Canon's dud?

I have had the 24-105 IS from Canon for about 5 years, and have to say its the worst lens I've worked with. It's soft, has no bokeh and the resulting images are immediately inferior to pictures taken from the 60mm, 10-22, 70-200 and even 100-400. However, going through some old images, I noticed that it wasn't always that bad. It seemed sharper in its younger days, but still unable to come near the sharp quality of the aforementioned lenses.

The result, fellow photographers, is that I'm about to embark on a 2 week photo holiday of India seriously contemplating leavin the weakest link at home. Ok, so I won't be covered from 22-70mm but I reckon that's a small price to pay for the danger of coming back with sub par images, not to mention the extra weight in my backpack. The idea is that when I get back from the holiday, I'll shop the blighter on eBay to pay for a 24-70mm. Would any of you risk going on a photo holiday without cover between 22-70? Admittedly, most of my time will be spent on safari where the trusty, glorious, Ak-47 of lenses (70-200mm) will never be far from reach.

So? Pray tell!

Just been to Rwanda with just a 50mm and I was almost always under-represented on the wide side. Made me realise how much one uses the wider end of the lens. I'd say rethink your decision.

On my last holiday I left my wide angle lens near a beach in Dubrovnik (whoever picked that one up had all his Christmases at once - it was an outstanding lens). Given that anything could happen to my other lenses, I think I'll take that advice & bury the 24-105 at the bottom of my backpack...

No way. Take it, you'll need it.

I've increasingly been leaving more and more gear at home. I have an excellent 24-105 which is very sharp but zooms make you lazy. You see something worth shooting, the composition is not right, so you zoom in or out. Snap. And move on. Whereas I find that zooming with my feet makes me notice distractions in the background, so I move to the side or crouch down more and create better images and stronger compositions.

So more and more I just take the 35mm prime out.

Sometimes less is more.

Agree with Kelvin.  Just back from Paris and South Africa, three weeks on the road with just carry on luggage.  Had two lenses with me, the 35 and the 75 (full frame sensor) and not disappointed in anything, never felt I missed a thing, but your style might be different of course.  These even worked on safari.

Kelvin, really interested in something you said there: zooms make you lazy. Never thought of it that way, but I will from now on. I once bumped into a Kiwi who said it was 'all about primes, only primes...' Never understood what he meant until now. Maybe a stable of primes is the way forward?

The funny thing is that 'my style' is very much wide angle: but I wouldn't be unhappy if a 10mm prime was replaced my 10-22mm. My previous holiday in India, there was a photographer on our tour with a 30mm prime (or some such). I couldn't understand how he was getting the shots I was, but he professed himself very happy with the one lens.

Ask yourself what it is you shoot.  If you do event or wedding photography, a few good quality zooms are really important.  If you do everything else then primes are just fine.  They are lighter, smaller, easier to pack and great quality at a less expensive price (usually).  You can take two or three on holiday in a smaller package and you really, really don't need to be able to shoot at 41.5mm or 176mm when a few steps will do the trick with a prime.  You have to decide if the extra cost and weight of zooms is worth it to your style of shooting.  Good luck and have a great holiday.

Your kit is your kit, everybody has different needs and comfort levels.  The mid range zoom is sort of your base, but if you are covered above and below it, why bother.  


The 24-105mm is favorite of some, not so much of others.  Sample variation?  I love mine.


Of course a nice 50mm would fill out the middle of said gap very nicly.

/
/@DavidCallan: I aplologize in advance if you know this.  Some cameras have the ability to micro-adjust the auto-focus mechanism.  The basic idea is that you photograph a specially constructed image, observe any difference between your target focus point and the actual, change the micro-adjustment for that lense in your camera, and repeat until optimum.


Here's a link to a discussion of this topic for Canon: http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/article_pages/cameras/1ds3_af_micoadjustment.html


And another from a venue that's likely to be much more authoritative: http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=40251207


And, finally, one from iStock's very own Nicolesy: http://nicolesyblog.com/2010/06/21/lens-af-micro-adjustment/


A good Google search term is "lens micro-adjustment".  Perhaps you can "cure" your failing lense???


edit: correct typo

(Edited on 2012-04-09 10:27:44 by hambagahle)

@ DavidCallan


I'm based in New Delhi. Please feel free to borrow my 24-105 if you need to during your India visit. I've got a fairly decent copy, and won't mind microadjusting it to your camera. I use it on 5DMII, and haven't had a reason to doubt the IQ rendered by this much-used lens. And, in case you are shooting in Delhi, you can borrow any of my lenses from 14mm to 600mm for local use (only). Cheers.

Very kind offer^

Hambagahle, great tip, thanks I'kll check that out before before going.

Salagahle

(I am originally from Zululand, so your icon name appeals!)

Very kind of you, thanks eROMAZe, but I will be flying through Delhi (literally, just enough time to see Safdarjung's Tomb), then on to Bandhavgarh. Appreciate the offer though - however, having heard previous comments though, I think the 24-105mm will be in my backpack!

I enjoy landscapes, portraits, wildlife & architecture, so quite a mix. But I think that my mind is made up on this: I'll take the 24-105mm with me, but I'll shop it when I get back for either a 50mm prime or a 24-70.

Thanks for the good wishes btw... Tigers are on the menu!

@DavidCallan - unusual way to meet, but it's a very small world these days especially with the number of folks who went walk-about.


One more idea, depending on your proximity to a reliabe Canon repair shop: assuming your camera supports the micro-adjustment function, they may be able to do the calibration for you if you have enough time before departure.


I'll site-mail you.


Regards

Regarding seling the 24-105 for a 24-70. I HATE the 24-70 due to the chromatic abberation and lack of Image Stabilization. Sold it on Craigs List in about an hour. Love the 24-105. Sharp as a tack with IS. Did a ton of side by side CA testing before selling the 24-70. The 24-105 had much less CA that Lightroom could clean up. Plus the extra 35mm of zoom is nice. 


I love zooms. I am often shooting in afternoon fading light and need to get in alot of shots quickly and with a zoom I can "find the frame faster". I don't call it lazy, more like efficient. 

Don't get me wrong, I'll shoot 90% of a wedding on the 24-105. But zooming with your feet really does make you improve your composition as it forces you to see more possibilities, rather than just being satisfied with your first point of view.

I sort of knew that taking a potshot at the 24-105mm wouldn't be a majority view. I've read other forum posts where people sound as if they'd just about sell their wives if it meant they could keep their 24-105mm. But in my case, and on most holidays to date, it's honestly as useful as a chocolate kettle. I think i may have a dud copy; I'll apply some of the corrections suggested above & hold off getting the 24-70 for the moment.

And if all else fails, there's always my 70-200mm.

Now there's a monster worth selling your wife for!