: old models of ff (from Pervopyatak to Mark3 and that one is questionable. Mark4 does not stand out in anything). Nikon is better in everything else: AF, ISO, ergonomics. Canon has cheaper optics of the top line, so your “pool” photographers are looking for “compromises”.

        • Yaroslav

          Please tell us more about 5D mark IV, as I understand it, you have access to Canon plans

        • Pastor

          Well, that is, stupid professional reporters simply do not know that Nikon is better. Wedding designers and advertisers are also poorly versed in photo equipment and for some reason prefer Canon more than Nikon. They buy carcasses for 350 thousand rubles (1dh or d4s) in order to save? That is, the average price for Nikon 24-70 2.8 (79 thousand rubles), in your opinion, is higher than for Canon 24-70 2.8 2 (99,9 thousand rubles)? Is Nikonovsky 70-200 2.8 BP (108,9 thousand rubles) more expensive than the Canon 70-200 2.8 IS (119,8 thousand rubles)? The price difference between 80-400vr (74,9 thousand rubles) and 100-400is (77,6 thousand rubles) seems to scare away all reporters, right? :) Prices from the market.
          As for ISO, yes, here Nikon is half a stop ahead, and that's good. Ergonomics is a purely personal and subjective thing. To some, both systems seem squalid and he takes pictures at the zenith. It's a matter of habit and nothing more, I say as the owner of carcasses and Nikon and Canon. Autofocus is not clear at all ... Where did you see the measurements? With a personal comparison (though not top-end carcasses), I noticed that the difference is special and not on carcasses of similar class. There are nuances, but they are not always in favor of Nikon, they are about half and half. But Kai Wong, having clicked on 1dx and d4, came to the conclusion that Canon's autofocus is better (he probably doesn't know much about photography). And the canon's rate of fire is higher, which is important for reporting ... In general, the canon is chosen for reporting not for the sake of economy, but for a number of objective reasons. In no case do I want to say that the canon is better than the nikon, just specifically in the report the canon is ahead.
          As for the old models, they were quite good for Nikon. d2x or d200 gave a very, very nice color straight from the camera. 5d or 1dsmark2 also gave a gorgeous color. And the fact that modern cameras in Jepeg do not give that “warm tube” picture is for the sake of high ISO. In addition, no one bothers to hammer the profile of the old camera in the editor and the colors will be just like in the old carcasses. True, I know several amateurs who have exchanged the same 5dm3 for the first 5d, but I don’t know a single bridesmaid who did the same. From which we can conclude that it is not the skin tone in the basic settings of the Jepeg that is more important for work, but something else that the new carcasses have.

    • Ed

      I really thought the time for such puberty holivars had passed, such as Nikon vs Canon. It has long been clear to everyone that it’s necessary to shoot something that suits a particular person more.

      • Lynx

        "There should be only one in the end!"

        • Oleg

          Yes, our people are inclined to monopoly: one leader, one party, one right opinion, now one right company. And these damned bourgeois all the time make us choose (kenon-nikon; samsung-lg; sony-panasonik; toyota-ford.) It’s hard

      • anonym

        …I agree…

  • anonym

    … And the Best Lens for a clean experiment!

    • Dmitry K

      phahaha! I never understood this in DXO. How does the same lens deteriorate after being swapped from Nikon to Canon? the quality of the glass is assessed by the carcass - as one satirist said, "well, stupid!"

      • anonym

        ... and you think ... suddenly you will understand ... or hardly?

        • Dmitry K

          oh blah, pulled up with his hints of mental disability. The same question is symmetrical - how will the quality of the glass change if it is put on film, for example? or even remove from the camera? no way. This is glass, just glass in metal and that's it. Or the same 14-24 nikonovsky is rearranged to canon. Nothing changes in the glass. And if this is not clear, then you can not think at all ... although you did not try, apparently

  • Denis

    This L-Coy and Mark II filmed the lion's share of high-budget weddings in the post-Soviet space ... and filmed well ...

    • Pastor

      Kaya Wong is still filming with her :)

    • anonym

      … When the customer sees no difference - why pay more! so many “professional photographers” say ... and normal guys take the best on their budget and shoot great QUALITY shots!

      Yes, and with fixes, you need to run, attach, and zoom and click from one corner. the main thing is puffing more powerful and iso higher!

  • Andrei

    Well, actually the glass is mediocre, shot on the second nickle, both photo and video
    as a reportage - good, nimble, convenient on FF, nothing on the video - smooth
    about sharpness? I have not heard, the copy is also used for a couple of years, but there is no sharpness, sometimes even at f9 there is soap (in the studios) ... and the trunk itself "falls out" ...
    Well, he does not pull on his stated as on me

  • Dmitriy

    The author has a clear antipapathy for Canon. I think your reviews are not objective. Comparative performance is negatively visible in the quantitative ratio of reviews on Canon / Nikon lenses.
    And how could the L series be textured on a Canon 550d crop. What is the previous post about Nikon glass much richer and more optimistic.
    I was a Nikon owner in the past and didn't know anything better, but then I picked up a Canon 40d and realized that I was blinded by the brand.

    • Dmitriy

      By the way, they’ll say now that the 40ka is already an old model, now I’m using the mark 3 mark and I’m extremely happy. But I do not sin to take in hand 40ku.

      • Yarkiy

        40ka is already an old model, 8 years already, already sand is pouring from the bayonet mount.

      • Vasily

        40th is good!

      • Andrei

        give Arkady the third dime, so be honest, for reviews, FF for all systems!

    • Lynx

      What a horror

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Give the facts. The reviews are the same in volume.

    • Peter Sh.

      Write yours, Dmitry!
      And we will read and criticize for not objective and not camera reviews.

    • anonym

      Dmitry, Arkady has recently been biased towards Nikon))

  • anonym

    There was an experience using such a lens as the predecessors 28-105 and 28-135, in fact this lens is more modern and a little faster than the lens, well, it doesn’t surprise you with its design, it’s just a relatively high-quality lens for commercial shooting and simple reporting, and no more.

  • Vasily

    Yeah, comrades nikonists, aggression is off the charts. Tell me, please, why did you bum on this sweetest lens?

  • Ivan

    Personally, this lens was the first autofocus for me after the kit on the Eos450D. The lens is very good. Until October 2014, 80-90% of all photographs were taken with a bundle of 24-105L with 450D or 5DmkII. On a full frame, the volume of the image somehow increases (perhaps this also applies to other lenses, just because I shot mostly with it - I clearly noticed the changes). On a full frame, I like the picture from the lens more than from the crop. To the disadvantages indicated in the article, I can add that the lens vignette with both the hood and the filters (moreover, if a thick filter, or two filters, then it is strong). Autofocus is very fast and quite tenacious, unless you shoot a dark scene in the theater. In terms of build quality, a red ring fell off for me :). About unsharpness at F9, etc .: sometimes autofocus needs to be adjusted (either by a correction in the camera or in the SC), the lens itself is quite sharp at any focal length (with good light and low ISO - sharp "pixel by pixel"). Having the opportunity to compare with another zoom (Carl Zeiss Vario-Sonnar 28-85 / 3.3-4 C / Y) of a similar class (in terms of focal length and aperture), I can say that the 24-105L holds back and side light better and not really loses contrast in contrast to Zeiss. And in the backlight, Canon doesn't have any strong hares. But Zeiss has a different drawing, less digital or something.

  • Alexey

    I hope no one accuses me of being addicted to praising Nikon? :)))
    I switched from D800e to Kenon a year ago, selling all my optics under Nikon.

    specifically about 24-105 / 4 kenon. development is old and unsuccessful.
    optics - the picture suffers from distortion, soap after 70mm, strong vignette.
    the micro-contrast is unimportant, there are no sane bokeshki - hard scales.
    an important point - the lens is actually darker than the stated 4, in fact there is about 4.8.
    easy to check in M ​​mode by comparing with any other lens.

    mechanics - the diaphragm cable breaks, the trunk falls out, the zoom ring breaks, and to replace the bushings, the entire block must be changed.
    for $ 500 (price in whale) - a good budget travel zoom.

    Kenon did work on the mistakes and released 24-70 / 4 - better bokeh (9 petals), the trunk does not fall out, there is no problem with light loss.

    Nikon 24-120 / 4 is better than Kenon 24-105 / 4 both in mechanics and in focal and in the picture.

    here's what is unclear - why test an FF lens on a crop? crop cuts off distortion, vignette and gives a different angle of view.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      that’s not clear - why test the FF lens on a crop? crop cuts distortion, vignette and gives a different angle of view.

      It's very simple, not “why”, but “why”. It was not possible to write a review in full frame. This does not change 80% of the information on the lens.

      • Alexey

        the picture changes. for the same equivalent focal lenses, kenon has its own version of a crop lens. simplified - if you put Helios 44 on the crop and thereby cut off its swirling bokeh, the result will be noticeably different from the FF :)
        on the FF, with the same amount of information, the corners will be soapy, distortion and vignette are clearly visible. to some extent, the volume will be better transmitted.
        pros do not need such a test. Novice amateur enthusiasts can sincerely think that the lens will give the same picture on the FF and will be unpleasantly surprised by the result.

        • Arkady Shapoval

          Therefore, the review clearly states:

          I used the lens only on a cropped Canon 550D camera, so I could not see the full capabilities of the lens.

          By the way, you, as the owner of the lens, can freely add a link to the archive here, either on a photograph, or simply upload a photo and supplement the review.

        • anonym

          The fact is that a novice will buy this lens and so, even despite the ego disadvantages, since when buying a whale this option is practically uncontested, 24-70 more expensive, the top 24-70 even more expensive. Further, the body option, Tamron 28-75 does not have a stub, a controversial construct, etc., sigma if new and with ultrasound costs decent money. Of the native lens on paper, this one looks the most balanced. You can certainly buy 24-105 STM but it is new and there is little information on it, moreover, it is not a Christmas tree, this becomes a decisive factor. Fir-trees 24-105 and 70-200 f 4, on the secondary are quite popular and years will pass until they are completely abandoned.

  • anonym

    Arkady has a lot more reviews for Nikon :) this is a relatively biased attitude towards canon

    • Lynx

      what a horror

  • Jury

    I was interested in this lens on the 60D crop, it’s gentle good travel zoom for every day, I read a lot of reviews and tips, as it turned out to be quite popular among crop camera owners, people write a lot of positive reviews, but some write that this is the ultimate dream and a very non-replaceable glass , others just that it’s a good staffer, (yes a staffer for crop without a wide angle) and you shouldn't wait for a miracle, I thought about buying a used one since I read that such an average one is not worth what they ask, I used a second-hand look within + / - 400 €, new wite box costs about 550 €, and the new one costs even more. The constant aperture and focus of the focus attracts me. I’m reporting there is a whale of 18-55, and I take pictures of 50 1.4 for myself, I don’t always need a wide angle and can be covered with a whale, does it make sense to look in the direction of used 24-105?

    • Antosha

      I think after the whale you will experience a completely different level. At least as soon as you pick it up. The image shows good colors, focusing speed, and a comfortable range. Washes the background well at the long end and 4.0.

      As a last resort, sell and not lose much - nevertheless, this is "elka".

  • Jinn113

    FTM seems to follow the instructions for the One Shot mode only. Correct if I am mistaken

    • Arkady Shapoval

      That's right, I supplemented the review. It still begs the question, why call the function “FULL TIME MANUAL” - manual focusing at any time, if in fact the function only works in some situations?

  • Jinn113

    I agree, it was necessary to call ftm more accurately. On the other hand, ai servo is designed for sports and situations like him. Manual focus in such situations and on most autofocus lenses you will catch little. This is probably why they didn’t bother much with the ftm algorithm in ai servo.

    • Arkady Shapoval

      Yes, and in One shot you have to wait for confirmation of focus :), that's why I made such a big block on this matter. For the opposing side, it is easier - he began to rotate the ring, the focus automation was completely disabled.
      In any case, thanks, in the instructions I overlooked this and tormented Canon more than once for such an FTM method of work in my reviews.

Add a comment

Copyright © Radojuva.com. Blog author - Photographer in Kiev Arkady Shapoval. 2009-2022

English-version of this article https://radojuva.com/en/2015/07/canon-ef-24-105-4-l-is-usm-review/comment-page-1/?replytocom=118078

Version en español de este artículo https://radojuva.com/es/2015/07/canon-ef-24-105-4-l-is-usm-review/comment-page-1/?replytocom=118078