Glass is undoubtedly good, reliable, Everything is fine, at least XA, the sharpness is already excellent with f4, but it’s somehow tasteless)

First I bought it to replace the whale one for 40 bought a 5D Mark II), now I use it as a whale camera (usually it comes with it) the lens hood helped a lot, and the lens itself withstood such a mockery (it was well covered) it catches a lot of glare.

Great lens! Quite an adequate price for L-ku, medium weight, is clearly not working, it is already always sharp, though it forces you to raise the iso indoors, but saves the focal range from 24 to 105 - there is not enough wide angle, but the portrait is excellent, now I don’t even want to get off L-ki) Excellent glass for FF! A workhorse for shooting during the day or indoors with flash.

The lens has excellent contrast, good resolution and design, convenient focal lengths, which primarily "aims" it for use in reporting.

Great lens for all occasions! now I use it with 5 this lens is designed for full frame, but at such a high resolution (22MP) example, 5D), very pleased with it, not going to change it anytime soon! Has some pros: First of all, versatility, Dust-moisture-proof (repeatedly removed them in light rain, everything is ok) The stabilizer is just great! Has some cons: There are few of them: - Chromatic aberration is quite strong if you shoot full frame at 22MP resolution) - The absence of a zoom ring

I bought it for the 60 On the Mark, it is not bad, I'm thinking of buying a 70-200mm F4 everything is in order with sharpness, and the background washes more beautifully.

I' digital crop, then on 5D2 of commercial shooting was filmed on it (and sometimes all 100%), reportage style, or just a little bit of everything, even on film, I shot the best shots on it, it fell (hard) twice, with subsequent repair (the diaphragm cable failed), lost its red ring, wedding shooting, for me it is preferable than its "brothers in purpose" - 24-70 / 2.8L (I and II). Digital crop, then on 5 shoot a lot at f/2.8 and 35 for people who always have to choose between 24-105 and 24-70,

The EF 24-70 / 2.8L was replaced by this lens on my EOS 5D since its weight and lack of a long focus didn't work for me, but now that I have upgraded to an EOS 6 and am pleased with its image quality, I find it to be subjectively superior to that of the 24-70 (and is roughly equal to 50/1.4 @ f/8). mm allows you to shoot comfortably in the mountains, as well as, to some extent, mm, the upper left corner of the frame is the darkest, mm FR, then the auto-correction of distortion must ALWAYS be…

Canon. 24-105 heaven and earth, mm focal length), Different pros: Constant aperture, constructive, bokeh (at some focal lengths) (see, for example, page=0), fast autofocus. Some cons: Aperture is sometimes not enough, you have to use a tripod or flash.

I chose among many lenses, I came to the conclusion that it is better to take a separate camera (without a whale lens), you can shoot landscapes, portraits, Ru/users/antumanof/view/571240/? page=0 page=0

I bought it for 7d and was happy with the bokeh, rich colors in the background, but at 100% 1.8 there was sharpness, at 15-85 there was sharpness, There is no protection! not satisfied.

In view of its compactness and inconspicuousness (black color), Years later, I took from the "scattered" but it doesn’t affect the performance at all, which is natural.

High-quality, reliable, stable, predictable regular zoom without any super-duper highlights and artistic delights, suitable for the role of a regular, in most cases, without a flash, but without it, the picture turns out, according to my feelings, somehow better or something, and then in everyday shooting I personally rarely encounter situations when it is necessary to shoot something then at a slow shutter speed it is impossible / did / 2.8, and the smaller focal lengths were ignored (I mean…

The price now of course is not quite adequate, but given that everything has risen in price, I use it with a 60D crop camera, perfect for travel lovers, Com/photo/96477171/wayfarer-by-nikita-danilushkin? from=user_library I liked the work of the stabilizer, yes, but it' there is a light 50 I am very pleased with the lens, a kind of everyday workhorse for all occasions.

A good standard lens that is perfect for "always at hand" I can say this: I have a canon ef 70-200mm f2.8 ISII USM zoom in my arsenal (I use it as a staff member), only the most interesting pictures I took were taken at 24-105 page=1 page=1 page=0 page=2 Draw your own conclusions, good luck with your shots!

The price/ so I didn’ see the point in taking it to the crop, if I stay on it, because the wide angle will no longer work - it turns out more than 38 in my opinion, 24-105 is a complete analogue of 15-85 but if you don’t bother much with the optics fleet, by the way, I use it when I don’t feel like carrying other lenses with me, on trips, and also at work, where quality and artistic nuances are not important. 15-85 used on 500 nevertheless, I think that 24-105, on the crop, will be sharper than

office, banquet) Hole 4 is clearly a bit dark (when compared even with the same 50 f/1.8), but at the same time it is functional and sharp up to 70 so the dust a little (but not much) then it is better to prefer 24-70 f / 2.8 to him, you will remember 24-105 average optics, but a budget Elka :) Do not use it for shooting portraits, because the bokeh is not ice, and it is soapy at a long focus (from 70 mm) take fifty kopecks for 3 thousand in addition to it and make portraits on it.

This is not the first "Elka", and compared to them, the 24-105 III, and on the full format Mark 5 especially 135 / 2L, there was a not very pleasant feeling of a soapy picture, and if 135 gives razor sharpness already at 2-ke, then 24-105 works out an open aperture very, as they say in the reviews, he honestly did not notice "dark"))))) I don’t remember such perversions to save a picture from the "Brezhnev" as my teacher (eternal and bright memory to him) Iona Leibovich said - "Shura, always…

We can’t replace weddings in the reportage part, about artistry I can say that at focal length 105 at aperture 4 it gives quite good blur, sharpness at a high level, autofocus hits, but when shooting staged, I change it to fixed (135 or 50) I also use it in the studio, since the aperture ratio is not important there, the glass justifies its price, so as not to be said, photo examples: p=0

Different pros: Design, the most requested range of focal lengths (for me, and for most). Has some cons Indoors, without a flash, it is very difficult to shoot (there is a lack of aperture).