🔍 Canon EOS SLR Cameras EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens - Bulk Packaging (White Box) Review

For the money, a magnificent full-time zoom, sharp across the entire field from an open aperture, popular even to write laziness about the merits. I’d rather say about the shortcomings: Distortion at 24 goes off scale, becomes acceptable at 35, and at 50mm again, but already negative distortion in the corners, which becomes more and more when approaching 105. At 105 it’s a bit soft, it starts ringing from 5.6. From experience, I would say that it would be more appropriate to call the lens…

In terms of money, if you take it, by the way, it is very affordable. More expensive than 5 thousand than 17-40, but with a stub and a large range of focal lengths. In latitude on the street, which is 17, which is 24, there is practically one raspberry, indoors on a crop and then narrowly. Even in this price category, only 70-200, but taking it with the only lens is somehow stupid, so there is only one choice - 24-105). The fact that it is dark is not a disadvantage for me - just count the…

In general, this is the first Elka after whales, 2022 glasses through the ring, after 50mm 1.8, 35mm 2, 28mm 2.8 and the rest of a bunch of various rented glasses, but Elka is the first in life. The glass is always sharp, very unusual after all the other lenses, I think the color reproduction is perfect. He fell into my hands when he was with the Canon 700D, and even on it, sharpness and color reproduction are at the highest level. All whales and other non-aperture glasses for sale or in the…

I owned it for about six months, probably - I chased universality, I got it. I sold it and I’m thinking of taking 17-40 . yes, maybe for different purposes, but I decided that I need everything exactly like that, and the FR is not so important. I took a vacation to Spain, beauty with a FR + crop matrix, I don’t want to shoot from the bus, closer further. Universalism - yes, it's good, but it's better to have glass with a narrower "field" of application, but more suitable for your purposes

An excellent workhorse, staff member for FF (I use it from 5dm2). Of course, he does not "enough stars" with his aperture and pattern, but he is very stable in terms of results in different conditions, and this is worth a lot in the reportage genre. I appreciate it for this. By the way, I remember quite recently the time when the price of 24-105 / 4 and 24-70 / 2.8 (first generation) differed by only 10-12t. R. (approximately 30 and 42 thousand, respectively) In my opinion, this is the real…

Very handy for reportage photography. Ideal for travel. Of course, you should not expect an artistic picture from him, but at the F / 4 aperture this is understandable. Who needs portrait photography, he will choose the aperture wider and the focal length longer. Although at 105 mm. focus and a portrait with a slight blur can be obtained not bad. Despite the presence of a stabilizer, it is better not to use it. The picture with him is worse. Moreover, on a full frame, you can also raise the ISO

Almost regretted buying it. Suitable only for travel, when there is no way to change the lens, but you need maximum freedom. And the compact size (relatively) also contributes to efficiency and convenience. The rest is only flaws. A very mediocre lens, it's strange that "L". It must be taken into account, however, that the rest of my lenses are also "L", well, fixes. Worst L in my backpack.

Many people remember that when this lens entered the market, it cost 32-31tr, but after a couple of years the price dropped sharply to 23tr, and this is due to the fact that these lenses break down after a while and repairs cost 8tr, that is, the canon decided to sell your lens, like automakers, once in a store, and the second time in a service. (23+8 same 31tr.) My opinion is that when I bought this lens, I made a mistake, it would be better if I took 28-135 YSM (the same thing, only without…

I have been using this lens for 8 years. And in frost -30, and in the heat, and in the rain, and in the mud, he never had any problems. If you find fault, you can't use a polarizing filter with a lens hood installed, and I would like more aperture . But Canon marketers stubbornly stick to their line, offering the buyer to choose between a stabilizer and aperture. And so - this is the most versatile lens in the Canon lineup, for almost all occasions.

The lack of artistry of his drawing and "disgusting" bokeh are often pointed out as a drawback. Dear comrades, there are fixes for creative photography (preferably top ones). As for the drawing, it is "electronic", there is no art in it, the quality and plastic from the L series are fully . "Bokeh" . Yes, probably not, but there is a completely digestible blur zone, which does not cause any disgust at all (there are such glasses). Where to go for artistic bokeh - it is written above. Another…

The lens has a leisurely, languid, philosophical view of the world. Role - rather portrait, Portrait, still life, interior. For landscapes, one might say, it is not at all suitable. Also, not suitable for reports and weddings. Can't keep up with the movement. Haste is useless. Despite the IS loves a tripod and a steady hand. Well shoots art objects, portrait and in studio conditions. Needed for photographers who love a corrosive look at textures, fragments and the play of light on objects. In…

During the time of use, I never thought about selling it. As if I myself tried to find cons in it. I tried and found it. But each time I stopped and objectively evaluated it. And each time I came to the conclusion that I needed it. very convenient focal lengths for me. It’s good for reportage shooting. Personally, this is important to me. "razor" sharpness and "juiciness" of the picture. And all because there is no Photoshop there. (Although now, unfortunately, there is). But everything is done

I will not write what has already been written a hundred times, yes, he is Elka, yes, he is at the most popular focal lengths, and so on. But it is very banal, very literal and predictable. There is no creativity, no inspiration in him, he is like a Japanese robot - he is ready to perform everything with incredible quality, but he won’t write poetry for you, he won’t draw a picture. For reportage - the most suitable option, but for a portrait - not suitable, for nature - no, for sunset - no. I

In fact, there is no alternative to the Canon 24-105 lens (70-200 f / 2.8 L IS does not count, this is a different range of fr), if you are fond of video and want to get decent quality videos without additional professional body kits: steadicam, slider, etc. The zoom ring is very comfortable in the hand, the smooth action makes it easy to shoot handheld, zooming in or out of the subject. In a stationary scene, after accurately focusing on the object in the zoom preview mode, the lens allows you

I’m far from a professional (don’t judge strictly) . But the experience of using a DSLR is about 4 years . Before that, there was a whale 18-55, then I bought a fifty dollars 1.8 (I really liked it as a portrait), then 18-135 (I used it for about 2 years , along with a fifty dollars), then I bought a sigma 75-300 (I sold it a week later) . I thought about L-ke . I chose for a long time, read . I settled on this . I sold 18-135 and bought . The first thing I felt when you open the box, it's…

I have been using it for more than two years, I bought a kit with 5dm2. Impressions are positive. I read reviews and noticed that they write that the stub compensates for f / 4. In part, you are right, this is true when shooting static scenes. Let's say in a normal and spacious restaurant where the first dance of the young will take place, for example, the Paradise Hall on Domodevskaya (there is a capacity of 500+ people), then you will have to turn up the ISO and shorten the shutter speed…

Great lens! Quite an adequate price for L-ku, corresponds to the quality. Easy to handle, medium weight, draws beautifully The main disadvantage is the luminosity. f4 is clearly not working, lathers. At f5.6 it is already always sharp, though it forces you to raise the iso indoors, without using a flash. Inferior to fixes from the same price segment, but saves the focal range from 24 to 105. I shoot at 60D - there is not enough wide angle, but the portrait is excellent, now I don’t even want…

I've been using it for almost five years. I started with film + digital crop, then on 5D2. More than 90% of commercial shooting was filmed on it (and sometimes all 100%), because there is nothing more universal. For those who shoot fast-moving action, reportage style, or just a little bit of everything, having one lens in a case. for the money, this is the best. On many trips around the world, even on film, I shot the best shots on it, although there are usually different things in the case.…

An excellent lens as a universal zoom, for landscape, cityscape, reportage. Travel lens. Because of 24-105, I switched from Nikon to Canon 3 years ago. I don't regret it. Of course fixes are better. For "artistic" portraits, real "macro", professional photography of architecture, "Canon" has other lenses. Optics "Canon" - about sixty lenses. If someone traveling on 5D-2 can only shoot with ultra-fast optics, and 24-105 everything is blurry or wild noises, this is not a problem with the lens…

An excellent general purpose lens. Before that, there were 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 + Converter 2x well and aperture 50 1.4 I shoot mainly on trips and on the road and not in the studio, the issue of weight and versatility has become an edge. I sold all the zooms and took one universal, well, I left fifty kopecks. the glass is really good. Compared to the 24-70 that I got: Weight is a third lighter (this is important if the shooting lasts 2-3 hours, the fingers slowly fall off) Large FR…