# EF 24-105 F4L - Normal or Issue



## Maui5150 (Dec 5, 2011)

So I just got the 24 - 105 to replace my EF-S 18-135.

First time dealing with RytherCamera, and despite the hard push on accessories when I needed to upgrade my shipping, overall arrived fine... White Box special which I would have preferred to know about up front, but New is New and at $900, not too bad

I still have not learned how to "test" a lens, but gave it a 5 minute look over, all elements look clean, AF seems quick and accurate, nothing seems loose....

The only one thing that concerns me is the zoom feels firm. It is not tight, but compared to my 70-200 F4L Non-IS just seems like there is a small degree more needed to turn the ring, and there is a tiny bid more sound when turning the ring compared to the 70-200. Have a full warranty from Canon, but looking to more experienced folks as to if this is normal, a "feature" of the lens, or a sign of slightly poorer build that should be sent in for servicing. 

Thanks


----------



## KacperP (Dec 5, 2011)

Have you read
http://www.canonrumors.com/tech-articles/how-to-test-a-lens/
??


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2011)

I'd say it's normal. While I don't have a 70-200/4 non-IS, my 24-105mm lens has substantially more resistance on the zoom ring than my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. The 24-105 that I have is actually my second copy (I bought one used, then sold it and got a new one for even money when buying my 5DII kit, although there was nothing wrong with the first), and it was the same. Comparing to the EF-S 17-55mm, the 24-105mm zoom also has a little more resistance. Consider - it's an extending design, and it's weather-sealed - that means there's an o-ring/brush at the base of the zoom extension, so there's extra friction to overcome compared to a non-extending zoom or a non-sealed extending zoom. That o-ring is also the reason for the 'swishing' sound as you zoom the lens.


----------



## JR (Dec 5, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> I'd say it's normal. While I don't have a 70-200/4 non-IS, my 24-105mm lens has substantially more resistance on the zoom ring than my 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II. The 24-105 that I have is actually my second copy (I bought one used, then sold it and got a new one for even money when buying my 5DII kit, although there was nothing wrong with the first), and it was the same. Comparing to the EF-S 17-55mm, the 24-105mm zoom also has a little more resistance. Consider - it's an extending design, and it's weather-sealed - that means there's an o-ring/brush at the base of the zoom extension, so there's extra friction to overcome compared to a non-extending zoom or a non-sealed extending zoom. That o-ring is also the reason for the 'swishing' sound as you zoom the lens.



Neuro, sorry I am off topic here a bit but when you use your 24-105 f4 on your 5d mkII, do you still have good AF using only the center point AF since it is a 2.8 sensitive point on the 5DmkII? Again sorry if this is off topic but everytime i try a copy of the 24-105 and since I always use the single center point on my 5D to AF, I find I have a lot of shot not that sharp...


----------



## funkboy (Dec 5, 2011)

Maui5150 said:


> The only one thing that concerns me is the zoom feels firm. It is not tight, but compared to my 70-200 F4L Non-IS just seems like there is a small degree more needed to turn the ring, and there is a tiny bid more sound when turning the ring compared to the 70-200. Have a full warranty from Canon, but looking to more experienced folks as to if this is normal, a "feature" of the lens, or a sign of slightly poorer build that should be sent in for servicing.



I have the 24-105 & used to have a 70-200 f/4 no-IS. I recall the zoom on the 70-200 was particularly easy to work. Bear in mind that the 70-200 is an internally zooming lens whereas the 24-105 has a lot more glass & lens body to move when you turn the ring.

I'd say that as long as everything works to your expectations & nothing feels really out of place (like a scratching sound or something) then you're probably OK.

If you're really worried about it you could try out another example at a shop & see if they work the same....


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 5, 2011)

JR said:


> Neuro, sorry I am off topic here a bit but when you use your 24-105 f4 on your 5d mkII, do you still have good AF using only the center point AF since it is a 2.8 sensitive point on the 5DmkII? Again sorry if this is off topic but everytime i try a copy of the 24-105 and since I always use the single center point on my 5D to AF, I find I have a lot of shot not that sharp...



Yes, it delivers good focus with the center point. The 5DII's center point is an f/5.6 cross-type sensor with f/2.8-sensitivity only in one orientation. Mine needed a bit of AFMA.


----------



## Maui5150 (Dec 5, 2011)

@KacperP - I have read it, something I am still learning, and the biggest hurdle I am getting over is establishing reference points to what is normal in a particular lens. 

@neuroanatomist - Think you nailed it on the head. Makes sense that comparing an extendable barrel with weather sealing versus an internal fixed barrel that there would be a feel difference. The "swooshing" or what I was thinking of as an almost "corduroy" sound was the part that just sounded different to me compared to the EF-S. 

@funkyboy - I probably will still swing by a shop this weekend for a piece of mind and see how another one feels. 

Thanks for all of the feedback.


----------



## JR (Dec 5, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> JR said:
> 
> 
> > Neuro, sorry I am off topic here a bit but when you use your 24-105 f4 on your 5d mkII, do you still have good AF using only the center point AF since it is a 2.8 sensitive point on the 5DmkII? Again sorry if this is off topic but everytime i try a copy of the 24-105 and since I always use the single center point on my 5D to AF, I find I have a lot of shot not that sharp...
> ...



Ok thanks! I will try with AFMA, it is probably all that I was missing...


----------



## funkboy (Dec 5, 2011)

Maui5150 said:


> @funkyboy - I probably will still swing by a shop this weekend for a piece of mind and see how another one feels.



Just a note: I live pretty close to a few camera shops & do take advantage of the fact that they have physical cameras you can touch from time to time (I'm about to go look at a Fuji X10). While I don't usually make major purchases from them as the price vs. online shopping makes a big difference, I do try to do as much business as I can there for small stuff when the price difference doesn't matter so much. I also prefer them vs. online if I'm buying something 2nd hand, as they have guarantees on used stuff & you can check it out before you buy it.

Just bear in mind that it's in your interest to keep your local camera shop in business...


----------



## bchernicoff (Dec 5, 2011)

I have owned two copies. One had more resistance than the other. I preferred the one with more since the lens didn't extend on its own while walking around.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 5, 2011)

I'm wondering if your white box special has a warranty that Canon will honor. It may have been taken from a kit camera which is not authorized by Canon, or it could be a refurb.

I'd call Canon with the serial number and ask. Having a warranty card means nothing.


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 6, 2011)

yeah my zoom ring feels stiffer than my 70-200 f2.8 too I would say its to do with the extending nature of it

and as for weather sealing, dont get the lens and camera covered in iron ore it will get in side, its so fine. cost me $170 for the canon tech to pull it down and clean it all out from inside the focus ring 

something I was wondering is the sparkles at narrow apperture have a unique shape to them on this lens, my other lenses seem to be very pointy where as this one the flare out at the ends and look different? anyone else noticed this or is my lens strange.

I'll try post up a pic to demonstrate


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 6, 2011)

see the strange sparkles?


----------



## lethalwp (Dec 6, 2011)

wickidwombat said:


> see the strange sparkles?



The white mini sparkles are because of a long exposure, it is sensor related, not lens. It is normal for a sensor to have blown pixels (red, green, blue, or a composite like white) on long exposures ( +- > 20 seconds), how longer open, how more pixels are concerned.

If you have the same thing on a short exposure ( < 2 seconds), then it can be an issue, and you can take contact with your canon dealer for a possible repair


----------



## lethalwp (Dec 6, 2011)

wickidwombat said:


> see the strange sparkles?


Ok nvmd if your were talking about flare =)


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 6, 2011)

lethalwp said:


> wickidwombat said:
> 
> 
> > see the strange sparkles?
> ...



i know the sparkles on the lights are due to long exposure, the point being they look very different to the sharp pointed ones the 16-35 produces, I'm not refering to the flare i couldnt avoid that as a floodlight was down and to the left pointing almost directly at me and there wasn't really anywhere else to take the shot from, taken on a gorillapod with a 1D mk1 and the 24-105. i had the lens hood on but the flare was still quite bad. 

what i am refering to is how the sparkles diverge at the extents instead of converge, just wondering if its a trait of this lens or my copy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Dec 6, 2011)

How old is your lens? Canon has a Product Advisory for the 24-105mm for unacceptable 'divergent light rays' flare in lenses date coded UT1000 and prior.


----------



## takoman46 (Dec 6, 2011)

I have actually gone through two 24-105's and have noticed that the zoom ring on my second 24-105 was noticeably tighter than the first one I had owned. (The first one unfortunately got stolen when my home was burglarized). I don't think a lower tolerance on the zoom ring is a problem though. If anything, I would call it a good thing as long as operation is smooth. I also have noticed that over time, normal wear and tear takes it's toll on zoom and focus rings and they eventually get a little more loose (Not rattling or operating rough or anything...). I noticed this on my 70-200 f/2.8 IS, but when I sent it in to canon service just to do a routine cleaning, it returned nice and snug again. Not sure what they did... the invoice didn't say they had replaced any parts other than the rear weather seal on the seat of the lens and thoroughly cleaned the lens... Whatever the case, the service brought it back to factory spec as far as I can tell. So in my opinion, it is not an issue and tighter is better 8)


----------



## htjunkie (Dec 6, 2011)

I went from an EF-S 17-55mm on 7D to a 24-105mm on a 5DII, and I agree: the zoom ring is tight as hell. It's considerably harder to zoom in and out with the 24-105. Not to mention that the zoom ring is right against the body, and is fairly "thin" (no room for more than one finger at a time).


----------



## wickidwombat (Dec 7, 2011)

neuroanatomist said:


> How old is your lens? Canon has a Product Advisory for the 24-105mm for unacceptable 'divergent light rays' flare in lenses date coded UT1000 and prior.



a year or so old UZ0123 so not in the range but sounds like it could be the cause


----------



## 87vr6 (Dec 7, 2011)

wickidwombat said:


> they look very different to the sharp pointed ones the 16-35 produces,what i am refering to is how the sparkles diverge at the extents instead of converge, just wondering if its a trait of this lens or my copy.



I'm betting the two lenses have different shaped aperture blades/opening causing the different looking starbursts... There is likely nothing wrong with your lens.


----------

