Canon EOS SLR Camera Lens EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Review

Pick one from of the many that are available here (!) This is not the L-ka that will shoot on the F4 frames that are pleasing to the eye in every regard, and this is not the 70-200 F4IS, for example. However, shooting on the F4 frames 90% of the time is far better than not having any frame while you climb for the right lens. (Overall score: a good four, with the possibility of earning a plus). Has pros: Lightweight (especially when compared to 24-70L, which was a common option) the generation…

There is little doubt that the lens is designed exclusively for full-frame cameras. the photo was taken, and it had both excellent sharpness and bokeh; in a nutshell, it was unquestionably worth capturing. Some pros: - Fast and precise autofocus - Excellent reliable design (dust and moisture protection, metal case) - Universal focal lengths (I shot virtually everything on it, from macro and portraits to studio photography and of course reports) with hands at 1/10 - no blurring); for videos in…

I purchased a Canon EOS 50D with an EF-S 18-200 3.6-5.6 IS lens a month ago. After a month, I came to the conclusion that my 18-200 (I can't think of anything negative to say about it) f/4 of course, to shift from 200 mm to 105 mm, but it's already too short for me personally. In general, the contrast between the 18-200 and the 24-105 is very clear, and the 24-105 is the only one I own.

First, I got it to replace the whale one that I had previously purchased for forty dollars (I bought a 5D Mark II), but now I use it as a whale camera (typically it comes with it). The lens hood helped a great deal, and the lens itself withstood such a mockery (it was well covered), but it caught a lot of brightness.

When I was shooting with a 50D crop, I utilized glass; now I use it with a 5DMK2. There are times when you want the background to be blurred, but miracles don't happen. The aperture is 2.8, but it's short on FF; after cropping, I don't even have 105:)

Got pros: Constant aperture, constructive, bokeh (at some focal lengths) (see, for example, page=0), fast autofocus. Its cons: Aperture is sometimes not enough, you have to use a tripod or flash.

Personal verdict on this purchase.Has some pros: Light enough, autofocus is very smart and accurate! Got cons: What can be the disadvantages if you choose consciously?

By the way, who here chooses between 24-70 and 24-105, I was advised to take the second one for 50D and younger, and leave 24-70 and of course, for complete happiness, do not forget to buy a flash! Its pros: Enough has already been written about the pros here, A few days ago I was filming at a concert, and being a terrible crooked hand, I dropped the lens from the balcony, from 7-8 know how I managed to accidentally press the button so that the lens detached, And he is safe and sound ! Only the

After Canon's whale lens, the Sigma 17-70 2.8 sometimes there is not enough aperture, I tried to use this lens on a Canon 5D - super, but I myself use it on a crop - it suits me too

The lens has excellent contrast, good resolution and design, convenient focal lengths, which primarily "aims" it for use in reporting. With its pros: Convenient focal range for reportage shooting, excellent design, good resolution. Its cons: Distortion at some focal lengths (24-45mm), the bokeh "pattern" is not so "beautiful", even in comparison with optics one step lower.

I' I purchased it in a kit configuration from 6 and 17-55,2,8 but despite the fact that I am very impressionable, I was even disappointed: after the first wedding he shot, even touch it indoors, I’ll manage fifty dollars.

A great photo lens for a reporter shooting in extreme conditions (in moderation, of course) On my lens, out of 300 frames, you don't have fixes) of course, but for the stub - it is (comparatively) worth its money Its pros: Very light, sharp at all focal lengths (f / 4), focusing speed, good stub, price (compared to other lenses), VERY GOOD DUST PROOF! Different cons: Protection of the "trunk" (when dust and sand got in (motocross report), it creaked for a couple of weeks, but nothing got…

I have been using this lens for 8 and in the heat, and in the rain, and in the mud, you can't use a polarizing filter with a lens hood installed, for almost all occasions. Pros: - universality; - fast and accurate autofocus; - image stabilizer; - sufficient sharpness; - nice colors, beautiful pattern; - strong and reliable design; - dust and moisture protection. Its cons: - chromatic aberrations; - catches "hares" in the backlight; - absolutely unsuitable for macro photography.

The sharpness of the lens is quite ordinary, the lens captivates with its versatility, but you should not expect anything outstanding. Pros below: Convenient focal lengths, good stub, pont red stripe, motor speed. Its cons: Depending on the focal length, it may not matter, I read somewhere that the lens is parfocal, there is nothing like it nearby.

I use it on crop, Most of the time, although worse than that at 70-200/4 in my opinion, it should have been made deeper, share such enthusiastic reviews about this lens - rather, it’s just a good, solid lens for every day, not much outstanding, 18-85, 18-135 and the like, people experience some euphoria at first.

During the time of use, It’ this is important to me. "razor" sharpness and "juiciness" (Although now, unfortunately, there is) Of course, plan to shoot anything other than portraits, then of course take 13 5 But the efficiency of this lens is important to me, mm L either.

when there is no way to change the lens, A very mediocre lens, it's strange that "L" however, that the rest of my lenses are also "L", well, Has pros: Compact size, light weight, wide range of focal lengths, fast focusing, presence of a stabilizer, good build quality (no backlash) Has cons: Strongly lathers on an open hole; very bad work out backlight; Distortion at 24 it "soaps" comparison with 70-200 2.8 L II) noticeably noisy, too.

Bought in tandem with 5 it is good, versatile, f/2 f / 1.4, so aperture 4 was simply not enough for me, he was paired with a mark at a good discount, otherwise he would not have bought for that kind of money

took in 2022 in conjunction with 40D, 200 to the detriment of the guarantee (canon has its own in the 2022, not worldwide) then it was 10-22 and now in conjunction with 16-35 after arriving in South Africa, the focus ring began to creak slightly (there was a hell of a wind in the deserts of Bolivia, quite expected in conjunction with fine sand) at the same time they adjusted it.

Some pros: I chose such a rating so that everyone would read this review))) I think this lens is very worthy! very convenient to use Has some cons: it’s really very difficult without external puff, IMHO a semicircle is formed from below .