Is the 5dmkiii kit lens (24-105) worth picking up?

[ronlane]

Skip the 50mm as it's pretty blah on a FF body. I hardly ever use mine.

That's a little odd. 50mm was probably the most popular focal length for 35mm film cameras....for 30-40 years.

Personally, I use my 50mm a lot more on full frame, than I ever used it on a crop camera.

But you're a FF snob {I'm joking people, NO hate mail}

 

[runnah]

50mm was probably the most popular focal length for 35mm film cameras....for 30-40 years.

That's why it's boring.

 

[Derrel]

Canon considers the 24-105 f/4 L IS USM to be "the" standard kit zoom for their FF bodies...they started using it when I bought my 5D; they stayed with it on the 5D Mark II; they still offer it kitted with the 5D Mark III. Why???

24/28/35/45/50/58/70/75/85/90/105...in there are some "classic" lens focal lengths like; also are some of the cult faves, like 45, and 58, and 75 and 90...

The 24-105mm range gives you wide (24), moderate wide (28); semi-wide (35);semi-normal (45); normal (50); selective walk-around normal (58 or 60); bottom-range-of-tele-zoom tele length at 70mm; short tele at 85mm; and finally at the top end, the classic Nikon length, 105mm, or one-oh-five.

You basically get a lot of focal length flexibility, Image Stabilizer, constant max of f/4, and a solidly-made lens. I just sold mine off after eight years, last week. It's a very,very versatile lens on FF.

It might not seem like it, but 45mm versus 50mm is a significant difference; same with 50mm versus 58mm or 60mm, but those are actually pretty significantly different lens lengths at normal, under 20-foot distances! A 50mm is a normal lens by traditional sales practices, whereas about 43mm is more close to the technical definition of "the diagonal of the frame normal lens length" definition.

I think you DO WANT the 24-105mm L IS USM in your FF Canon kit, for sure.

 

[jsecordphoto]

I love my 24-105. I didn't think I would like it as much as I do, but the kit with the 6d wasn't too much more than the body only so I grabbed it. Nice and sharp

 

[robbins.photo]

Skip the 50mm as it's pretty blah on a FF body. I hardly ever use mine.

That's a little odd. 50mm was probably the most popular focal length for 35mm film cameras....for 30-40 years.

Personally, I use my 50mm a lot more on full frame, than I ever used it on a crop camera.

But you're a FF snob {I'm joking people, NO hate mail}

I was just going to save myself some time and forward you all the hatemail I get. Oh well.. sigh.

 

[JustJazzie]

English humour but the original 5D does get very dusty, 50mm is great to walk round with on FF, i still have my 5D when i use it it has the 24-70F2.8 fitted, i'm thinking of getting an adapter that will auto focus and i can change aperture for my A7 to use because the colours they produce on the A7 are far better than the 5D 70-200F4 @ F4 cheap adapter on A7

well, we don't call it English humor in our house, but now that I know what to call it, I think you'd fit in over here. DH and I talk like this all the time, and I will shamefully admit that I've lost a few friends in real life due to my "English humor." Not every one can emotionally handle it, so I try to keep it between me and DH. I am so jealous that the a7 suits your needs, I desperately wanted that to be my camera!

$349 on B&H.

thank you! That's on on par with my emount 50mm, sounds like it would be worth the wait.

Canon considers the 24-105 f/4 L IS USM to be "the" standard kit zoom for their FF bodies...they started using it when I bought my 5D; they stayed with it on the 5D Mark II; they still offer it kitted with the 5D Mark III. Why??? 24/28/35/45/50/58/70/75/85/90/105...in there are some "classic" lens focal lengths like; also are some of the cult faves, like 45, and 58, and 75 and 90... The 24-105mm range gives you wide (24), moderate wide (28); semi-wide (35);semi-normal (45); normal (50); selective walk-around normal (58 or 60); bottom-range-of-tele-zoom tele length at 70mm; short tele at 85mm; and finally at the top end, the classic Nikon length, 105mm, or one-oh-five. You basically get a lot of focal length flexibility, Image Stabilizer, constant max of f/4, and a solidly-made lens. I just sold mine off after eight years, last week. It's a very,very versatile lens on FF. It might not seem like it, but 45mm versus 50mm is a significant difference; same with 50mm versus 58mm or 60mm, but those are actually pretty significantly different lens lengths at normal, under 20-foot distances! A 50mm is a normal lens by traditional sales practices, whereas about 43mm is more close to the technical definition of "the diagonal of the frame normal lens length" definition. I think you DO WANT the 24-105mm L IS USM in your FF Canon kit, for sure.

thanks Derrel! I was hoping this would be the answer, because assuming it does what I need it'd to for dirt biking, I keep my f4 that I had on the nikkor and then get time to decide what I need next.... A 70-200 f2.8 or a ?-300?..... I keep buying what I think I need, and then either my needs change- or I just don't know what I need till I need it. I'm afriad of spending $1500+ On a lens only to find out I need f2.8 or more telephoto. Kwim?

 

[runnah]

two things.

1. I think calling this lens a "kit lens" is doing it s disservice. It's a full blown L lens with great build quality and superb optics.

2. Look into the used market. As it is a "kit" lens most well-to-do type will sell it cheap so they can get the 2.8's.

lookie here, most are $400 off. find a reputable seller and save a bundle.
http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trk...canon+24-105mm+f/4l+is+usm&_sacat=0&_from=R40

 

[Derrel]

two things.

1. I think calling this lens a "kit lens" is doing it s disservice. It's a full blown L lens with great build quality and superb optics.

2. Look into the used market. As it is a "kit" lens most well-to-do type will sell it cheap so they can get the 2.8's.

lookie here, most are $400 off. find a reputable seller and save a bundle.
canon 24-105mm f/4l is usm | eBay

Well, the term "kit" has multiple meanings. In the UK, "kit" means "gear" or "equipment."

And when I bought my 5D and 24-105 L I bought "the kit" package, and payed $3,995 for the kit.

As in the

EOS 5D
Mark III
EF 24-105 F4 L IS USM Kit

You know, just EXACTLY the way Canon labels a boxed 5D series + this lens-----on every,single fu****g BOX sold in the English-speaking world.

Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III_EF24_105LIS.jpg

^^^^^^LOOK AT THE FRICKING BOX ^^^^^^^^

See--the camera + that one lens is the entire "kit", or gear set, that a person needs. Like an emergency repair kit; or a first-aid kit; or a gun-cleaning kit; or my tool kit. "KIT", as in packaged together in ONE container. As in a set of ESSENTIAL, related items. As in "the kit lens" that Canon considers so essential they put them into kits and sell them, labelled as a kit.

 

[runnah]

Well, the term "kit" has multiple meanings. In the UK, "kit" means "gear" or "equipment."

Yes but the term "kit lens" has a bad rep, people think of it as a cheap add-on to entice buyers.

Just like how people think guy's with mustaches own at least one denim shirt and several well worn copies of victoria's secret catalogs.

 

[JustJazzie]

Well, the term "kit" has multiple meanings. In the UK, "kit" means "gear" or "equipment." And when I bought my 5D and 24-105 L I bought "the kit" package, and payed $3,995 for the kit. As in the EOS 5D Mark III EF 24-105 F4 L IS USM Kit You know, just EXACTLY the way Canon labels a boxed 5D series + this lens-----on every,single fu****g BOX sold in the English-speaking world. Canon_EOS_5D_Mark_III_EF24_105LIS.jpg ^^^^^^LOOK AT THE FRICKING BOX ^^^^^^^^ See--the camera + that one lens is the entire "kit", or gear set, that a person needs. Like an emergency repair kit; or a first-aid kit; or a gun-cleaning kit; or my tool kit. "KIT", as in packaged together in ONE container. As in a set of ESSENTIAL, related items. As in "the kit lens" that Canon considers so essential they put them into kits and sell them, labelled as a kit.

Yes but the term "kit lens" has a bad rep, people think of it as a cheap add-on to entice buyers. Just like how people think guy's with mustaches own at least one denim shirt and several well worn copies of victoria's secret catalogs.

I completely see both sides to this, which is why I posted! I know most kit Lens's are "junk" and I also know lots of lower quality lens get great user reviews because they don't have anything to compare it with. For instance, my 50mm emount is a "five star" lens. I thought to too, until I started noticing things, like the AWEFUL CA it gives, and the color rendering as compared to that nikkor 70-200 I test drove. But compared to the 18-200 emount I was using it IS a 5 star lens. And compared to what I was using before, in thought my 18-200 was a 4.5* lens.

Anyways, I was hoping some of you who had already made that comparison could help, and it seems you have! I am glad to hear that the 24-104 is not "kit lens" quality. I think I will go ahead and start with it, and then reassess my needs once I get a first hand understanding of the differences between ff and aspc in real world situations.

Thanks a bunch!

 

[Derrel]

I'm sorry runnah, but I have grown tired of your constant, incessant "needling" of me anytime I say anything you perceive as being even remotely negative about your new favorite brand, Canon. Seriously, the term "kit" does not mean it's bad-quality. Would you refuse life-saving first aid because the EMT used a first aid "kit" on you?

I spent $3,995 of my own cash money to buy a Canon 5D "kit". I used to work at a camera store: manufacturers package best-sellers in "kit" packages. It has been done for years.

Canon labels every English-speaking country's 5D,5D-II,and 5D-II boxes that have a 24-105 L inside with the word KIT right on the package.

The 24-105 L IS USM is soooooooooo pentiful on e-Bay and second hand because it has been "kitted" in every single market: Europe,Asia, North America, South America, Australia/New Zealand.

As a guy who was a top camera salesman for a while, let me tell you why "kits" are made: They bring dealers higher profit margins, and they give customers a ready-made "kit", like it says on the freaking BOXES CANON MAKES UP, so that buyers get what the UK calls, "a great piece of kit". A complete, ready-to-sell, all-in-one, pre-packaged "kit". Buyers will purchase a Canon or Nikon factory-made kit with confidence, KNOWING that the camera maker considers this and this to be a great "kit".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_24–105mm_lens

"The EF 24–105mm f/4.0L IS USM is an EF mount wide-to-telephoto zoom lens. It was introduced by Canon in 2005 to complement the well-regarded 17–40mm f/4L USM and 70–200mm f/4L USM. It is often included as the kit lens with the Canon 6D body."

My post above to Jazzie indicated I owned one of these for eight years, and I think it's a great lens option. It can be bought, brand new, with a body, in a kit. Canon itself considers the 24-105-L to be the kit lens pairing for the 5D-III and the 6D.

 

[runnah]

I'm sorry runnah, but I have grown tired of your constant, incessant "needling" of me anytime I say anything you perceive as being even remotely negative about your new favorite brand, Canon. Seriously, the term "kit" does not mean it's bad-quality. Would you refuse life-saving first aid because the EMT used a first aid "kit" on you?

First off, remotely negative? You blast Canon anytime you get the chance. Secondly a camera is just a tool to me, the brand is not that important. Just because you can't see past brands doesn't mean other's can't.

Secondly you and I both know the the 24-105 is magnitudes better than every other kit lens out there. My point was that lumping it in the kit lens bucket scares off people because of the bad reputation. I know it was offered as a kit lens, I am not stupid.

 

[bratkinson]

My EF 24-105 f4L IS was the upgrade for then favorite all-around lens, the EF-S 18-135 f3.5-5.6 on my 30D and 60D. It immediately became my most-used lens on the 60D, and now that I've upgraded to a 5D3, that camera, too. It's the main lens for all my work...indoor church events, trains, cityscapes, and vacations. I consider my other 3 lenses 'special situation' lenses, and together, they're mounted perhaps 30% of the time. In short, the 24-105 on the 5D3 is a perfect combination, in my book. Some may claim the 24-70 f2.8 L ii is a better lens, or maybe the new f4, but for price and size/weight considerations, the 24-105 is THE lens.

While there are those that pooh-pooh that it isn't the sharpest of the L lenses, with a little bit of sharpening in post, it'll clearly 'show off' that it's an L. Considering the price, it's also the lowest cost L zoom lens in the current Canon lens lineup (I think). Making it the 'kit' lens makes it an even better bargain.

And others will say that f4 is too slow. Baloney. The IS allows even my less than steady hands to get some great hand held shots, even at 1/30th if I have to go that slow. And rather than slow the shutter speed, I can easily crank up the ISO to 6400 on the 5D3 without any significant noise. So f4 doesn't become a problem unless I really want an extra thin DOF that f2.8 and faster can provide.

In short, go for it! However, I'd wait until they go on sale again to get the best price.

 

[JustJazzie]

However, I'd wait until they go on sale again to get the best price.

when does that usually happen?

 

[curtyoungblood]

I used a 24-105 for a few weeks about a month ago when my 24-70 2.8 mark I was in for some repairs. I was very impressed with it. I briefly considered getting one to use all the time instead of the 24-70. The focal length of the lens is a lot of fun and very versatile. It is also fairly light and produces excellent photos. You will not be disappointed.

the only nitpicks are that the zoom ring is a little stiff and the wide it is pretty condensed. By condensed I mean you don't turn very far to get from 24 to 35 so it can be tough to be super precise. I found that to be a minor issue.