Reading mode: Light Dark

I'd love to see a 24-105 vs 28-135 Is Comparision

Go to last post
To be honest, for me personally, the color rendition is very important. I still see a big difference in the color rendition of the "L" lenses. I've seen it in images here with the 24-105 - and I certainly see it with my 17-40. That's one reason I got it - and haven't regretted it. :-)

Not to mention that I need the IS. getting to be that age, you know.

Maria
--
http://mariaimage.smugmug.com/

 
Oh ya... sorta forgot about that.... but I was really amazed to see the MTF for the new 24-105.... not impressive at all at the wide end if you are using a full frame sensor.....

... and, once again, we see the benefit you get by using a cropped sensor, and only capturing the middle portion of the image. Many average lenses do not look too bad out to 13mm diagonally.....

--
http://dogluver.smugmug.com
 


in comparison to the 24-105L at 24mm:



--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
Thanks a lot indeed for the comparison!
Exactly what I was longing for, I'd love to get a 24-105 but
rather if it was 1/4 or at least 1/5 cheaper.

greetings, Wick
 
Wickblau said:
Exactly what I was longing for, I'd love to get a 24-105 but
rather if it was 1/4 or at least 1/5 cheaper.
Click to expand...
Who wouldn't? Alas, Canon is in business to make money, and they will charge whatever they judge the market will bear, and this lens promises to be a very popular one. But here's a way to rationalize the purchase and even think you're getting a bargain: the only lens that's available in IS and non-IS versions is the 70-200L, and the IS version costs $600 more. Subtract $600 from the price of the 24-105L IS and the cost of the lens without IS becomes about $600. For an L series lens of this range, that's a bargain!

Bob
 
Here in Austria + Germany (don't know about prices elsewhere) you really can make a bargain by buying the 5d-set incl. 24-105, then sell the new 5d-body a bit cheaper than lowest net-price and you have the lens for 3/4 of the single price
 
Interesting idea, but here in Canada that wouldn't work, because you'd have to pay tax of 15% on the camera as well as the lens, and when you sold the camera you would not get that back, so that even if you sold the camera at full retail you'd lose out. No, I have to go with the rationalization that I'm getting a bargain on the IS, and, besides, I'm saving money by not buying the 5D :-)

Bob
 
lx200 said:
The first one sucks...
Click to expand...
The first one is one of the best moderate wide-angle lenses in existance - the 35/1.4L.
lx200 said:
but that does not mean the second is
"Awesome". I think the 2nd is great on a 1.6 crop sensor and very
good on full frame.
Click to expand...
It looks pretty good to me. Wide-angle lenses always look like this on their MTF charts.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
i can only say that people who bought lens at 80 per cent can go ahead
and i will pay 20 per cent more for warranty

the only way i will buy a second hand lens

are those zeiss manual lens which produce superior result at half the price of L lens.
 
singveld said:
i can only say that people who bought lens at 80 per cent can go ahead
and i will pay 20 per cent more for warranty
Click to expand...
I just sold 5 of them for about 80% of new.
singveld said:
the only way i will buy a second hand lens
are those zeiss manual lens which produce superior result at half
the price of L lens.
Click to expand...
That's certainly your right.

--
Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top