davidrb
Loc: Half way there on the 45th Parallel
Canon is listing the EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS USM as "in stock" at $599.99. That is one hell of a price for such a hard working lens. I see people buying 1/2 the lens for twice the price. What a temptation.
The only problem is that they have a tendency to fail long before they should.
Mine failed around 17,000 photographs.
TriX
Loc: Raleigh, NC
RichardTaylor wrote:
The only problem is that they have a tendency to fail long before they should.
There is a known internal ribbon cable issue (although mine hasn't failed after almost 4 years of constant use), but I wonder if the ones on the Canon refurb site haven't had the problem repaired...
TriX wrote:
There is a known internal ribbon cable issue (although mine hasn't failed after almost 4 years of constant use), but I wonder if the ones on the Canon refurb site haven't had the problem repaired...
No Canon refurb is a used lens! A refurb means it has come back before the 15 day trial has expired. If there is even one little scratch on the barrel, it will be returned to the buyer as not returnable.
If it comes in before the warranty is up and it will be repaired and returned to the owner. If it is replaced, the used lens will likely be destroyed and will never go out as a refurb.
Many don't actually know what a refurb is! ;-)
SS
TriX
Loc: Raleigh, NC
RichardTaylor wrote:
The only problem is that they have a tendency to fail long before they should.
Mine failed around 17,000 photographs.
Ouch! If you had it repaired, do you mind me asking the cost to repair?
This has been a tried and true glass. The price is amazing. I have one and love it!
J. R.
"Ouch! If you had it repaired, do you mind me asking the cost to repair?"
I didn't have it repaired.
Replaced it with a second hand Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens. While it is not as good as the 24-105 it is still ok and meets my (nowdays) ocassional needs.
WOW, talk about trading down.
J. R.
RichardTaylor wrote:
"Ouch! If you had it repaired, do you mind me asking the cost to repair?"
I didn't have it repaired.
Replaced it with a second hand Canon EF 28-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens. While it is not as good as the 24-105 it is still ok and meets my (nowdays) ocassional needs.
Gifted One wrote:
WOW, talk about trading down.
J. R.
I didn't like the idea of replacing it with another brand new 24-105. I do know some guys who have done exactly that.
It was mostly used as a walk around/vacation lens on a full frame body.
I nowdays do have other good and faster, lenses, which meet my needs when I have to push things, a lot better.
TriX wrote:
Ouch! If you had it repaired, do you mind me asking the cost to repair?
It cost me 125.00 plus my shipping.
TriX
Loc: Raleigh, NC
mrtobin wrote:
It cost me 125.00 plus my shipping.
Thanks - good to know. Think I'll hang on to mine...
I like this lens as my walk around on my 5D MK iii. No known issues 'yet'.
Happy Shooting
RichardTaylor wrote:
The only problem is that they have a tendency to fail long before they should.
Mine failed around 17,000 photographs.
Geesus. What a bummer, especially for such a highly regarded piece of hardware.
I have had one on my 5DII since day one and probably shoot 90%+ of my images with it. It's been dragged all over the world, dropped several times, and continues to deliver after nearly 8 years of faithful service. I'm a big fan.
Quote:
WOW, talk about trading down
Actually, the only significant differences are that the L-series is somewhat better built, better sealed for dust and moisture resistance, and has a constant f4 aperture, while the 28-135's is a variable f3.5-5.6.
The 28-135mm can mostly match the image quality of the 3X more expensive 24-105/4. The 28-135 actually has less vignetting at the wide end. They are pretty equal at other focal lengths up to 105mm, but the 28-135 gets slightly soft wide open (f5.6) when racked all the way out to 135mm, well beyond what the 24-105 can do. They also have similar close focusing ability, equally fast USM autofocus and similar IS assistance. Both lenses often suffer from "zoom creep" when you carry them around (both can be tightened up and/or simply use a wide rubber band over the zoom ring). The 28-135mm typically has some slight "wiggle" between the inner and outer barrels, though that seems to have no effect on images. The L-series tends to have the problem with the flex connector... and with its red plastic ring breaking and falling off. One of the four or five 28-135s I've used over the years had a problem with aperture control that required repair (wouldn't stop down below f5.6 at any focal length).
I know of several pros who use the 28-135 a lot (Joe Farace at Shutterbug Magazine, for one). Despite being an older design and not an L, it does its job well without breaking the bank, selling new for $300 (plus $25 or so for the hood, which isn't included). In comparison, the 24-105mm street price new is $1000 (hood included, like most L-series). You can pick up the 28-135mm used or refurb'd for $200 or less, while the 24-105mm typically sells used/refurb'd for around $600-650.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.