Canon 24‑105mm f4.0 L IS USM

Admiral Huddy · 6 Mar 2014 at 09:57

This seems like a good deal.. What do you think?

http://www.cameraworld.co.uk/new-equipment/lenses/mid-range-zoom/canon-24-105mm-f4-0-l-is-usm.html

Would have thought this would have been f2.8 for an L lense though?

Admiral Huddy · 6 Mar 2014 at 10:19

Thanks

I currently have a tamron 17-50 f2.8 and whilst its not telephoto, I can see this being a useful addition to my kit

Admiral Huddy · 6 Mar 2014 at 11:58

D.P. said:
Seems pretty pointless if you ask me. As above, get one of the 70-200mm lenses if you want so ething longer. Don't see you would ever use a 24-105mm f/4 if you have a 17-50mm f/2.8.

I have a tamron 70mm - 300.

Just thought the 24-105 walk be a good lens for general walking around with.

thanks for advice

Admiral Huddy · 6 Mar 2014 at 13:05

Thanks paul11.

I guess it the kind of lens that rarely come off.

Admiral Huddy · 6 Mar 2014 at 14:39

Thanks for the advice D.P. I understand exactly what you are saying. Sometimes i find the limit 50mm but restrictive. I know it's not a lot having a lens without much swapping seems ideal.

I need to think about my next year, when my course concentrates more on portraits. I've been told that 85-105 is the sweet-spot for such genre.

Admiral Huddy · 6 Mar 2014 at 16:06

Thanks for the advice guys. My initial gut feeling was that tthe f4 was a bit ideal and indeed as you say a gloried kit lens. I guess I was taken by the fact this is an L type lens for the price so thanks for saving.

I'll certainly look at the 85 1.8

Admiral Huddy · 10 Mar 2014 at 12:05

D.P. said:
I also see too many people taken in by the marketing that FF bodies, L glass, red/gold rings, nano coatings suddenly gives you magic abilities and instantly turns you pro. L glass in particular is really misunderstood, it mostly just refers to build quality and price rather than anything particularly relevant to an amateur photographer like image quality, aperture, etc.

I get this impression.