Will I notice the difference in lenses??

[bobt]

Hi,

I'm toying with upgrading my current main lens which is the Canon 28-135 IS F3.5-5.6 USM.

The one I have narrowed the search to is currently the Canon EF 24-105 F4 L IS USM.

The body will mostly be a 40D.

The question is - am I likely to notice a significant difference in image quality? Issues such as build quality, weather resistance etc are not so important given the care with which I use my equipment - but the bottom line is simply IQ. What does anyone think - will the difference be significant and noticeable?

[JM Tran]

Hi,

I'm toying with upgrading my current main lens which is the Canon 28-135 IS F3.5-5.6 USM.

The one I have narrowed the search to is currently the Canon EF 24-105 F4 L IS USM.

The body will mostly be a 40D.

The question is - am I likely to notice a significant difference in image quality? Issues such as build quality, weather resistance etc are not so important given the care with which I use my equipment - but the bottom line is simply IQ. What does anyone think - will the difference be significant and noticeable?

short answer - YES

long answer - I have used both extensively on travels overseas, 1 month with the 28-135 on a 5D, and 2 months with the 24-105 on the 1DsMKII

what the 24-105 has over the 28-135

-constant F4
-slightly faster AF and USM
-much better bokeh and more creamy
-much superior colour rendition and sharpness and IQ both wide open and stopped down
-4mm wider is quite noticeable on full frame
-mates very well with a sealed camera like a 1D series
-4mm wider is more noticeable than 30mm extra reach
-3 stops IS compared to 2 stops on the 28-135 as it is a first generation Canon IS system, and more noisier too

I like the lens, thanks to Ernie, its an excellent lens for traveling, but to use it for work - I have better ones for specialist purposes. This is great as an all rounder though.

[bobt]

short answer - YES

I like the lens, thanks to Ernie, its an excellent lens for traveling, but to use it for work - I have better ones for specialist purposes. This is great as an all rounder though.

Thanks for that ..... it looks like the best compromise so far - but at the price it's a decision not to be made lightly (for me anyway). I'll probably cogitate a bit longer yet!

[ravescar]

Short answer is Yes,

but note that 24-105 won't be that great on a crop sensor, which 40D is, it is better suited for a Full frame.
depends on shooting habit 24-105 may be a more useful range than the 28-135 as it is slightly wider.

I reckon it is possible that 28-135 with full frame camera like 5DMk1, or MkII would make more difference than 24-105 with 40D IQ wise.

Also if you are after IQ on 40D, Tamron 24-75 may be a good contender than 24-105 will be due to DoF and Optic.
If you don't miss the extra Reach and IS.

[EdZz]

What was the rough price of the lenses bobt?
And where were you looking to buy it?

Cheers

[bobt]

What was the rough price of the lenses bobt?
And where were you looking to buy it?
Cheers

Looks like between $1100 and $1400 depending on where I go and what level of risk I take!

DD Photographics have it for $1349 plus shipping but there have been cheaper options. It's a lot of money though, so I'd want to be happy that the IQ improvement was going to be better.

[aycee]

It sort of depends what you are going to use them for and how much money you have...all the good lenses from Canon are the L series...any more that about a 3 times zoom there will be degrade one lens doesnt suit all

if money wasnt to much of an worry and being able to handle 2 lenses i would go for the 24 x 70 2.8L which is a marvellous lens and the 70 x 200 either 2.8 L or 4 L (cheaper) to cover the bases in that range..the 2.8 is much faster that is all...these are serious lenses for serious photos
regards Alan!..i am not a camera or lens buff either..just a novice

[jeffde]

DD Photographics have it for $1349 plus shipping but there have been cheaper options. It's a lot of money though, so I'd want to be happy that the IQ improvement was going to be better.

You will never use the old lens again. after buying the 70-200 and the 24-105 my kit lenses haven't been off the shelf (except when i dust which isn't very often)

[SirNobicus]

You will never use the old lens again. after buying the 70-200 and the 24-105 my kit lenses haven't been off the shelf (except when i dust which isn't very often)

Same here, I have now updated to a pair of 5Ds and when shooting it is the 24-105 and 70-200 combo most of the time. Occasionally there will be a prime in the mix, but as general rule of thumb the 24-105 never comes off the camera.

[bobt]

i would go for the 24 x 70 2.8L which is a marvellous lens and the 70 x 200 either 2.8 L or 4 L (cheaper) to cover the bases in that range..the 2.8 is much faster that is all...these are serious lenses for serious photos

Yeah ... I was thinking that, until I read a lot of reviews that said that the IS was far more valuable than the extra stop - both would be nice!
I have the 70-200, but it's a bit heavy and cumbersome for day-to-day use.

You will never use the old lens again. after buying the 70-200 and the 24-105 my kit lenses haven't been off the shelf (except when i dust which isn't very often)

That's exactly the combo I thought I'd go for - it's just that the 28-135 is already a good lens and similar range, and I wasn't sure what the difference would be. It's not like one of the crappy kit lenses.

Same here, I have now updated to a pair of 5Ds and when shooting it is the 24-105 and 70-200 combo most of the time. Occasionally there will be a prime in the mix, but as general rule of thumb the 24-105 never comes off the camera.

Did either of you go from the 28-135 ? Or did you go straight from a kit lens straight to the "L". ??

[JM Tran]

That's exactly the combo I thought I'd go for - it's just that the 28-135 is already a good lens and similar range, and I wasn't sure what the difference would be. It's not like one of the crappy kit lenses.

actually u will find that the 28-135 isnt that much better than the kit lens, it basically is the 17-85mm for cropped sensors - sharing same optics and build quality. While it serves ok as a general purpose lens, it still leaves a lot to be desired.

While I used mine on full frame cameras which are more demanding on the resolving ability of a lens and more taxing on corner to corner sharpness, it will be a bit better sharpness wise on an APSC sensor as the poor borders are cropped already.

[bigdazzler]

Tamron 24-75 may be a good contender

no such thing .. 28-75 2.8

[ravescar]

no such thing .. 28-75 2.8

I stand corrected!