Never ever try a PRIME lens.. Going back to a ZOOM, you get too obsessed w. IQ

gaul wrote:

Hello,

My ZOOM on a Full-Frame, Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM is certainly no match for a F/2.8 zoom, but it's supposedly a very popular lens, used by pros and amateurs to great results..

This EF 24-105 Mk ii .. as a reminder.. is an "L" lens after all..

BUT ..

As soon as I compare with ANY of my PRIMES, "L" or "non-L" lens, even these cases tech USM lenses... well, the IQ from ALL of my PRIMES will obliterate what I get from the ZOOM..

• EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM

VS

• EF 28 f/2.8 IS USM
• EF 35 f/2 IS
• EF 40mm f/2.8 STM
• EF 50 f/1.4 USM
• EF 100mm f/2.0 USM
• EF 135 f/2 L

All of these PRIMES will absolutely smash the ZOOM at DETAIL level at least

To be clear, I have thought I would be harsh and compare the PRIME at 200% rendering vs the ZOOM at 100% rendering..

Well, in every case, it's about what I get in terms of DETAILS..

i.e. my EF 135 F2 on the same scene at 200% on my screen shows even more detail than than EF 24-105 at 100%

Is this my copy of this Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM?? or is this expected?

Only good result from my ZOOM, the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS II USM outputs a very good colour rendition.. And yes, if you keep the image small, it does look pleasant enough.. Still, now I have done these comparisons, cannot force myself to come back to my ZOOM ...

Really going to turn into a "Prime snob" I think
Thanks for your feedback, rgds, Gaul

The foot mobile will force you back.

Primes are generally sharper but one has conceded range so the foot focus wheel has to kick in and getting great composition with a foot focus is much harder than a zoom frame.

When I was younger, I would head out with the F 135 and while I came back with great shots - I missed many more  because I can't reframe street fast enough on foot or at public events - a set stage like a gym mat wrestling match is ok.

So I am with you but we have to pack the zooms too and that will eradicate all primesnobitis