What to do with my new 24-105mm

Discussion in 'Canon EOS' started by avery|1, Feb 1, 2010.

  1. So I couldn't resist a smoking deal on a 5DII and finally made the plunge and upgraded from my 20D. I also made the choice to get the 24-105 kit because it was also a really good deal (don't worry, it wasn't from a storefront shop in Brooklyn).
    Btw, in case anyone else is interested (this deal was still good last time I checked) you can pick up the 5D from circuitcity.com for $2500 - $375 for 15% bing cashback and/or the kit for $3300 - $500 for 15% bing cashback. I couldn't pass up the kit for $2800 shipped.
    Anyway, so now I'm figuring out what to do with this lens. My initial inclination was to try and trade this lens (plus some cash) for a new 400 f/5.6 or an even trade for a like new 400. I haven't gotten any bites on craigslist, though, and know that there probably aren't tons of people out there walking around with new 400mm lenses that they want to get rid of (especially for a 24-105). I also called one local shop (I'm in the San Francisco area) who basically told me that what they could offer me wouldn't be worth it for me. Anyone have ideas for other routes?
    I could keep the lens, but I already have a 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200 f/4 and I'm not sure I can justify the expense of also having the 24-105 (although I do a lot of photography while backpacking, so I might be able to be convinced otherwise). Am I missing a reason to have the 24-105 on top of what I already have other than the convenience of a lighter lens with a little more length than the 24-70? (In case it matters, I also have the 17-40 and 50 1.4)
    Should I just sell the lens and then use the money to buy a used/new 400? I was trying to avoid the big cash craigslist transaction and I have never sold anything on ebay, so i'd assume it'd go for below market just because of a lack of history.
    Thanks for any suggestions!
     
  2. I would sell it to get the lens I was interested in having. You could try selling it here. Or perhaps you know someone who uses ebay and would be willing to sell it for you. JR
     
  3. zml

    zml

    so I might be able to be convinced otherwise​
    Ever tried to convince yourself..? Just go out, shoot a few thousand frames with it and see if you like it (I know, I know, it's a novel idea...)
     
  4. Michael--
    I've thought about this, but assumed it would be easier and more profitable to sell the lens as new vs. like new.
     
  5. Check out the buy/sell forum at Fred Miranda.... lots of transactions over there, maybe even the possibility of a trade.
     
  6. zml

    zml

    Avery: at the end only you can answer your question but there are many threads on this forum "24-105 vs <this or that>" which you may find beneficial (search...) and literally hundreds (if not thousands) of similar threads on other photography forums.
     
  7. I find it hard to believe that someone with a 5D II couldn't find a use for that lens.
     
  8. I'm also a backpacking photographer, and the 24-105 is my core lens on a 5D2. It is reasonably light and compact for a lens that covers 24-105mm and the IS feature comes in handy when I need to make a quick shot and don't have time to unload the tripod from the back of my pack. If I went backpacking with only a single lens it would be the 24-105.
    By the way, this evening I had occasion to post a sample shot from my 24-105 in another forum where there was a discussion of image quality from this lens. The following is a 100% magnification crop from the very far corner of a photograph made with the 24-105 on a 5D. The shot was hand held at 1/60 second; the focal length was 24mm, and the aperture was f/8. For those who don't understand... this is absolutely fine sharpness considering all the factors outlined above. (See un-resized here .)
    [​IMG]
    Dan
     
  9. Roger G

    Roger G Roger G

    Sounds like you have the focal lengths 24-105 covered one way or another. I quick look at EBay shows several unfinished auctions with current prices around $800. My experience is that I can often get around 75% of the new price. There are selling costs of course. And having no feedback might affect the price you get. Still I'd sell it, and get the 400 which I think is what you really want - and it's a great lens.
     
  10. The 24-105/4 is being won at an average price of $650 US in the last 2 days. It is also an excellent walk-about general purpose lens.
    The 24-70/2.8 is being won at an average price of $900 US in the last 2 days. It is a very good (and 2.1 pound heavy) walk-about lens but also more suitable as a bread and butter zoom for weddings. It is also dust and moisture resistant for your "photography while backpacking".
     
  11. Roger G

    Roger G Roger G

    I just looked at EBay "completed listings" the cheapest successful sale [Jan 31 2010] was $793 [used] some sold over $900.
     
  12. Since you have a 17-40mm F4, 24-70mm, 50mm F1.4 F2.8, 70-200 F4, Telephoto is about all you lack. You might want to check on what focal lengths you use most offen between 17-200 and then adjust those numbers by the 1.6 crop factor (Assuming your prior camera had a APS-C sensor). If you find you are frequently between wide and telephoto with little inbetween the larger zoom range of the 24-105 might be more convienent for you. Otherwise the 100-400 or one of the similar primes in that range would be a good addition. However that said the 100-400 is a little heavy for any serious backpacking.
     
  13. Roger G., enter this item #320481519066 in eBay. This is one at the buy it price will sell fast. You and I may not see the same listings because it's tricky to see them all depending on how one enters the name of the item in eBay.
     
  14. Thanks for all the suggestions/responses. They were quite helpful.
    Michael, I really wasn't trying to start another ___ vs ____ discussion (which I tend to not even read anymore myself). I was trying to get advice on the best way to switch out my 24-105 for a 400. Sorry if I wasn't clear and if the part about "or convince me to keep it" made this ambiguous. I'm definitely not getting rid of my 24-70.
    G Dan, good to hear from another backpacker and yes, that shot is pretty impressive (although I'm a little surprised by the noise). I guess I need to decide whether I'd rather have more flexibility with my weight in the midrange or a telephoto lens.
    Steven, great advice. I'll take a look at how many of my shots using the 24-70 were at the 70 end (which will just about be 105 on the full frame). Switching lenses is a pain, especially in the dirt and grime of the outdoors.
    Roger G, until your post I didn't even realize that you could look at histories of auctions. Very useful.
     
  15. G Dan, good to hear from another backpacker and yes, that shot is pretty impressive (although I'm a little surprised by the noise). I guess I need to decide whether I'd rather have more flexibility with my weight in the midrange or a telephoto lens.
    That noise is from a almost completely flat, uniform, low luminosity area... and you are viewing at 100%. That noise would be invisible in a 16" x 24" print. (The image you are looking at on the screen is a tiny bit of an image that might be at least five feet wide in a print!)
    Dan
     
  16. I couldn't pass up the kit for $2800 shipped.
    I'm not sure I can justify the expense​
    Well, I fear that I am as confused as you are.
    The 24-105 f/4L is a nice lens when you want to go light, e.g. when traveling. Under the right circumstances you could shoot all day with this one lens and only occasionally desire something longer or wider. And it's sharp. And it's got IS. What's not to like?
     
  17. When I was a Canon user (1Ds II and 5D) I had all the lenses you list, and quite a few more, but the one that got used most when I was travelling was the 24-105mm and on backpacking trips that was the only lens I took. It has a couple of well-known foibles - distortion and vignetting - but used intelligently they are easy to overcome. I took many of my best shots using that lens alone.
    I would keep it. If anything sell the 24-70mm ( I eventually did) and get yourself a 35mm L or even the 35mm ZE which are fabulous and open up new avenues.
     
  18. I just don't like my 24-105 L, it's mega sharp alright, but I'd swap it for a 24-70mm f2.8, 35mm f1.4 or 24mm f1.4 in a drop of a hat. Anyone in the UK up for that then drop me a mail.
     
  19. I generally buy lenses because I want them for something, not just for the sake of buying it. Maybe you should try that approach.
     
  20. Why not pick up a teleconverter for now.
     
  21. I have four lenses, including the 24-105 and the 70 - 200 (plus a 20mm and a 300mm, neither of which I use very much). I'd guess that I make about 80% of my photographs (outdoors, mostly landscape, some architecture, some miscellaneous stuff) with the 24-105. I'm sure that percentage would drop by a considerable amount if I had your 24-70 because of the extra 35mms at the long end of the 24-105. So I'd be changing lenses much more often than I do now and using the 70-200 much more. If I were you which I'm obviously not I'd sell the 24-70 and keep the 24-105 unless the extra half stop you get with the 2.8 vs 4 is critical to you.
     
  22. Since you have both the 24-70 and 24-105 on hand, I'd suggest to take some careful test shots, say square-on shots of bookcase or similar. In my experience, the 24-105 images "come apart" toward the corners, comparing to the 24-70. The IS is nice though.
     
  23. Mendel, look at 100% mag corner crop sample I posted above. A well-adjusted 24-105 is fine in the corners.
    The lens does exhibit significant barrel distortion at 24mm. At 24mm you would almost certainly need to correct for this in post if you shoot subjects with lines near to and parallel to the frame edges. This problem diminishes to essentially non-existence in the middle of the focal length and then becomes very mild pincushion distortion at the 105mm end.
    Dan
     

Share This Page