Reddit mentions of Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens for Canon EOS SLR Cameras

Repost from: Advise on buying semi-universal Canon lens.

First off: I know there is no such thing as an universal lens.

I'm looking for a lens I can use for city walks, portrait and nature. I do have 50mm 1.8 for portraits and I plan on buying wide angle for nature. But I want to have something that I can use most of the time even for portraits and nature without constantly swapping lenses.

Recently I went to Ireland and was doing photographs of cliffs, my friends and small houses and fortresses. Then, some city shots of Dublin. I was not happy with quality of photos produced by 18-55 kit lens (50mm 1.8 had way better sharpness and less distortions), but it was universal and I didn't have to swap lenses.

So, I was thinking its time to buy better lens, but something that is at least to some extend universal.

I have Canon 550D (Rebel T2i) with kit lens 18-55mm and 50mm 1.8. I live in Europe (Poland) and plan to spent up to 1k USD on lens.

These are some options I have come across:

• Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM -- $599.99
  
• Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD -- $1,299.00
  
• Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM AF -- $824.00
  
  
  Is it worth investing more to buy this lens? I don't believe I have enough skills to appreciate difference...
  
  
• Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM -- $2,299.00 (its way out of my league... I have money but I'm afraid I would fall into dark depressing place filled with guilt If I spent so much)
  
  Right now I opt for Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM because it is L lens and is relatively cheap. It has 105mm max, but f/4 apperture, so I'm worried about night city shots. Is image quality really good and f/4 something that I should not be worried about? I heard most photos are taken with f/4 and above anyway...
  
  EDIT: I'm doing some reading and people complain that it's old construction, has a lot of chromatic aberration and photos are not that good. Are these claims valid?
  
  TL;DR: I have about 1k USD to spend for a good semi-universal lens and I'm considering Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM. Is it good choice? Are there any better lenses under 1k USD?
  
  Sorry for long post.

For around 5k, I'd buy:

Sachtler Flowtech 75 sticks, C100 camera, 24-105 lens, and MKE600 Microphone. The c100 is aging but it is more than sufficient for journalism (and built like a tank). The C100 is on sale at B&H for $1700 today.

For 2.5kish budget, I'd probably get Davis & Sanford Tripod, GH4, Lumix 12-35, Variable ND filter, and MKE600 Microphone

What's the deal with variable-aperture zoom lenses, and why are they so much cheaper than zoom lenses that maintain a constant aperture, for lenses with roughly the same focal length range?

Related: Why is this lens so much more expensive than this lens? They look nearly equivalent to me.

Is...is the original online anywhere?

Also, how well do you think this could have been replicated with a mark II and their 24-105mm L lens? (http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-105mm-USM-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000AZ57M6)

1.) Something that is grey.

2.) Something reminiscent of rain. (It sprinkles all over you!)

3.) I've heard these are delicious

4.) For my best friend because birthdays! Also he loves superheroes!

5.) You must read this because I mean... V for Vendetta. The movie was fantastic, this will blow you away


6.) Well, it can be... ;)


7.) I am the crazy cat lady, so...

8.) I mean... It's beautiful


9.) Not the actual movie
But seriously, everyone needs to see this movie. It changed my life, really. I mean, it changes how you perceive things. Even your littlest actions. Not to mention, fantastic movie score... 10/10 would recommend.

10.) May not be real, but it still shoots...


11.) Definitely this or this but they're wicked expensive. The lens would absolutely change my photography career so much because photography is a lot more about equipment than people like to admit. The Macbook would help me with my photo editing, music mixing, and even my coding and programming. These things would open up so many possibilities for me...

12.) Ugh, stupid add-on... I just want to cure my chapped lips! :(

13.) This is the most expensive and I'd love it for photography... The MacBook, my second dream item, is only $100 less...

14.) Definitely bigger than a bread box...

15.) Earring are small.

16.) This smells glorious


17.) Because neurology <3

18.) This would be extremely helpful!

19.) I CAN'T STOP. I also may or may not have already finished the second volume...

20.) THIS COMIC OMFG but seriously, it is one of the best comics ever (according to statistics)


Thank you for the contest! :) <3


EDIT: Bonuses

1. I'm sorry, this is hilarious.
   
   
2. Hm, this sounds good!
   
   fear cuts deeper than swords.... muahahahahaa!

I'm running a Rebel XT from 2005. I currently have the 18-55 EFS kit lens, a 75-300 EF lens, a 50mm prime EF Lens and a Sigma 24mm Super-wide II lens.

Assuming I could only buy one or the other, would I be better served by getting the 24-105mm L IS USM lens here;

or the Canon 6D here?

Oh, to expand on that, it was a Canon 5D Mark II with a 24-105 f/f L-series lens. I was shooting at around f/9, I believe, and I white balance on the camera before shooting using white balance cards. I often use a reflector as well to fill in the front, but this time I didn't.

Post processing was in Photoshop. I did just a tiny bit more white balancing using a curves layer, then I punch up the highlights and bring down the darks (a standard S-curve). I also use the shadows/highlights tool to bring up the darkest darks so they aren't just straight up black.

I then make a mask around the parts that I really want to feature (in this case the beef and the folded towel on the right), the do a minor Gaussian blur on everything else to just slightly blur it, which makes the meat and texture on the towel pop a little more. Too much and it ends up looking like an Instagram photo.

Similarly, I use that same mask to blow out the lights and darks in the un-masked sections slightly so that the beef and towel pop even more. The key is really being subtle about it though. I probably did a quick sharpen on the whole image as well.

Actually, the REAL key is good lighting. You get good lighting and you're 99% of the way towards a good photograph.

Well you've mentioned ranges from 18mm to 250mm. You can get a Sigma or Canon 18-200mm, but the image quality probably isn't what you're looking for.

What kind of price range are you looking for? Canon makes some L glass in the 17-40mm and 17-105 ranges, but they're pricey compared to all your other glass.

So what we need to know is:

1. What is your price range?
   
   
2. Which focal lengths do you typically shoot?

Cannon 70-200 2.8f
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-70-200mm-2-8L-Telephoto-Cameras/dp/B00006I53X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1292814414&sr=8-1

24-105 f4
http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-105mm-USM-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000AZ57M6/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1292814491&sr=1-1

And you obviously know little about photography, "glass" refers to the lens mounted on the camera.

This is the model lens I use on my DSLR: https://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-105mm-USM-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000AZ57M6

For the money, I think the most versatile hand-held lens is the canon 24-105. The image stabilization is good, the range is great and it's just a good solid lens for run and gun shooting.

Currently I have:

• 50mm f/1.4
  
  
• 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
  
  
• 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM
  
  
• 28mm f/1.8 USM

A single lens for a novice, I would recommend a zoom lens rather than a fixed.

If you have the money to pick of a collection of prime lenses that might be a different option if you want to go that way. You might want to pick up a set with the 24mm, 35mm, 50mm, 85mm, 100mm... yeah, it adds up.

The kit lens for the rebel series is the one mentioned earlier (EF-S 18-55) and older editions can be found for cheap. Looking over ebay I see them for $11.50, $8.50, $13.00, $10.61, ... The range of 18-55 is not terrific and many people ditch their kit lenses as soon as possible, but many others never move on from their initial kit lens. They are not that bad, and the market is flooded with them, so they can be had for cheap.

If you're willing to go off-brand and on a tight budget for a better zoom, better both in terms of better glass and more versatile midrange zoom, this Tameron lens is one of the best ranked among the 'cheap' category. 28-75 f/2.8 for $315 used like new. It is missing a lot of expensive features, no image stabilization, slow noisy motors, but the glass is good for a midrange zoom lens.

If you do have a little bit of money for a lens, my absolute favorite "inexpensive" canon lens for regular walkabout use is their 24-105 f/4 L-series lens for about $650 used. Excellent glass (it is an L-series) good mid range zoom, fast quiet motors, image stabalization, full-time manual focus. True it isn't the very similar f/2.8 flagship that sells for 4x the cost, which I would recommend if you had the money. It is a mighty fine mid-range lens.

If budget permits, go ahead and get the [Canon 24-105 f4] (https://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-105mm-USM-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000AZ57M6/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ll1&tag=battleforthew-20) with a [Pixco adapter] (https://www.amazon.com/Pixco-Electronic-Adapter-Full-Frame-Generation/dp/B00S9DCPKI/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ll1&tag=battleforthew-20) [Referral Links]. With this adapter, you'll have image stabilization and autofocus.

Here is the image quality you can get from the A6000 plus the Canon 24-105:

• [Hong Kong Rain by Raffaele Mosca] (https://vimeo.com/128415960)
  
  
• [STARS AND STRIPES by Jonny D Henson] (https://vimeo.com/132711987)
  
  I recommend Canon lenses because they can be mounted on just about any camera you might upgrade to in the future - whether it's an A7s, FS100, URSA EF or Canon Cinema EOS camera.
  
  Sony E mount lenses, on the other hand, cannot be adapted to any other mount because of their short flange to focal plane distance.
  
  That said, if you really want a general purpose Sony mount lens with image stabilization, you might want to consider the [$598 Sony 18-105 f4 power zoom with Optical Steady Shot] (https://www.amazon.com/Sony-SELP18105G-PZ-18-105mm-OSS/dp/B00ENZRQH8/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=ll1&tag=battleforthew-20) [Referral Link].
  
  This lens is wider at the short end and has power zoom.
  
  Here is an example shot with the A6000 and the 18-105 (except for the end, where the 50mm f1.8 was used):
  
  
• [the jewel under a rock by Joe Mills] (https://vimeo.com/100732167)
  
  And here's one with the A6000 and the 18-105 on its own (please note the use of power zoom at the beginning):
  
  
• [Evening at Langholmen by Jens-Chr. Strandos] (https://vimeo.com/100604042)
  
  Again, hope this is helpful!

I'm also a beginner (only into this about a year) and I started with that exact lens and the 24-105 L lens that can come with the 5D3 (and the 6D). I love both and think that's a great lens to start with. Keep in mind that, on a crop sensor, everything will look closer. On a 6D or 5D3, the 50mm is pretty close to what your eyes see.

As for the other lens I mentioned (24-105), you can get it for only $500 more with the 6D: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-Digital-Camera-3-0-Inch-EF24-105mm/dp/B009B0MZG2 . That is all sorts of worth $500, IMO. Here it is by itself (for a lot more money) so that you can see the reviews: http://www.amazon.com/Canon-24-105mm-USM-Lens-Cameras/dp/B000AZ57M6