I’ve never used a zoom that covered the middle range of focal lengths very much. I have a 17-40 and the common 70-200 in my collection, but in between the two ranges the only lens I use is my trusty 50 1.4. I once felt I had no need for some boring mid-range zoom to cover the gap between those two lenses with some overlap, that it’s a pointless range to spend my money on for what I tend to shoot. Over time I realized that for what I shoot, that’s the perfect range for a good zoom that is versatile as a walk-around lens that would require no tripod. Since most of my shooting is spent tripod-bound, for a long time I refused to recognize the opportunities the right lens would open up when I don’t feel like carrying a tripod and multiple lenses. I suppose I had become a bit of a tripod snob; but the more I shot handheld with lenses that are really tricky to use in lower light, the more I started to turn around on that opinion.
105mm with IS on, f/8, ISO 800, 1/8 second handheld
Due to the size & weight, the 24-70 2.8L wasn’t the ideal choice for me. I don’t generally need to or want to shoot at 2.8 because I usually want more DOF, not less. When I found out I would have the opportunity to get a new 24-105 4L IS for significantly lower than retail price (less than I’ve been able to find them used!) I decided that it was the right move to make. I had been eyeing that lens for a while but knew nobody that had one to try, so I chose to take the plunge myself.
An f/4 lens with IS more than makes up for the fact that it is a stop slower than the 24-70 2.8. On top of that it will fit in my bag better, weighs less, and has better reach on the long end. As great as this lens is on my 1D Mark II it will be an even better walk-around lens when I get a full frame camera hopefully within the next year (5D Mark II where are you?). The range is close to perfect for a full frame but still quite good on my slight cropper sensor.
One thing I appreciate in a camera or lens is the right feel in my hands. I’ve used other much less expensive alternatives like the Canon 28-135 IS, Nikons 24-120 VR, Canon’s 28-105 USM and a Tokina 28-70 2.8. The 24-105 surpasses all of them in just getting that immeasurable quality of feeling right in my hands (and not to mention the better measurable optical quality). The AF is quick, the zoom mechanism has no play at all and the IS works beautifully. I certainly can still use the rapid-fire stabilization method I’ve written about before but IS does make it a much easier general purpose lens to use in a variety of conditions.
If I didn’t already have the 70-200 2.8L, I might consider getting the 4L to complete the trio of smaller & lighter f/4 zooms. Having zoom coverage from 17mm to 200mm in high quality but lighter weight and smaller lenses definitely appeals to me. For now I’ll just have to see if I can fit the three of them in the smaller shoulder bag I already have.
I am currently in the process of trying to sell / swap my 24-105 for a 24-70 2.8. The 24-105 is a very convenient lens for out and about, but it’s just a shame it’s not 2.8 because its just to slow for anything moving in low light situations. It’s not quite wide enough and it’s not quite long enough and it’s not quite fast enough! It’s so near to being great and the image quality is good (not great). Wish list would be an L series Canon equivalent of Nikons 18-200mm VR but with 2.8 fixed, IS and minimum distortion with 30cm focus distance. Now that would be the perfect walking lens. I’ll stop dreaming now!