Review: Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS

Posted March 11, 2009

I got a new toy.  How can I afford a new toy these days?  I didn’t spend anything more.  I basically sold two other lenses to get this one.  I basically wanted to get an overall walk-around lens and not have a few specialty lenses that I only use on occasion.  I basically sold my macro lens and my wide angle lens.  Parting with the wide angle was probably the toughest decision but I think it was the right move.  This won’t be a very technical review but just mainly my experiences with the lens compared to lenses I have owned in the past.

The first thing I noticed about the lens was that it was slightly longer but noticeably heavier than my previously owned Canon 17-40 f/4 L.  I would say, most of my comparisons will be with 17-40 because it was the lens I was using the most before I acquired this lens.  Of course, another reason why I’m using this lens more often is because the 17-40 was one of the lenses that I did sell.  One of the main reasons why I made the switch to this lens was the fact that I does have a longer reach.

One very similar lens that I did own in the past was the Canon 28-135 IS.  The focal lengths are very similar but main similarity or point of comparison is of course the Image Stabilization (IS).  I don’t have any technical proof and I don’t even own the 28-135 anymore, but I must say the IS on the 24-105 seems to be noticeably better.  I don’t know if it’s just one of those things where I’m making myself think it is better or if it is actually true.

Image quality is very good and definitely lives up to the “L” label in the Canon professional line of lenses.  I don’t have picture samples but I guarantee you that the majority of the pictures that I post up after this post will be taken with this lens.  Probably my favorite subject to shoot is of people and in the past I have been reluctant to post pictures of people for various reasons.  I think I will soon get out of that mode.  Probably one reason for that is, I really don’t get that much traffic to this blog but once pictures are up on the net, who knows if they ever go down.

What I liked about the lens:

• Focal length is a good range.  It’s a great improvement over my last lens. (40mm vs 105mm).
• Image Stabilization is nice!
• Not an terribly heavy lens like the 24-70 2.8 (which I have used in the past and was consider getting).

Things I didn’t like or will miss:

• Not as long as my previous lens. (17mm vs 24mm which does make a big difference in certain situations).
• A little bit heavier than the previous lens  but again, not terribly heavy.

Conclusion:

I would definitely recommend this lens to anybody.  It is a little bit on the pricier side, but any “L” lens in the Canon line is pretty expensive.  Actually, my previous lens, the 17-40, was probably one of, if not, the most affordable “L” lenses available.  Where do I go from here?  Take more pictures of course.  If I happen to start to make some money on this photography thing, I may look in getting a Canon EF-S 10-22mm lens.  That would probably be the best compliment to current gear.