Seems official: Canon EF 24-105mm F/4L

[Nic1302]

I'm now hoping that some folks would start dumping their 24-70/f2.8 so that I can have a chance to pick up one cheaper - hehehe.

 

[hazmee]

I'm now hoping that some folks would start dumping their 24-70/f2.8 so that I can have a chance to pick up one cheaper - hehehe.

I dont think that would happen so soon. Cheers!

 

[r32]

Spoke to someone who had a hands-on with the 5D and 24-105mm.

The lens extends, so its not a constant length lens.

 

[benny]

The lens extends, so its not a constant length lens.

Oh....so it's just like the 24-70 mm.....Shame..

Cheers,

 

[majere2sg]

Oh....so it's just like the 24-70 mm.....Shame..

Cheers,

Not like 24-70, more like 28-135,
Extends out on the longer focal length.

 

[eAgles]

Not like 24-70, more like 28-135,
Extends out on the longer focal length.

*sigh*

 

[Stoned]

Now all that's left is to wait for some test photos and the official release in SG. I'm interested to take a look at the performance. AND of course the final street price.

 

[David]

Actually y is there generally such a disappointment over the zoom lens barrel extension thingy???

yeah it'll be aesthetically nice if it's "inside" the lens... And also minimize buyers of 2nd hand lenses from commenting "Oh i'm worried cos I c much dust inside..." (DUH!)

But did anyone ever think it's a physics or engineering phenomenon?

I've never seen any standard zooms from Canon (sorry im ignorant of 3rd parties and other brands) that doesn't have the barrels extending.. L, consumer or kit lenses.

Just accept the extension! No doubt we know from Canon's long standing L reputation that the 24-105 is gonna rock! With IS...wat more man!

 

[USM]

Actually y is there generally such a disappointment over the zoom lens barrel extension thingy???

yeah it'll be aesthetically nice if it's "inside" the lens... And also minimize buyers of 2nd hand lenses from commenting "Oh i'm worried cos I c much dust inside..." (DUH!)

But did anyone ever think it's a physics or engineering phenomenon?

I've never seen any standard zooms from Canon (sorry im ignorant of 3rd parties and other brands) that doesn't have the barrels extending.. L, consumer or kit lenses.

Just accept the extension! No doubt we know from Canon's long standing L reputation that the 24-105 is gonna rock! With IS...wat more man!

I guess that people expectations are just unlimited. :angel:

 

[dragos]

I'm now hoping that some folks would start dumping their 24-70/f2.8 so that I can have a chance to pick up one cheaper - hehehe.

will not happen unless it is also a f2.8

 

[RCheah]

Actually y is there generally such a disappointment over the zoom lens barrel extension thingy???

Same sentiments here, I always wonder why it's such a major concern. :think:
If it's any consolation, remember that this 24-105mm L is supposed to be environmentally sealed, so even though the barrel is moving, there would be a seal in place.

As I've said in my earlier post (here), Canon could have made it internal zoom if they wanted. But I suppose the "standard zoom lens' would then become almost the same length as their telephoto lenses. :bsmilie:

I think the next concern people would be voicing is whether this lens would also suffer from ZOOM CREEP... another major complain of the 28-135.
My guess is it wouldn't...

 

[USM]

I think the next concern people would be voicing is whether this lens would also suffer from ZOOM CREEP... another major complain of the 28-135.
My guess is it wouldn't...

Well said. This is next question that people will ask. :what:

 

[David]

Haha.. Yah, zoom creep is prob the next ques... For an L, I think not?

But 1 thing i dun quite get... How does Canon decide where to "start" or "end" its focal length on lenses? I mean, why 24-105mm? Is 24-135 possible? Or why 17-40? Is 16-50 possible? Not sure if its the complexity involved in lens design.. Or just a way of careful marketing to ensure no lenses become redundant?

 

[Belle&Sebastain]

Haha.. Yah, zoom creep is prob the next ques... For an L, I think not?

But 1 thing i dun quite get... How does Canon decide where to "start" or "end" its focal length on lenses? I mean, why 24-105mm? Is 24-135 possible? Or why 17-40? Is 16-50 possible? Not sure if its the complexity involved in lens design.. Or just a way of careful marketing to ensure no lenses become redundant?

i'm certain there is zoom crepe, my 28-70mm 7 years old L lens is creaping, abet not as loose as the 28-135 i used to own. Now that being said i do not find any speck of dust in my 28-70 copy. Lots in my 28-135, there is even a peice of hair like dust in the middle of the second or third element on the 28-135 on the 4th month i was using.

dun worry bout the zoom extension, its no biggie in my experience. worry about zoom crepe instead.

 

[srisaro]

some more interesting links..

Canon 24-105 F4L IS USM - Availability Sept 2005
http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=149&modelid=11924