Is Canon’s 24-105mm f/4L a real image-quality upgrade over the 18-135mm on a 40D?
Asked 2/18/2011
2 views
2 answers
0
I’m shooting with a Canon 40D and was planning to buy the EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM, but I’ve seen reviews suggesting it may not be a big optical upgrade over general-purpose EF-S zooms. Since the 18-135mm costs much less and offers more range, I’m wondering whether the 24-105L is actually better in real-world image quality, not just build quality. For anyone who has used both: is the 24-105L noticeably sharper or better overall than the 18-135mm, especially on a crop body like the 40D?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
8
I have a 24-105 L and it is an excellent lens. The build quality is superb which makes it heavy but the L series lenses become an asset as a result of their build - it will last.
The image quality is also excellent. Check out the digital picture review linked to above. Whilst Andy says some will say he is bias (for a long time I think he has only reviewed Canon gear) - the bias is somewhat irrelevant when you're comparing Canon to Canon.
The 18-135 covers a longer range, typically this isn't a good thing IQ wise in zoom lenses (with some exceptions). I haven't used this lens though.
Check out this link which contains comparison images of a lens test chart with both lenses. Set the focal lengths and apertures to comparable values. To me, at a quick comparison, the 24-105 looks to have significantly improved IQ:
My advice? Invest in the best quality lenses you can afford to. If you buy L or at least don't buy EF-S, they will last forever and transcend any bodies you own be they cropped or full frame.
Originally by user3664. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user3664
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Based on the user reports here, yes: the 24-105mm f/4L is generally a meaningful upgrade in image quality over the 18-135mm, not just in build.
People who have used both describe the 24-105L as noticeably sharper, especially away from the center. The 18-135mm is said to be acceptable in the center but soft at the edges, often needing extra sharpening in post. The 24-105L is also praised for much better build and mechanical quality.
That said, the 18-135mm does have advantages: it’s lighter, cheaper, and gives a more convenient zoom range. If portability and all-in-one flexibility matter most, it can still be a practical choice.
One important point for your 40D: 24mm on APS-C is not very wide, while 18mm is much more useful as a walkaround starting point. So the decision is partly about focal range as well as optics.
In short: if your priority is image quality and build, the 24-105L is the better lens. If your priority is low cost, lighter weight, and wider coverage on a crop body, the 18-135mm may fit better.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Canon EF 24-70mm f/4L IS vs EF 24-105mm f/4L IS for general use and occasional weddings
Why buy a Canon 17-40mm instead of the 18-55mm kit lens if it’s only 1mm wider?
Best first lens upgrade for a Canon 250D from the 18-55mm kit lens?
Should I trade my Canon 18-135mm and 24mm for a 17-40mm f/4L or 70-200mm f/4L on a 60D?
Canon EF 70-200mm f/4L USM vs EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM: which is the better choice?