# Where's the competition for the 24-105?



## androiduk (Aug 19, 2013)

As I get ready to buy the 6D with the 24-105 lens I'm wondering why none of the other manufacturers are offering a mid range quality zoom, maybe something like a high quality 18-135. Canon seems to have had this segment to themselves for a long time and I'm a little worried the 24-105 is "outdated". Am I justified in thinking that and is there anything on the horizon from other manufacturers?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Aug 19, 2013)

Probably hard to compete. The 3rd party vendors generally try to produce lenses that address gaps in Canon's lineup or are similar to an existing lens but at a lower price point. The 24-105L is an excellent lens, and adds as low as $500 to some kits.


----------



## weixing (Aug 20, 2013)

Hi,
IMHO, 24-105 F4L will not be updated if it's still a kit lens. I think when the 24-70 F4L fully replace 24-105 F4L as the new kit lens, then 24-105 F4L will be updated.

Have a nice day.


----------



## ishdakuteb (Aug 20, 2013)

I do not know where is the competition of this lens since it is, IMO, so good with its price (bought it new for less than $750). Wish that there is 24-105mm f/2.8 IS... Below is an image that I snapped in front of my friend house:

Note: Image was post processed to display with light box panel. Took it before dark, around 7PM and handheld with 5d mark iii, 24-105mm, 1/8 of shutter, f/8 and iso 3200. That is the reason why I am loving IS


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 20, 2013)

this used to be expensive, but then it was packaged with every 5d mkiii and 6d and it became too plentiful. supply and demand. in all honesty, it is a really good lens. sure I would love to shoot at f2.8, but it is easily a great value at 750 and at 660 people should jump at the chance. yes there is some distortion, but that is what Lightroom is for.


----------



## jdramirez (Aug 20, 2013)

and there are super zooms by tam r on and sigma, as well as 24-70's, but at this point, I think it would be difficult to sell a f4 24-105 third party and still be able to make money.

msrp isn't the real price with this lens and everyone knows it.


----------



## tomscott (Aug 20, 2013)

Its a brilliant lens, lightweight great range. Stuck to my camera most of the time.

Its not as sharp as other Ls but theres nothing with this range in a standard zoom, 24-70mm is heavy with modern cameras you can shoot higher with the same noise so F4 is not a problem gives ok subject isolation and good bokeh.


----------



## Jim O (Aug 20, 2013)

androiduk said:


> As I get ready to buy the 6D with the 24-105 lens I'm wondering why none of the other manufacturers are offering a mid range quality zoom, maybe something like a high quality 18-135. Canon seems to have had this segment to themselves for a long time and I'm a little worried the 24-105 is "outdated". Am I justified in thinking that and is there anything on the horizon from other manufacturers?



It's still a great lens to "carry around" if you don't know what you might encounter. A bit more barrel distortion on the wide end than I like, but easily fixed in post. It's a great bargain in the kit for an extra $500.

As for making an 18-135 lens, and making it *well*, that would be expensive. The zoom ratio is that much higher.

Before Canon updates the 24-105 they may update one of the other lenses in their "f/4 L" series. The 17-40 is a few years older, and the 300 IS is _really_ old (though still a good performer, it could use updated IS at the very least).


----------



## mhvogel.de (Aug 20, 2013)

androiduk said:


> ... I'm a little worried the 24-105 is "outdated"...


the 24-105 is a good lens, for a very reasonable price (it's on my camera more often then the 24-70): go for it, especially with the highISO capabilities of the 6D.
stop watching the horizons, it only confuses and delays desicions.
have fun taking photos

mv


----------



## John (Aug 20, 2013)

i have the 24-105 and love the lens. it is very versatile and i use it more than my 24-70. it is an excellent lens. it is what i would call my walk-around lens. i have used it for portrait and group work as well and liked the results every time.


----------



## Wildfire (Aug 20, 2013)

androiduk said:


> I'm a little worried the 24-105 is "outdated"



It's not. As an owner of the 6D + 24-105L combo let me reassure you, it's a fantastic lens; the perfect all-rounder lens with top notch image quality.

Better lenses are available but you will be spending much more money and/or sacrificing focal range.


----------



## sandymandy (Aug 20, 2013)

Theres no announcement for an update and even if there was an announcement it would still take over 1 year for the newer version to be released. So nothing to worry. Lenses dont lose their value fast anyway. Some never


----------



## Stig (Aug 20, 2013)

+1 happy with 6D and 24-105


----------



## jhanken (Aug 20, 2013)

Canon has spoken with the release of the 24-70 f/4L IS, and I suspect the 24-105 is an evolutionary dead end. Too bad, I find I use the 70-105 part of the range fairly often. But don't sweat it either way, the currently available lens is a great every day lens that will serve you well, especially for the price that it is available at today.

BTW, in my experience the 18-xxx ranges are almost exclusively for APS-C sensors, 18 being an effective 29mm on a Canon APS-C body.


----------



## 7enderbender (Aug 20, 2013)

I have the 24-105. Bought it as a "kit" with my 5DII. I go back and forth on it. I have absolutely no complaints about the optical quality. Not as sharp as my 135 for instance but plenty sharp for most applications.

My issue with it is (and why I still sometimes regret not buying the original 24-70 back then) that it's not working for me as the "general purpose" lens it is intended as. As a "walk around" I now almost always resort to my 50mm or bring the 50 and the 135. The 24-105 is simply an issue because it's f/4.

That being said - instead of parting with it or swapping it for a used 24-70 (version 1) I find that I like it for three applications: a) for the rare instances where I want a wide angle lens it makes for a decent substitute b) it works very well as a studio-setting portrait lens especially when working under time pressure/antsy subjects and c) for live music/stage/event photography.

Especially for the latter the IS is working surprisingly well (with flash or without), the extended zoom range can come in very handy at times and uber-sharpness is not really a need there necessarily. I start out with it for that kind of stuff just to cover the basics before I move to the primes to get some of the prettier stuff.

But with that in mind it really makes it more of a (quite useful) specialty lens and not a general use/walk-around lens. YMMV.

While on the subject: the 24-70 f/4 doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever to me. I simply don't get it.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Aug 20, 2013)

It's so good, it made me sell my 24-70 f/2.8 MkI


----------



## duydaniel (Aug 20, 2013)

The competitor to 24-105 is the Nikon 24-120


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Aug 20, 2013)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> IMHO, 24-105 F4L will not be updated if it's still a kit lens. I think when the 24-70 F4L fully replace 24-105 F4L as the new kit lens, then 24-105 F4L will be updated.
> 
> Have a nice day.



I'm pretty sure the 24-70 f/4 IS IS the update.


----------



## 7enderbender (Aug 20, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> The competitor to 24-105 is the Nikon 24-120



Now, watch your language or we'll have to come and clean your potty mouth with soap...


----------



## rs (Aug 20, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> The competitor to 24-105 is the Nikon 24-120


True. Both affordable, constant f4 aperture, stabilised lenses. Very comparable sharpness between them, with a slight edge to Canon. However, that Nikon lens at the wider end displays the typical Nikon chromatic aberration - no wonder Nikon implemented in-camera correction for CA before Canon with lenses like that.

With both the major DSLR manufacturers making lenses of the same ilk, when are any of the third party manufacturers going to join the frame, or even better, extend the range beyond Nikon's offering? Something along the lines of a compact 24-135/4 with stabilisation, weather sealing and good image quality wouldn't go amiss.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Aug 20, 2013)

sandymandy said:


> Theres no announcement for an update and even if there was an announcement it would still take over 1 year for the newer version to be released. So nothing to worry. Lenses dont lose their value fast anyway. Some never



The 24-105 lost its value fast though recently. It went from $850-1300 to $500-700 pretty quickly a while back. Of course that was a long time from introduction.

That said, I think it has had it's big price drop at this point and it probably doesn't have much room to go below the $500 kit add on, $650 split kit new pricing it is at now.

And the Canon replacement for it is already out, the 24-70 f/4 IS.

You can get the much better 24-70 f/4 IS for the old 24-105 price now and the Tamron for the very high side of the old price of the 24-105 if you want better performance (24-105 was always among the least impressive of the L class lenses optically, although very convenient with wide range, fast AF and IS, but optically it was fairly weak on FF especially at the ends) or the 24-70 II for well more than the 24-105 ever cost even at intro.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Aug 20, 2013)

7enderbender said:


> While on the subject: the 24-70 f/4 doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever to me. I simply don't get it.



Why not? It's no more costly than the 24-105 used to be a little while back. It has much improved optical quality. Improved IS. It's smaller and lighter.


----------

