i can see the diff btw the vios and a porsche. first the look is so diff and the horsepower and cc is also diff. the reason i post the thread is becoz i can both are lens, and so i need someone who knows the technical diff in the output of the picture. for eg, the colour, clarity and other details can tell alot of diff between the two..... Plsssss
what is the significant diff btw the EF-S 18 - 55mm IS f/3.5-5.6 vs EF 24 - 107 f/4 L
- Thread starter raycytay
- Start date
- Status
Built-wise: 24-105 wins hands down
IS, USM - Both feature IS but the 24-105 has fast and silent USM motors
Vignetting - 24-105 is a full-frame lens, so it naturally has much less vignetting than the APS-C 18-55 IS kit lens. Easily correctible though.
Color, contrast - 24-105 wins hands down
Resolution - Both have the SAME sharpness. Yes, you heard me right. :bsmilie:
Chromatic Aberration - Both have some failings. I'll call this round a tie.
Unless you plan to upgrade to FF at some point, you may as well stick to the iS kit lens because parameters like color and contrast can be added in post-processing.
However, if you need more telephoto, the 24-105 is surely a better bet. But the L lens loses out at the wide end as it starts effectively from 36 mm, while the kit lens starts at about 28 mm.
Last edited:
Cartman2000
Senior Member
IMO the 24-105 has better corner sharpness
thanks doodah, that's the answer i am looking for. i know the built is definitely much better judging from the price and thus the material used should be compensating here. vignetting wise, i am not so worries as i always apply the vignet effect coz i love to add a bit of the lomo feel.USM to me is not that important as i am not shooting sport and macro, most of the time i will be shooting friends at wedding or gathering for family. colour and contrast i need to really go and try out myself in order to justify. i am really surprise that the resolution u give it a "SAME" sharpness??? that really surprise me. in this case, i think i should switch my choice to maybe 10-22 to capture wide angle view. tho i own a wide angle converter, the Chromatic Aberration is totally unbearable at times. like u said some of the weaknesses in the kit lens can be easily adjusted in PS, i will wait a little longer to upgrade to this lens when i buy my 5DMII in the future.
thanks alot!!!
thanks alot!!!
You mean.. as a FF lens, "it naturally has much less vignetting" when used on a crop camera?
So the 24-105 on a FF camera might show the same as the 18-55 on a crop camera?
So the 24-105 on a FF camera might show the same as the 18-55 on a crop camera?
Last edited:
marios_pittas
Senior Member
My point was that if you can't afford the porsche the comparison between the porsche and the vios would have been pointless.
If you can afford the porsche, and assuming that you have decided that you don't mind spending that of kind of money on a car, then without knowing the purpose for which one intends to make the purchase providing advice is a bit difficult, in my opinion.
Like you said: "both also can drive..both also gor relatively good feedback.."
So it comes down to.. what do you want it for?
-- Marios
Cartman2000
Senior Member
No primes for you?
Yes, especially on the wide end.
No primes for you?
Primes are certainly not for everyone. :bsmilie: I survive with only the 10-22 and 17-55 f/2.8 IS lens whenever I go hiking (on any part of the planet).
waderbreak
Member
heyo i guess if you already had your 'answer' at the back of your head then there wasn't much point for the thread except to comfort you. bummer -_-....
anyway this is quite the no brainer. different lens for different target market. you can't compare it this way. usually, you can't just say higher price = better build quality, cause the 17-55 f2.8 is also a crappily built lens for a high price, but i guess for the 24-105.. workmanship is good.
really.. bestif you rent the lens and try out or just go to shops and get a feel for it. specs count for only so much.
oh oh! one last thing. some people post saying 24-105 has higher resale value, but i think a better advice is to see what can provide your needs for photography RATHER than thinking of which NEXT lens to buy off once you sell your previous one. really defeat the purpose.
all the best!
I find comments like this kind of short-sighted. The 24-105 lens costs a bomb. If you sell it after, say, 1 year of use, you'll probably lose about a hundred bucks or so. How much does the kit lens cost.. around that price too! And one may even be able to sell it at fifty bucks. :bsmilie:
So, I guess people simply look at second hand sales in terms of percentage of the original price, but not at the ABSOLUTE amount that is lost. :bsmilie:
waderbreak
Member
uh, im not too sure what you meant, but if you thought my comment was short sighted, i was trying to say you shouldn't let the resale value of a lens decide for you if you're pursuing photography. it's not even the amount that's lost, but the constant feeling of having to worry about when your current lens is worth lesser than it was yesterday. heh.. well many people are more into lens chasing, not photography chasing.
No primes for you?
Tried 50mm f1.4 (both Sigma and Zeiss). Had a 28mm f1.8 (an excellent walkabout prime for EF-S bodies).
But ultimately, I still keep reaching for the 17-55mm. Nothing is more frustrating than not being able to capture a shot simply because your focal length wasn't right at the right time.
No, no, no... sorry for any misunderstanding. I am not referring to you. Actually, I totally agree with what you've said. :bsmilie: I am talking about those people who think of lenses in terms of second hand sales value...
waderbreak
Member
cool ok glad we on same frequency.
eeepee, i took the plunge and bought the 17-55. never did look back, maybe cause from the start i got such a good lens.
eeepee, i took the plunge and bought the 17-55. never did look back, maybe cause from the start i got such a good lens.
If you can't appreciate the difference yourself, then after getting the lens, you also wouldn't be able to appreciate the difference, then you would say "oh the 24-105 is a waste of cash. I can't see the difference".
If you can get the 14-105 lens, and it's compatible with most of the XMMs, your photography will become invincible! :devil:
iMac08
Senior Member
:bsmilie::bsmilie::bsmilie:i like the XMMs part
Alex chong
Member
To TS, if you can afford the 24-105, no need to ask the question if it is any better than the 18-55. Seriously, you will be tremendously disappointed if you find that the 24-105 doesn't give you the kind of shots you are expecting because at the end of the day, its the person behind the camera that makes the difference.
I have the L lens but hell, I still take crappy shots most of the time. I probably would feel better though if I had taken the crappy shots with the 18-55 coz I will blame it on the lens. But then I wouldn't improve either.
Think of it this way and remember this. If you get the L lens and your shots aren't what it is, know that its you and try to learn and improve. There is definitely a tangible difference between the kit lens and the other kit lens. Canon not stupid to sell you the same lens and users aren't stupid to notice if the 24-105 has same quality build as the 18-55.
Go for it and I am sure you will be happy. If not, sell off and you can recoup most of the money spend.
To answer Waderbreak's comment, high resale value of the L lens is a good reason for some if you already can afford it.
I have the L lens but hell, I still take crappy shots most of the time. I probably would feel better though if I had taken the crappy shots with the 18-55 coz I will blame it on the lens. But then I wouldn't improve either.
Think of it this way and remember this. If you get the L lens and your shots aren't what it is, know that its you and try to learn and improve. There is definitely a tangible difference between the kit lens and the other kit lens. Canon not stupid to sell you the same lens and users aren't stupid to notice if the 24-105 has same quality build as the 18-55.
Go for it and I am sure you will be happy. If not, sell off and you can recoup most of the money spend.
To answer Waderbreak's comment, high resale value of the L lens is a good reason for some if you already can afford it.
- Status
