# 24-105L II delayed until December, but the kit with it is in stock right now



## ahsanford (Nov 2, 2016)

Go figure -- I guess it's only delayed if you want the standalone lens SKU:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/News/News-Post.aspx?News=19184

- A


----------



## monkey44 (Nov 2, 2016)

Has anyone done a good in-field review of this lens? I've seen a few that the reviewer seems a little less than complete ... as if it came from Canon PR rather then from actual field use. Haven't seen any real world images either. 

Seems odd to that it only comes with a :kit: ... and at no discount. Maybe pushing the dual purchase instead of allowing sale of the lens itself.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 2, 2016)

monkey44 said:


> Has anyone done a good in-field review of this lens? I've seen a few that the reviewer seems a little less than complete ... as if it came from Canon PR rather then from actual field use. Haven't seen any real world images either.
> 
> Seems odd to that it only comes with a :kit: ... and at no discount. Maybe pushing the dual purchase instead of allowing sale of the lens itself.



People we tend to trust here -- TDP, LensTip, Photozone, LensRentals, etc. -- haven't gotten production versions to test, to my knowledge.

I expect reviews in the next few weeks. Carnathan @ TDP said he'd buy a 5D4 kit immediately if it let him review the lens any faster.

- A


----------



## mycanonphotos (Nov 2, 2016)

So where can we buy a broken kit white box version..?


----------



## YuengLinger (Nov 3, 2016)

Who has confidence, with the announced delay, in the kit lens?

And why would somebody so quickly sell a kit lens? Wouldn't there be at least a small loss to ebay it, even if it's just shipping and handling? I mean, if you buy the kit, wouldn't you want the new 24-105?


----------



## Ryananthony (Nov 3, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> Who has confidence, with the announced delay, in the kit lens?
> 
> And why would somebody so quickly sell a kit lens? Wouldn't there be at least a small loss to ebay it, even if it's just shipping and handling? I mean, if you buy the kit, wouldn't you want the new 24-105?



On my local Craigslist, there are so many 24-105 lenses for sale, many of which are brand new purchased as a kit. Similar to how some people will only use canon lenses, some people are only interested in f2.8 zooms. perhaps they could only purchase a 5div kit with the lens locally at this time. they think they have no use for the lens, since they have a collection already. I've seen this lots with the old version, so I figure it might be similar even though it is a new lens.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 3, 2016)

YuengLinger said:


> And why would somebody so quickly sell a kit lens? Wouldn't there be at least a small loss to ebay it, even if it's just shipping and handling? I mean, if you buy the kit, wouldn't you want the new 24-105?



Short answer: this happens due to impatience and people profiteering off of it.

1) This happens when the only way to get a body quickly is to buy a kit and they sell the lens immediately. Some people actually do this. If you already own a 24-70 f/2.8L II, you may never use that new 24-105.

2) Sometimes you can only get the lens via a kit (like right this moment!), and smart people recognize this and make a killing off of that fact from people desperate to get their new lens.

- A


----------



## monkey44 (Nov 3, 2016)

How does one "make a killing" off this lens ?? It's no discount if you buy it separate - unless someone wants it sooooooooooooo bad, they'll pay a premium over the retail.


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 3, 2016)

monkey44 said:


> How does one "make a killing" off this lens ?? It's no discount if you buy it separate - unless someone wants it sooooooooooooo bad, they'll pay a premium over the retail.



^^ That ^^. That is 100% happening. See my prior link -- they were selling the 24-105L II for $1,499!

Also, it's a faster way to get the product altogether if your region of the world doesn't get that product yet.

Later -- as the product matures into its mid-lifecycle -- splitting it out becomes a margins game for 3rd party resellers, who buy kits and flip both components separately for a slight (slight!) savings over B&H, Amazon, etc. but that's a very foolish move for consumers, especially for a $3k+ item that I believe would not be covered by warranty.

There's a massive ecosystem of people doing this, and I simply avoid it unless it's a < $50 commodity item like a hood or lens cap.

- A


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 3, 2016)

There is definitely a profit for dealers to split up a kit. They get the kit wholesale, and pay less for the lens that way than a stand-alone costs them. Since its hard to get, they can ask full price for the kit lens.


----------



## monkey44 (Nov 3, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> monkey44 said:
> 
> 
> > How does one "make a killing" off this lens ?? It's no discount if you buy it separate - unless someone wants it sooooooooooooo bad, they'll pay a premium over the retail.
> ...



Yes, I saw the link - and checked retail for each products ... you're probably right about the areas that don't receive good retail options. Holds true for most products that folks "need" and can't easily order or buy. But, I'd never pay over retail for a 'likely non-warranty" product at that cost, not even at a savings because a failure often costs more in revenue than the savings. And, I still wonder about re-branding and fakes sometimes too, as the recourse for fraud in those same areas is likely nil ...


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 3, 2016)

monkey44 said:


> Yes, I saw the link - and checked retail for each products ... you're probably right about the areas that don't receive good retail options. Holds true for most products that folks "need" and can't easily order or buy. But, I'd never pay over retail for a 'likely non-warranty" product at that cost, not even at a savings because a failure often costs more in revenue than the savings. And, I still wonder about re-branding and fakes sometimes too, as the recourse for fraud in those same areas is likely nil ...



In short, don't spend more than $X on eBay for photographic equipment unless you do it sufficiently frequently that _losing_ $X in one fraudulent transaction doesn't erase all the money you saved at eBay over the course of the year.

For me, who might buy one lens a year and one body in 5-6 years, my frequency of purchasing is so low that X is about $100 for me. If you buy gear all the time, your threshold for risk might be higher.

- A


----------



## monkey44 (Nov 3, 2016)

ahsanford said:


> monkey44 said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I saw the link - and checked retail for each products ... you're probably right about the areas that don't receive good retail options. Holds true for most products that folks "need" and can't easily order or buy. But, I'd never pay over retail for a 'likely non-warranty" product at that cost, not even at a savings because a failure often costs more in revenue than the savings. And, I still wonder about re-branding and fakes sometimes too, as the recourse for fraud in those same areas is likely nil ...
> ...



luckily, we live in USA, and buy either from B&H or Adorama, sometimes my local shop, until it closed, and occasionally Amazon - never ebay. So, always buy Canon from authorized source. We don't buy often, and always keep equipment as long as practical - take good care of it in the field.

Am waiting now to see if the 24-105 lens upgrade it worth it. Otherwise, will figure something out between 16-35 and 70-200. I shoot a lot of candid shots, work mostly in the outdoors (nature / sports) and like the overlap, as opposed to the 24-70, but may go that way if the 24-105 upgrade is 'mediocre'... that 24-105 spread is great as a walk-around tho'. That extra 35m is nice on the long end in many "candid" cases.


----------



## Ian K (Nov 9, 2016)

Full retail box version of the new Canon EF 24-105 f/4L IS II USM collected from store yesterday. They are definitely starting to ship to pre-order customers.


----------



## LesC (Nov 15, 2016)

A positive review here: https://www.martinbaileyphotography.com/2016/11/07/canon-ef24-105mm-f4l-is-ii-lens-review-podcast-548/


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 15, 2016)

LesC said:


> A positive review here: https://www.martinbaileyphotography.com/2016/11/07/canon-ef24-105mm-f4l-is-ii-lens-review-podcast-548/



Aware, thx. Mr. Bailey claims the 24-105L II is marginally sharper than *the 24-70 f/2.8L II*, which has many people not taking his review too seriously. (That's against all common sense for the price point, the realisities of a 3x zoom vs. a 4.5x zoom, etc.)

A far more established reviewer (TDP) is still working on his writeup, but his IQ samples tell a very, very different story:

24-70 f/2.8L II vs. 24-105 f/4L IS II @ 24mm f/4:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=2&LensComp=1072&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

24-70 f/2.8L II vs. 24-105 f/4L IS II @ 70mm f/4:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=787&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=4&API=2&LensComp=1072&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=3&APIComp=0

The above two comparisons are what most folks expected would happen, but this comparison has a lot of folks scratching their heads:

24-105 f/4L IS I vs. 24-105 f/4L IS II @ 24mm f/4:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=355&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1072&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

24-105 f/4L IS I vs. 24-105 f/4L IS II @ 105mm f/4:
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=355&Camera=979&Sample=0&FLI=5&API=0&LensComp=1072&CameraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=5&APIComp=0


That the former version appears to outperform the II version is a jaw-dropper. Of course, I await more testing, reviews, etc., but I'm going to bet the verdict will fall much closer to TDP's read of things (meh) vs. _outperforming Canon's flagship professional standard zoom._ That's unreasonable to expect in a 'kit' FF zoom with a larger FL multiplier in a considerably lower price point.

- A


----------



## LesC (Nov 15, 2016)

Think we need to see a few reviews before we can form an informed opinion.

I do wonder how much variation there is between copies of the same lenses though; I have the EF24-70 F2.8L II & whilst I find it OK I've always felt a little underwhelmed with it. Judging by reviews maybe I do have a poorer copy. Unfortunately for most people you'll never really know unless you sell & get another...


----------



## ahsanford (Nov 15, 2016)

LesC said:


> Think we need to see a few reviews before we can form an informed opinion.
> 
> I do wonder how much variation there is between copies of the same lenses though; I have the EF24-70 F2.8L II & whilst I find it OK I've always felt a little underwhelmed with it. Judging by reviews maybe I do have a poorer copy. Unfortunately for most people you'll never really know unless you sell & get another...



Wonder no longer, there is a tool to review LensRentals' OLAF test platform data at TDP:

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/MTF.aspx?Lens=787&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&CT=VAR

Choose variance in the pull-down. Play with focal length and your score will change -- for instance, the 24-70 f/2.8L II is more consistent copy-to-copy than at 70mm.

- A


----------



## james75 (Nov 15, 2016)

Geez, what a bummer if the updated version can't outperform the original even if only marginally. Guess we'll have to wait for a few more reviews to come in to really know for sure. if this is the case, I can then turn my attention to either putting my money towards the 6dmarkii or a different lens.


----------



## tron (Nov 16, 2016)

If the later edition is outperformed in IQ by the former one they can delay it until any December they want (2016, 2017,2018...) ;D

In fact they can delay it until 24-105 f/4L III ;D ;D

Assuming the version III will not be worse than the II ;D ;D ;D


----------



## H. Jones (Nov 16, 2016)

I do find it kinda strange that they've held back the general release but released it in a kit. Got to play with the 24-105 F/4L IS II at a local camera store while checking out their 5D Mark IV, and the II is ergonomically pretty great. Looks great and feels great. Seemed a bit better than the original but I couldn't really tell. Definitely going to be keeping my 24-70mm F/2.8L II though.


----------



## candyman (Nov 18, 2016)

Finally I was able to test the new 24-105L II (basic testing - I am not an expert in that area) 
For the record: it was not a kit-lens but separate lens that comes in the original Canon box.
The production date is October 2016 (4603xxxx67xx)


MK II
I see some improvement in mid- and corner sharpness at 24mm (f4) over the original version
Vignetting at 24mm (f4) slightly worse than the original version

Distortion at 24mm (f4) same as original version
At 105mm (f4) the center sharpness is less than the original version
At 105mm (f4) the vignetting is worse than the original version
At 105mm (f4) the CA is pretty much the same


The Canon dealer was surprised as well about these results. It is possible that I got a bad copy. They just had one copy so I could not compare with another MKII. Delivery is still difficult.
Somehow I think that the first batch has a QA problem after reading on the internet about other comparisons.


I decided not to replace my orginal 24-105. I will wait a couple of months into 2017 and try again with newer batches.


----------



## tron (Nov 18, 2016)

candyman said:


> Finally I was able to test the new 24-105L II (basic testing - I am not an expert in that area)
> For the record: it was not a kit-lens but separate lens that comes in the original Canon box.
> The production date is October 2016 (4603xxxx67xx)
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info. I believe though that's just that and there is not a QA problem (but of course if you can check back in 2017 you are more than welcome to do so...)


----------

