• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter
Photo

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 USM L IS II review coming ...


  • Please log in to reply
64 replies to this topic

#1 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,414 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 November 2016 - 01:28 PM

Will be picking up the lens on Thursday


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#2 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,230 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 14 November 2016 - 01:39 PM

This one should be very, hot.

24-105f4L IS is an extremely common lens, and has so many lovers 



#3 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,414 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 14 November 2016 - 02:34 PM

This one should be very, hot.

24-105f4L IS is an extremely common lens, and has so many lovers 

 

Except that it isn't an overly impressive lens ... ;-)


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#4 chrismiller

chrismiller

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 218 posts
  • LocationGlasgow, UK

Posted 14 November 2016 - 03:32 PM

You're on fire with the new new lens testing.



#5 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,532 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 14 November 2016 - 04:44 PM

And the 70-300 II as well? :)


  • Brightcolours likes this

#6 josa

josa

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 106 posts

Posted 14 November 2016 - 08:32 PM

Slow down! You'll need some energy for X mas and New Year.. :D



#7 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,230 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 14 November 2016 - 10:25 PM

Except that it isn't an overly impressive lens ... ;-)

It has an extremely useful range,  reliable performance, very good build quality, that's the most important



#8 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,532 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 15 November 2016 - 01:58 PM

Over at FredMiranda.com, confusion reigns: http://www.fredmiran...m/topic/1460343



#9 Rainer

Rainer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 442 posts
  • LocationSouth Germany

Posted 15 November 2016 - 11:12 PM

The testchart comparison between 24-105L and 24-105L II over at "the digital picture"  ... 

 

http://www.the-digit...omp=0&APIComp=0

 

... is not overly promissing (in my eyes).

 

Anyhow, I'm curious about PZs review on the version II.



#10 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,793 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 15 November 2016 - 11:30 PM

I have never put any trust in TDP "test" chart images.



#11 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,414 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 16 November 2016 - 08:03 AM

Flat field ...


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#12 Brightcolours

Brightcolours

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,793 posts
  • LocationThe Netherlands

Posted 16 November 2016 - 01:06 PM

https://www.martinba...ew-podcast-548/



#13 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,414 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 20 November 2016 - 08:05 AM

A bit weak in the corners at 24mm it seems ...


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#14 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,532 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 20 November 2016 - 09:53 AM

A bit weak in the corners at 24mm it seems ...

On 5DSR? I wouldn't be surprised...



#15 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,414 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 20 November 2016 - 11:56 AM

Sure, on the 5Ds R. Subjectively the 16-35mm III seems to be better at 24mm.


Chief Editor
photozone.de

#16 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,532 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 20 November 2016 - 01:48 PM

Sure, on the 5Ds R. Subjectively the 16-35mm III seems to be better at 24mm.

Don't most of the zoom lenses have the sweet spot about 1/3 into the range anyway... :)



#17 toni-a

toni-a

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,230 posts
  • LocationLebanon

Posted 20 November 2016 - 04:32 PM

Whatever weaknesses it might have I expect this lens to be a commercial success because it covers a much needed range.
In the past Canon 17-85 has had its days even for a short period.
24-105 has for a long time been a best seller so why this one won't?
Nobody is expecting it to rival primes, it offers decent quality an extremely useful range, excellent build quality, everything to make it a best seller.

#18 Arthur Macmillan

Arthur Macmillan

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 191 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 20 November 2016 - 11:39 PM

Flat field ...

The test if more like a filter.  "If you can't even do this right..."



#19 Klaus

Klaus

    Chief Editor

  • Moderators
  • 5,414 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia

Posted 21 November 2016 - 12:38 PM

Hmmmh, the 5Ds R is eating this one for lunch ...
  • toni-a likes this
Chief Editor
photozone.de

#20 Rover

Rover

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,532 posts
  • LocationRussia

Posted 21 November 2016 - 02:09 PM

I wonder what the improvements over the version one are? Or is it one of those "Silver ring added for a touch of luuuxury!" updates? :)


  • Arthur Macmillan likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users



© by photozone.de