Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens

[melsauto]

I recently purchased a EOS Rebel xti with a base lens.

I was thinking of Tamron but reading reviews i decided not to.
I am thinking of buying the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens.
Have any of you used this lense and what do you think of this lense.

Could you explain certain terminology like
What do the following mean.
1.Digital SLR with a high FOVCF
2.It is slightly long on a 1.6x body
3.A fixed f/2.8 minimum aperture makes this lens as fast as any Canon EF zoom lens.
4.Barrel distortion on the wide end
5.Vignetting is very well controlled

Thanks for your time and help.

 

[usayit]

1) Digital SLRs have a smaller sensor than the traditional 35mm film camera. As such, the field of view is affected. The Canon Rebel has a 1.6x crop factor. This means a photographer used to the 35mm field of view on a film camera (or full sized sensor) will have the same field of view as a 56mm (35x1.6) lens.
2) Because of the 1.6x crop factor the short end of the focal length has a field of view equivalent to that of 38mm (24x1.6). Some might find this too long for their taste. On the flip side, the 105mm focal length will end up longer which some photographers see as an advantage.
3) The 24-105mm f/4 doesn't have a f/2.8 maximum aperture (not minimum as lower number means larger aperture) it has a maximum aperture of f/4. Essentially, the lower the number the more light is "collected" which means the film plane can be exposed "faster". This essentially means that one can obtain a faster shutter speed with an f/2.8 lens as opposed to the f/4 lens. (I'm trying to keep the explanation simple.. I hope this all makes sense).
4) Wide angle focal lengths usually introduce distortions in the resulting image often easily seen by straight lines (walls) in the view. Wide angle lens optics usually try to limit or compensate. Wide angle zooms don't usually do as well correcting distortion as wide angle primes that are specifically designed for a single focal length.
5) Vignetting is also a "behavior" of wide angle lenses. Usually ends up with a photo that is darker (underexposed) at the corners and edges. Again... wide angle lenses try to compensate and correct. Primes (single focal lenses) do a better job than zooms because they designed specifically for a single focal length

 

[usayit]

Could you please post what Tamron you were considering? It is important in this discussion.

 

[usayit]

Finally.. I shoot with the Canon 24-105mm f/4L IS. It is a wonderful generally walk-around lens with excellent IQ for a zoom (ie.. I still prefer the IQ of primes). It has a good range and packs well. The built-in stabilization is handy. Think of this as the Utility Truck of Canon's high-end lenses.... I've seen a few journalists pack this lens with a few extra faster primes for low light situations.

This lens is often compared to the 24-70mm f/2.8L. This lens provides a faster aperture of f/2.8 at a cost of shorter focal range and extra weight. I also shot with this lens and it too has VERY good IQ but I ended up with the 24-105 since it fits my shooting style. This is the ex-de-facto wedding photographers Canon zoom. Think of this as the Sports car... fast (aperture) with a specific purpose.

Both lenses will seem to long on the short end of the focal range due to the 1.6x crop factor of your camera.

The reason why I would like to know the Tamron you were considering is that it would give us an idea of your budget and expectations (if you wanna add more it helps). Often people make the mistake of breaking their bank to try and get themselves into the best lens money can buy. Often, past customers have been disappointed since they expected HUGE LEAPs of improvements over another considered lens. Things to note:

* Photography is like food or wine. You develop an discriminating eye and taste. I couldn't tell the difference between $5 glass of wine from a $40 glass of wine... Some photogs couldn't tell the difference between a cheaper (not crappy) lens and a very expensive lens. Just as I would be disappointed that I spent $40 bucks on a glass of wine, those photogs end up disappointed that they spent $$$$ on a lens.
* Third party lenses are not bad, I repeat not bad. Many perform wonderfully. Also... all brands have good and bad lenses. This includes Canon and Nikon too. When I need a faster zoom, I default back to my grand-old Tamron with a f/2.8 aperture. It produces fine images. Many professionals shoot with Sigma and their work still shows quality.
* Lenses are a longer term investment.... so don't go the other way and buy crap now to save money. You'll just end up trading it in for something better later.

 

[melsauto]

Could you please post what Tamron you were considering? It is important in this discussion.

SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di LD Aspherical [IF] Macro

 

[melsauto]

Could you please post what Tamron you were considering? It is important in this discussion.

Actually i was looking at Tamron SP AF 180mm f/3.5 Di LD (IF) 1:1 Macro.

The other 2 lenses under consideration are
1.Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens
2. Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS

I dont mind spending the extra money if it is worth it.
This is what i read reviews about the above lenses

The Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens is the bread and butter wedding lens for many professional photographers. The 24-70mm focal length range allows a large group shot or a closeup picture of the bride without a lens change. At f/2.8, available light shots are possible in most churches (a high ISO setting will usually be required).

The 24-70 L is also the choice of many photojournalism style photographers. Indoor sports are often captured with this lens though the f/2.8 aperture can be marginal if the light is especially bad.

The 24-70 L makes a nice portrait lens - especially on a 1.6x FOVCF body. The zoom functionality makes capturing those quick frame-and-shoot situations (have any kids?) possible.

The Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens focuses close enough to take close-to-macro pictures. It will not take a 1:1 macro shot, but capturing the flowers around your house is one of this lens' capabilities.

The biggest downside of the 24-70 L (in my opinion) is it's size and weight. With its large lens hood, this lens is not small or light when used as a walk-around lens. I quickly got over this downside after reviewing my results.

All that said, I think the Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L USM Lens is one of the best Canon walk-around/all-purpose lens made. Be sure to read the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 L IS USM Lens review and if you are using an EF-S capable body, the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens review before making your decision.