If not 24-105mm L series, then what?

[BecdS]

I'm ready to make the giant leap out of kit lenses (except for the 50mm prime). I thought I had absolutely made up my mind on the 24-105mm L lens, until I read through a thread here. I was shocked by the number of people experiencing the exact same problem, one that Canon swears they know nothing about!! If I'm going to "invest" this much money, I shudder to think of paying the $300+ repair bill through no fault of my own.

The reason I settled on this lens as my first foray out of the kit lens wilderness is because of it's all-round usability. I've chat with a few auspho-folk and this is the lens (at least this length) that's been most often suggested. I'm a beginner, but I would like to start building a useable kit. At present I'm practicing portraits and shooting things reasonably close, using the 50mm.

I currently have: Canon 350D, 50mm 1.8, Canon EFS 18-55mm, Canon EF 75-300mm.

Where to from here?

[kiwi]

There's simply no reason to buy any lens at the moment

[Brian500au]

Hi Becs,

My interest also lays in doing a lot of people / portraiture / glamour type of photography. I have a few lens I use for this type of work but in truth there is no perfect lens. My favourite lens when I am working in the studio is the 24-70 f2.8. It is the perfect focal length for my 1.3x crop body. When outside I always use the 70-200 f2.8 - once again it just gives me the flexibility to zoom and of course the 2.8 gives me control over DOF.

For myself I also own a cheaper second body which I tend to arm up with a fixed focal length lens (50, 85, etc) just to give a different perspective to the shoot - but this is more as a back up if something should go wrong with my primary setup.

I also own the 24-105 lens but I never use it for portrature work - this is more my general walk around / travel lens (and it does an excellent job for that purpose).

With the strength of the AUD at the moment the 70-200 f2.8 is the cheapest I have ever seen it (and some great second hand bargains on ebay too). If you want any more information on my setup you are welcome to PM me.

[Gemini2261]

Never had a problem with my 24-105mm L and I have used it quite allot. I would wait like Kiwi says and hone your skills first before out laying money. By that time you will know in which direction you are starting to lean and then be able to make an appropriate purchase according to need.

[Art Vandelay]

I wouldn't be too worried about the 24-105. Sure there's a few dropped dead here recently and evidence of others around the ridges, but considering the tens of thousands (hundreds of thousands ?) out there in use, it's not a deal breaker if that's the lens that suits you.

I frequent a large canon international forum and it hardly rates a mention.

[JM Tran]

+1 on the 24-105 buy, nothing wrong with them. I have been using them for a few yrs for travel photography and possibly in more environmentally worse conditions than most would use it at, I havent had a problem or heard of them until I saw it on AP.

[ravynne]

I only purchased one a few days ago ... so far, it's not been off my camera ... I love it, but then, I just purchased my first DSLR camera and lenses a few days ago so I am in a world of camera happy and know nothing yet about what can go wrong. That aside, the 24-105 has proven to be rather versatile for everything from close up portraits of animals, nature, and landscapes. I have a feeling it will - next to a macro lens - be the one that is on my camera the most.

[Bennymiata]

If you can afford it, buy it!
You won't regret it.
It is one of the most useful lenses around and takes superb photos.

Mine only comes off the camera when I need another, more specialised lens.

[William]

Nothing wrong with the 24-105 , Mine did suffer the ribbon problem, I've been told there was a fix in the design of the newer versions of the DPU unit , Great lens love it in It's rebirth , Sharp as , And great colour rendition

[kiwi]

A good speedlght and tripod would be more useful Bec.

[jjphoto]

The 24-70/2.8 is an extremely good lens and holds it's own against many excellent primes. I've had one for close to 10 years and use it as my main lens.

JJ

[KeeFy]

I reckon the 24-105 holds up well with the FF as with the 1+ extra stop of ISO vs a crop, it's awesome. With a cropped body tho.. you might want to consider something a little faster like a 2.8. Even at 2.8 i'm having trouble keeping up during low light situations for some events and have to make use of an external flash as well.

[wideangle]

The problem with your conclusion that the 24-105 has a major problem is that you will only hear from the people who have had a problem with their lens, most people who have the lens and it's working fine are not all going to be posting how it's working fine. There are going to be 'duds' in anything consumer electronic, I would say if you had your mind set on this lens then go for it, the range is versatile.

[crum]

Have you also considered the EFS 15-85? When I was shopping around to upgrade my 400D there was a lot on here who recommended that over the 24-105 as the focal lengths suited the crop frame sensor better. I ended up going this way along with a 7D and it makes a perfect all around lens

[macdog]

Damnnn, I'm in the same boat, desperately needing to replace my 28-135 with either the '24-70 f2.8' or the '24-105 f4'. This decision is hurting my brain. Mainly for my all purpose reasons + portrait and the odd low light shooting

[Papou]

24-105L will only come off my camera when i purchase the 100-400L...Mind you i have had the 24-70f2.8 a few times and it is a brilliant lens also far as i'm concerned..

[gje38752]

I am inclined to agree with the comment about the 15-85 its a far better lens than a lot of people realise and so versatile, that extra width is not to be ignored particularly on a crop camera 50D. I have a 70-200 L and on a recent trip around Oz I used both and honestly I find it difficult to tell the results apart. The 15-85 is well built, not as good as an L but how much do you need. Any comments ? .

[roburg]

Damnnn, I'm in the same boat, desperately needing to replace my 28-135 with either the '24-70 f2.8' or the '24-105 f4'. This decision is hurting my brain. Mainly for my all purpose reasons + portrait and the odd low light shooting

I was wondering what the main problem is with the 28-135?

I too have been pondering whether to buy a versatile zoom in this middle range. I recently bought one of the "Photo Workshop" series of books on nature photography and many of the photos in it were taken with the 28-135. The author did say that his current travel lens was the 24-105, but it looked like the 28-135 wasn't too bad, so its got me thinking! I don't need the wider end as I have the 17-40 already.

[KeeFy]

Fixed aperture. L build quality. Weather Sealing. Better IQ and Contrast.

Need i say more?

[unistudent1962]

Better IQ and Contrast

Better IQ and contrast than what?

Assuming you are comparing it to the EF-S 15-85, the only real advantage it has is the fixed aperture, any reviews I've read say that the IQ and contrast are comparable.
L build quality is better than that of the EF-S lenses, but unless you are careless with your gear does little if anything other than to add weight.
What's the point of paying a premium for a weather sealed lens unless it's going on a weather sealed body?
I'd buy the 15-85 for the comparable optics, better range of focal lengths on a crop body, and put price difference into something else.