Discussion Forums » Photography Equipment

Canon 24-105/f4 IS II vs original 24-105 IS - experiences ?

Moderator: E.J. Peiker

All times are UTC-05:00

« Previous topic | Next topic »

0 people like this post

First unread post

| 8 posts |

Page 1 of 1

by WJaekel on Thu Nov 24, 2016 7:04 pm

WJaekel
Forum Contributor

Posts: 663
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Location: Germany

Visit website

From what I've seen so far, the new 24-105 II seems not to be a worthwhile upgrade of the v1 - as least not for sharpness across the frame. IS may be better and distortion apparently is slightly improved, though.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi ... &APIComp=0

Some early adopters at Fredmiranda and dpreview are underwhelmed, too.

I'm interested in more opinions and experiences of photogs, especially from those who upgraded from v1.

Thanks

Wolfgang

0 people like this post

by WJaekel on Mon Dec 05, 2016 7:55 am

WJaekel
Forum Contributor

Posts: 663
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
Location: Germany

Visit website

Obviously no opinions so far

Anyway, both the reviews at lensrentals and photozone now confirmed that there's no substantial improvement over the predecessor. There may be other points to consider. But for the owners of the 8 year old original who were hoping for a better optical performance of this popular lens there's evidentally no real reason to upgrade. Given Canon's latest v II releases that's pretty disappointing.

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/1 ... f-results/

http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/99 ... 105f4ismk2

Wolfgang

0 people like this post

by E.J. Peiker on Mon Dec 05, 2016 8:17 am

E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor

Posts: 86776
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002

View portfolio

It is clearly the most disappointing new lens from Canon in a few years. Of late, their new lenses have been absolutely fantastic but not this one. It's a huge disappointment. There is absolutely zero reason to upgrade from the old to the new and for new customers for a 24-105, quite frankly, save yourself some money and get the Sigma 24-105 which has essentially identical performance for less money.

E.J. Peiker http://www.EJPhoto.com
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/EJ-Peiker-Nature-Photographer/

0 people like this post

by Mike in O on Mon Dec 05, 2016 10:22 am

Mike in O
Forum Contributor

Posts: 2673
Joined: 22 Dec 2013

Not a Canon shooter here, but I understand the new lenses for Canon are able to take advantage of the new AF modules better?

0 people like this post

by Tom Reichner on Tue Dec 06, 2016 5:44 pm

Tom Reichner
Forum Contributor

Posts: 598
Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Location: Washington (state) and Pennsylvania

Visit website

E.J. Peiker wrote: There is absolutely zero reason to upgrade from the old to the new . . .

I have considered upgrading to this new lens, specifically for the greatly improved image stabilization. When I blow shots with my current 24-105, it is most often due to camera movement at relatively slow shutter speeds, when unsupported handholding is the only option. I was/am hoping that the new 4 stop I.S. would be a noticeable improvement over the old 1 1/2 stop I.S. Would this not be the case?

I would consider the Sigma, but I have CPS and really like the way that Canon services my gear.

Wildlife photographed in the wild

http://www.tomreichner.com/Wildlife

0 people like this post

by E.J. Peiker on Tue Dec 06, 2016 7:13 pm

E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor

Posts: 86776
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002

View portfolio

Tom, I never really consider that because in normal lens testing it doesn't show up and because I shoot 99% of my shots off of a tripod. Certainly a modern IS system would be more effective than an older one if you rely on IS for sharp shots.

E.J. Peiker http://www.EJPhoto.com
Facebook Page: http://www.facebook.com/pages/EJ-Peiker-Nature-Photographer/

0 people like this post

by Wildflower-nut on Wed Dec 07, 2016 8:16 pm

Wildflower-nut
Forum Contributor

Posts: 825
Joined: 4 Mar 2008

to me the 16-35 vignetting made that lens a disappointment too.

0 people like this post

by E.J. Peiker on Wed Dec 07, 2016 8:45 pm

E.J. Peiker
Senior Technical Editor

Posts: 86776
Joined: 16 Aug 2003
Location: Arizona
Member #:00002

View portfolio