Old vs. New: Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 IS USM 'L' ii lens review and comparison video

[@girlperson1]

I use the old version and am very satisfied with it. no update needed as far as I'm concerned. You can't improve on perfection. What Canon should focus on is lowering their prices.

[@KellanReck]

I totally agree. Both lenses are great, and the first version still stands up

[@sirrathersplendid4825]

Lower prices, and reduce the size and weight.

[@MegaJURISTE]

you can improve on perfection lol. i like it

[@rgbplumbinghilton]

They have hopefully improved on the ribbon wear that occurs on the old version. Other than that, it didn't need anything else.

[@Noojtxeeg]

Lowering prices won't make them money. But making new versions will make older ones cheaper.

[@JasonLundgrenn]

What an AMAZING review. So very detailed and easy to understand. I've been shooting on the EF24-105mm f/4L IS USM for around 5 years now. It came as a kit with my 6D (which still packs a pretty amazing punch in 2021) and I never even knew they made a version II of this lens! Naturally, I had a bit of buyers remorse thinking I had gotten the less capable lens when I thought back to my 5-year-old purchase. Having purchased the 6D/24-105L kit in October of 2015, had I JUST missed this amazing upgrade a little of a year later. Well, thanks to your review, I can easily say NOPE! This was an instant like/subscribe situation. I haven't even had a chance to check out the rest of your channel but I HOPE you kept making content I know the work that went into this review. Going out and getting the shots, stitching them together in PS, dropping them into Premiere, doing the voice over, uploaded, etc! The effort bleeds through this well-constructed and generous review. Thank you for making me feel better about this aging lens! Great work - Justin Njus, Creative Heighs Media

[@PaulHojda]

So basically, if you already have the old one, don't get the new one. Great review, as usual

[@plush18]

Im glad i came across this video my lens broke and i needed one urgently so i was considering the newer one.

[@mirasga]

No need to upgrade. 😁

[@joaoconceicao6856]

If u shoot in harsh conditions i told u that is a good upgrade

[@Princeton_James]

I was ready to sell my old lens since I've moved over to Fuji. I decided to try it adapted to my Fuji. Wow, it is absolutely stunning. Definitely a keeper!

[@fastfoxshark]

Your lens reviews are the absolute best on KZbin. Keep up the phenomenal work.

[@OlimpiuVuia]

Excellent work. Thank you! As a video shooter I have to say that the old version has a problem with stabilizer. I know many people that have this issue: sometimes it goes crazy, it's shaking like hell until you turn off the IS. I hope this issue was solved in the new version.

[@shengwei123]

christopher, thanks for all your reviews! really gotten alot of knowledge from your videos! and your voice is so soothing it makes me feel good LOL

[@chirag4]

sexiest voice on YT, by far !!!!!

[@merdanserin3017]

Silent IS is probably the reason for this release. It is a big improvement for video makers.

[@africanhistory]

I do not see why it would be big. R u using the mic that came with the camera?

[@mavcek]

The 'old' 24-105 has been my workhorse for several years and I love it. The only flipside is that mine suffered from the dreaded 'Err01' and needed repair costing £150+. I certainly won't be upgrading though for such minimal improvements (and such a steep price rise!). Great review.

[@MBPH]

finaly you made the video, many thanks to you, now i know that does not worth to upgrade to the newer verion, there is no changes also there are some things batter then the newer verion, this is not good step by canon

[@Jim1971a]

Thank you so much for this video. I’m going to buy one of these 2 lenses. Now my decision is easy. I will get the older one. Thanks again for saving me money and providing this information.

[@timothyisidro4215]

With the 1st version, Canon has made a lens so good that even they can't make any more improvements on it. Even after more than decade of new technology.

[@RickP2012]

Old version has always done me and I think I will be sticking with it. A lot of Canon improvements these days seem to be aimed at videographers. I only use mine for photography.

[@MustadMarine]

Thank you! I just bought the Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 IS USM 'L' (older) lens based on your video. The price difference is greater than my photographic skills.

[@RobThePlumber]

I sold my 24-105 and some other lenses and bought my 24-70l ii. I do miss the range of the 24-105 at times but I will survive. The 24-70 is the sharpest zoom lens I have ever used!

[@chriskaprys]

Wow. First time to your channel. This is a beast of a comparison. Well done, sir.

[@charlesteton]

Chris, I love the lens, MKI, a lot and use it often for video on Canon C300. One thing that really bugs me is it seems not to be constant aperture for video! I’ve tried three/four examples on different C300 and they all lose a stop of light at 105mm when zooming in whilst recording. Wide open at F4 this does not happen but any other F-stop it looses a stop. Have you found this and is the MK II different? I don’t have this problem with EF 70-200 2.8 IS MKII or EF-S 17-55mm 2.8 IS, which is an incredibly sharp lens. Keep up the great work. Charles

[@bobuk5722]

Hi folks.. Three years on! I have the old version of this and the AF is not as nosy as Christopher's one. Probably has not had the same level of use. Even with video a noisy lens is not a problem if using lavalier or, to a lesser extent, shotgun microphones. Very helpful review, just saved me £1,000! Cheers. BobUK.

[@bobfromhull]

I went for the Sigma 24-105 Art in the end. A definite upgrade with this one. Also bought the 24-35 f2 and Wow!, is that sharp.

[@johntinker3457]

Just curious, the Sigma, are you still happy with it? I am considering the Sigma instead of this Canon...

[@melvinjohnson7033]

Canon was able to increase the street cred of the ii version by making it bigger, heavier and more expensive. At the same time they were able to decrease the optical performance by taking the one and only UD element of the i version and tossing it out. So whereas the i version has 18 elements with a UD element the ii version only has 17 elements sans the UD glass. A diff optical formula but you get the picture.

[@jalilchaouite]

Not afraid to say what you truly think of a product, that's why I subscribed to your channel Chris! Keep up the good work and thank you for the content

[@infini1970]

Thank you for your comparison. I was disappointed when I bought a used original 24-105 in my frenzy to get a good deal until I saw this. I wanted to get the ii and almost tried to cancel the purchase. But with some days to think about it, watch some vids. I found this one. I think I will be just fine for doing events and small weddings with the older model and a 6D.

[@leedobson8031]

Your lens reviews are amongst the most out there.

[@TeaRexTheMighty]

I'd love 24-105mm F2.8, but don't think that'll happen.

[@christopherfrost]

TeaRex Tamron once made a 28-105 f/2.8. it didn't turn out all that well

[@DrakeAlexanderKnight]

You and me both.

[@MrPhilbautista]

I agree on the Tamron. Too big and heavy, poor cotrol of CA, and quite soft. Pretty good as a portrait lens, though, if you like the dreamy effect.

[@andrew1977uk]

I don't think that would happen, it would be to similar to the 24 - 70. However, they could do something like a 16 - 50 1.8 . That would come in very handy!

[@laszu7137]

That would require ridiculously lot of glass.

[@theskatebort]

Favorite lens reviews by far! Thanks for your honest, unbiased approach. Very solid as always.

[@chirag4]

After seeing this review, there's no need to buy either the older or newer 24-105L. The new L II has 10 aperture blades that produces smoother bokeh, thus having a slight upper edge, plus, it has silent AF (good for video), and some improvement in vignetting. Sigma 24-105/4 Art is the most used lens of Tony Northrup, and sharpest of the three, but the 24-70/2.8 LII is even sharper than Sigma. So, it all boils down to Sigma versus the expensive f/2.8 L II. People would now be drawn towards that Sigma all the more, & I hate to say this. Sigma has more tele range and stabilization over 2.8 L II, but i would give 2.8 II L the nod, for its reliability. This focal range is bread & butter for many Protogs, and sadly there's no good 24-105 from OEM which forces us to look elsewhere, as, 3rd parties are doing a better job in manufacturing. Canon-users are getting punched in the face by Canon Inc. i have the 24-70mm f/4L IS USM for my 6D, and happy with its sharpness from 24 to 40mm, & it is soft between 50-70mm, esp. at close range. It's Macro feature is a joke. Yes, It's MFD / Repro is a sort of an advantage (when compared to any other 24-70 or 24-105), even without switching to Macro function. It is much lighter than all the above lenses for hand-holding long hours. I once tried the old 24-105L for a day, it was tiresome, and front-heavy on 6D, and naturally goes well with bigger 5D series bodies. Thanks Chris for this helpful comparison video.

[@melvinjohnson7033]

Another good review of a inferior "replacement" for the original. This is an embarrassment to the L designation. Canon dumbed this one down and removed the one and only super UD element of the original and replaced it with a increased price and reduced optical performance. At the same time Sigma is stuffing theirs with exotic glass at superior performance save for the weather sealing.

[@RichardsWorld]

The only reason to change is if you want to record video. That first version makes too much noise.

[@Na-kuxne-u-Meri]

Hi, Christopher. I like very much your video reviews about the lenses and think you're the best! So, please, help me in my issue: recently I've bought Canon EOS 7D Mark II body and need the appropriate lens to make my video blog footages dedicated to video recipes and photos of the dishes I do. So, I need a very good quality lens with good sharpness, smooth and fast focus, able to make video recipes and interviews, trips and a little bit with macro abilities. As I know, in Canon lenses, L series' lenses have good quality, but which one could be best for my camera and needs? I would be very thankful in case you could help me with your professional advice, Thank you very much beforehand, Meri

[@charlesteton]

Hope they fixed the fact that V1 is not constant f4 for video? Even on your review of V1 you can see a change in exposure. Its about 3/4 to a stop difference at the long end. I’ve checked multiple copies.

[@miamidolphinsfan]

Thanks for the review Christopher, you just saved me $1100 :)

[@clarkgriswald9909]

Thanks for the comparison - I had guessed as much. Proves the old saying, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Will stick to the older version! Thank you!

[@africanhistory]

the F4 is the only drawback and why I do not use it 1/2 as much as I should. But The IS is very nice when doing rig or gimbal work. And the focus is fast. If this lens had 2.8 I could superglue it to the camera and be cool for the next 200 years.

[@Jyyo]

Got my hands on the new version for roughly 800 dollars, at that price point I think it's worth the money.

[@alexkairis3927]

So much love for you Chris.... So glad to see that you are still making reviews.... you do great reviews!

[@knibestolfoto]

Best lens reviewer on youtube :D

[@MileyonDisney]

Great review and comparison video. I finally got the Mark II, my first L series lens. Dang, that thing is heavy! But it's a great lens that takes beautiful photos.

[@ggwildlife]

excellent video as always thank you. i wouldn't upgrade personally as i am more than happy with my older version and no way could i justify the extra £600 for the mark II i never really thought about the IS motor being noisy like i heard in your video, but i use an external mic (rode) so to get round that dilemma perhaps pop an external mic on for a fraction of the price.

[@samismyname40]

Great review,Christ! I use the older 24-105 which form my old 5D mark II on my 5D mark IV,It's my favorite lens,very good for traveling, the performance is all right for me, still have that L lens level.after I watch this review, I think there is not necessary to move on to the newer version AT ALL,maybe save more money to buy the 24-70 f/2.8 II.

[@Magnetron692]

Hi Chris, thanks for this comparison! I purchased one copy on eBay from the UK. I'm very happy with it. One advantage over the newer RF version is that I can use it (via Fringer adapter) on my Nikon Z6 as well! That's nice! Best wishes, Ralf

[@ExpressoMechanicTV]

I have recently purchased a new copy of the older lens for my 100D and am very glad I did.

[@Magnetron692]

Hi Chris, I bought this lens. Quite a hefty piece of kit on the Canon RP. Used it‘s cheaper than the RF counterpart. I‘m very happy with it. Thanks for the review!

[@Fisu614]

At least for me it was not a surprise that the new lens isn´t much better than the old one. Canon designed both lenses to be kit lenses for full frame cameras with good enough optics. These lenses are made to make money for Canon and to be inexpensive to manufacture, so that they could be sold in kits with small marginals and separately with big marginals for the manufacturer.

[@timetothink558]

Thank you for this - and to see the fabulous location of Portmeirion too. I walked up Snowdon with my old 24-105 lens and have to say I am not looking forward to the extra weight with the new one I have just bought second hand.

[@rajib045]

Thank you so much for the advice given at the end of the video. I am now going to buy the older one. Thank you again

[@HiFlyer371]

Excellent review and mirrors my findings. After much research and testing both the new Canon and the Sigma, I replaced my 8 year beloved 24-105 with the Sigma. Just got back from the Bahamas and the lens did a great job, but it is VERY heavy and uses 82mm filters. The filters are not a major problem as my Tamron 24-70 f2.8 also uses 82mm. Keep up the good work!

[@Princeton_James]

William Maxey great lenses you own.

[@ricardoxv]

Hello! I already have Sigma 18-35mm f1.8 and I'm looking for my second lens but I prefer with image stbztion. I'm in doubt between: Canon 24-105mm f4 (v1 or v2) Sigma 24-105mm f4 Tamron 24-70 f2.8 G2. Based on your xp, which one do you advise? Thanks!

[@HiFlyer371]

@@ricardoxv Diffidently a 24-105. The sigma is a bit better than the V2 Canon but a lot better than the V1. But it's heavy. All 3 are good lenses and I rank them Sigma, Canon V2, then Canon V1. If you can find a deal on any of them you'll be happy with the results. Check out KZbin reviews.

[@ricardoxv]

@@HiFlyer371 However, since the last time I came here to leave the question (2 days ago lol), I've seen and read a lot of reviews and I was even more in doubt between the Canon 24-105mm f4 v2 and the Canon 24-70mm f4, not the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 because it has no stabilization. However I put aside the Sigma and a Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 (g1 because the g2 is too expensive), because I didn't liked the stabilization quality, felt a little bit fake and not so natural and fluid like the Canon does. But I think I'll pick the Canon 24-70mm f4. Looks way better than 24-105mm and I know I'll lose the extra 35mm but win a lens that makes good macro images, being the only one with this capability in this one's that I put over the table. Both lenses in f4, the 24-70mm can get more light. And If for some reason I need to go beyond 70mm I have a 135mm f2.8 prime! May be my next next lens will be a 70-200mm for example!

[@len.whistler]

1:36 ----- I recommend the Cotton Carrier. You can walk all day and the camera is always ready to shoot.

[@AustrianGeek]

Quick and dirty choice: Stills oriented -> Go for the old version. Though: As soon as video is important too -> Go for the new one ^^. (At least they fixed the really noisy stabiliser with the new version.)

[@ianmartin5389]

Just put on a external mic if the noise is too loud.

[@yogstoriodor]

Yes Chris, why not keep the venerable 6d? Even in 2023! Ok, higher pixel density probably challenges lenses. Thanks for your presentations!

[@mikeschultz9691]

Thank you for the video. I’ll be buying the original as I’ve seen plenty more out there and if it’s just as good or better than the 2nd one. Win win

[@catanasi]

Thanks for the great review. I thought I wanted the new lens, but decided to keep my old, lighter and great OLD lens. I'll wait for a MAJOR change. It was easy to change from my 70-200 4.0 to the 2.8. But this is not worth it. Thanks so much!

[@ifly65]

The watch dial sold me Im grabbing the older one for the C100 cinema camera. Thanks for doing this great video!

[@dannydao1660]

There's one of a reason that I like the new version when you realised that the old version will always extend its length by itself when the lens is facing down.

[@oiko2k4]

You are absolutely right. It was such a known issue that I feel that THIS was the main reason Canon updated the lens. I used to rent the original 24-105 and I thought the extension issue was because off the extreme usage a rent item gets. But it was a design defect actually.

[@dannydao1660]

@@oiko2k4 I think that the lens extension problem of the old version isn't too related to rent item. I bought the old version which is new item with original box packing, but such problem still exist. Btw, the new version has a lens lock but I never use it, it can always maintain its length not to drop down even you didn't use the lock.

[@oiko2k4]

@@dannydao1660 Yes my friend, that's what I said. It's not a rental lens' problem, it's the actual design of the lens that is faulty, we agree.

[@Halfpint71]

Good video, very useful. I've just ordered the older version after watching this and a few other videos. It's seems there's little difference and given that i'm not a pro, I'm using an old 7D and my bank balance isn't the healthiest, I doubt it will make much of a difference to me. The older version is still an awesome lens. Cheers.

[@emptysuit]

Great information as always Chris. Think I'll be holding on to my version one of the lens. Thanks for sharing.

[@m.allmark]

Tempted to get the Mki version.Will replace my 18-50mm sigma f2.8 (don't really need 2.8 for that lens/walk about lens). I have a 10-20mm sigma for close up car stuff, 70-200mm L for on track motorsport.

[@mundojourney1104]

wait, nobody is talking about that horrible noise when autofocusing ?!! was that just picked up from the in camera mic and then amplified just for us to hear the difference or is so loud even a Rhode mic on top of the camera will pick it up? that is the defining factor in which one Im buying, please help :)

[@mehrdadhaghighi5140]

I have the 24-105 f4 of Sigma and I have to say...it's unbeatable :D

[@Metyletylhexanoat]

Its better than the old canon 24-105 for sure. But also significantly heavier.

[@MrPutrifyingEagor]

The image quality is superior on the sigma, by a good margin, Sigmas autofocus is also better - However as I found to my cost, sigmas weatherproofing is no where near as good as Canons, I had got so used to using my Old Canon in rain, snow, etc My Sigma was permanently damaged in a heavy rain storm. So watch out with bad weather.

[@mehrdadhaghighi5140]

Thanks for the heads up :D

[@isaacsj1000]

If I could afford it I would buy for my aps-c camera I think the zoom range is not bad when I was using a 35mm om-10 in the 80's I only had a 50mm and 28mm lenses and mainly used the 50mn. 35mm is adequate for most outdoor situations situations in my opinion.

[@ghaniysalim32]

Mehrdad Haghighi But its not weather sealed unlike the Canon 24-105

[@wildbill9919]

l used to have the old version when l had my 1D iii. lf l was buying it again, l'd get a good used older version-smaller, lighter, and cheaper.

[@tobiasgmeiner3530]

135 likes and no single dislike 👌 you're the only youtuber, that has such a rating... props 👍

[@chirag4]

few people can lay claim to an awesome achievement as this. Now there are only 3 dislikes, against 400 likes.

[@CryptidHunter_official]

Thanks for this video, I've been debating whether to grab the new version vs the older version of this lens. Do you think it'll work with my 80D?

[@mariusstanciu6785]

Cryptid Hunter did YOU Find a answer ,i am in the same place

[@CryptidHunter_official]

@@mariusstanciu6785 yes I ended up buying the 18-135 stm lens instead. It's lighter and quieter and works best with my 80D

[@Ronald5Dii]

Have an Err 01 on my mark I copy, was thinking about getting the mark II instead of repairing the old one. Price and above all the size/weight increase are the dealbreakers for the mark II afaic. Especially since both version are further very alike performance wise.

[@karthikeya3594]

your voice is so very amazing sir !

[@chirag4]

Sexiest Voice on YT (among all photo-channels), even more so than Ted Vieira & Ted Forbes.

[@karthikeya3594]

Indeed !

[@jordan.7]

Thats a tough match. Ted Vieira's voice and black and white video are so soothing to watch.

[@richmck007]

thanks to your original you tube video comparison, I bought the original version. I would say the only downside is the f stop! At f4 I have made some lighting mistakes over the years...Weight was never issue for me. Shame Canon could not have improved on the brightness... Nevertheless, a great walk around lens. Many thanks for giving up an insight into the updated version.

[@davideographer4410]

Thank you for an honest review! You covered each aspect in great detail!

[@derreth]

Thanks Chris Great review. I watched this out of curiosity because I have the old model. Couldn't see anything in you review to make me wish I had the new one.

[@DavidMNewbold]

Thanks for this review Chris. You may have saved me a bit of money. I have the old 24-105mm lens and was considering whether it would be worth the extra expense to upgrade. However, it sounds like the improvements are marginal at best and certainly not worth the hundreds of additional dollars. My lens copy is pretty sharp and I think I'll hang onto it for a while longer.

[@NARFALICIOUS]

Just confirming, with a shoe-mounted microphone, can you hear the IS working on the mk ii?

[@PewPewDave]

Is barrel and pin cushion even that big of a deal considering you can fix it using one key press in Lightroom?

[@christopherfrost]

It's a lens attribute worth testing IMO. If distortion and vignetting are too strong then processing out is a lossy process.

[@gazdyer2732]

Good review chris , it confirms just what i thought , i will be sticking with the MK1 . thanks for the review.

[@kaminobatto]

That was disappointing I used to have the older version and thought this would offer a world of difference. Great review as always.

[@flancymuwang]

Is it because canon wants to fix the Err-01 issue happened with the old lense? And have they fixed it with this II version?

[@325productionsuk7]

As a videographer I do a lot of run and gun work at events, but also shoot a lot of interior interviews as well. I own a Tamron 28-70mm F2.8 VC but am often disappointed with the sharpness compared to colleagues's 24-70 Canon F2.8. I can't afford the Canon so I am thinking of changing to a 24-105m for the extra focal length and maintaining IS but only if sharper than the Tamron, I am happy to lose a stop of light as I hardly ever shoot wide open as DOF is too shallow. I've watched your Sigma Vs Canon 24-105mm vid, which is great by the way, so wondering if I should go for the Sigma 24-105 over the Canon 24-105mm Mark II. Would I be gaining much from buying one of these two lenses over keeping my Tamron? If so which would you recommend please. The one drawback I can see of the Sigma is lack of weather sealing, I shoot outside quite a lot. Your insight is always appreciated, many thanks!

[@christopherfrost]

Get a 24-105 lens, you'll be happy. As for whether you get the Sigma or the Canon, take a look at my review of the Sigma version of the lens :-)

[@wieri347]

I think you should try out the STM version of this lens. I own both STM and L versions and I must say the STM is only a little bit behind the L. For video the STM is great, because all its motors are completely silent and the slightly inferior optical quality (more CA in my opinion) will not be noticable with video.

[@joecap2919]

Anther great review Chris, I have the original and it is my sharpest lens. Canon couldn't improve it so re-packaged it for $$

[@sisi5408]

Thank you so much for the detailed review. It helped me decide on which lens to buy.

[@aantomop4795]

The true downside of the old 24-105 is lens creep. I find this very frustrating and maybe the upgrade might be worth it just to get rid of the lens creep... Also at 24 the new lens looks better. The improved IS certainly is useful.and the save filter size is ideal. But is it worth the 400 Dollar difference...?

[@joshhyyym]

I'd much prefer if they made something like a 35 - 100mm f/2.8. 24-70s are a bit short for me, and 24-105s are all f/4 Although, as a ff pentax shooter, it's not like that's going to happen

[@davidmarquez2821]

Your reviews are great! For the viewers: This lens is quite unsharp according to DxoMark. I ordered the Sigma 24-105 instead.

[@bringmeknitting844]

How do you find the Sigma?

[@lyfka9969]

Excellent illustrative content! Thank you very much!

[@rkdash2006]

Dear Chris, as always brilliant review. There is a sigma 24 70 art coming. I am planning to buy 5d iv. Do u think I take this as a kit lens with 5d iv or wait for sigma 24 70. I have a sigma 18 35 and very satisfied with it. Although I feel focusing is bit slow though. Given this experience, and I want a walk around lens for travel, street, low light what is your view? I have 50 1.8 and 85 1.8 as well

[@hiddenpk1]

The 6D is still an amazing camera. But 6d Mk2 will be out in a few months :)

[@tommasosala3036]

Thanks! I'll go with the older one :-)

[@TheSunsun5]

I'm trying to purchase the Canon 24-105 mm f/4 IS used, as described in the compelling video that was made comparing new to old. But, all I can find used is the Canon EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Lens. Yes, I'm and ametuer and don't a lot, so thats why I'm asking all of you for help!

[@christopherfrost]

You should be able to find the 'L' lens used on eBay

[@calduncan3367]

Hi thanks for the reviews, helps a lot when looking into getting new gear, you say when you know where to look when buying the older lens and pricing is the anywhere you would recommend looking as I’m after the older version Thanks

[@comingsoon737]

Nice review. Did you handheld when you are talking about the is? I'm considering to buy a 24-70, but I'm not sure wether IS is crucial when I use a camera support.

[@christopherfrost]

In my tests in this video? Obviously, I was holding the camera

[@hawaiirealmedia5610]

So very helpful and really well done review. Thanks!

[@WildHorseProductions]

Great review. I got my mk1 second hand and it's still pretty good. Probably don't need to upgrade at this point

[@cjmadridtv4289]

real photograper☝ you have a portfoli sir?

[@loukasstylianou1]

Christopher is it recommended to buy this one or the sigma ?

[@brianpratt2432]

You just saved me money thank you very much and keep up the good work I love your videos

[@rahulkamath6916]

Love your videos. So very well explained !!

[@АлексейДолидович-ц9г]

Hello Chris,what fullframe camera would you recommend me to buy? Excellent reviews,you are so good at it!)

[@christopherfrost]

The best you can afford! The 5D Mark iv is excellent, although do bear in mind that hopefully Canon will bring out a new version of the 6D soon

[@bringmeknitting844]

But the original 6D is still a great camera! Great review as always. Personally I think I'll go for a copy of the old lens, the improvement doesn't seem worth the extra price and weight.

[@ounkhamphomvihane9734]

thanks for vdo, you did the great compare, i need your advice about the old lens because im gonna purchase the canon 5D mark IV but im not sure whether the old len can work well with new camera due to technology (old vs new) , your comment is very much appreciated

[@DukeToast]

Hey Chris, always enjoy and appreciate your reviews. Do you still recommend the Sigma 17-50mm ex os lens or have you come across and updated suggestion? I'm very pleased by the quality but off put by the scratchy noise of the af It'd mainly be used for low light landscape work on a 70d and some video work I will happily follow your advice

[@christopherfrost]

Still recommend the Sigma 17-50 OS HSM - nothing newer and better has really come along so far

[@QtmMtrlzr]

Disappointed in the new lens. Thanks for your great videos, keep up the good work.

[@syekbe]

To all first version of this lens owners: do your lens slightly gets darker when zoomed in all the way to 105?

[@MarsArseniy]

You are absolutely right, the first version has a long end, not f4, about f5. I have a second version of this lens, it stays light from start to finish.

[@koll676]

best comparison so far, congrats and tks

[@bringmeknitting844]

I did pick up a copy of the Mark 1, and I really enjoyed using it... for a month. Then I started getting the dreaded "error 01" message and it quickly stopped working at anything other than 24mm. So I got a refund. Now I don't know what to do!

[@danielwang5467]

Great vid, Chris! I own the old 24-105, and it does emit some noise when focusing in video mode. Do you experience focusing noise on your lens? If so, is it quieter on the new one? Thanks!

[@christopherfrost]

As you can see in this review, it's about the same

[@fotobum1952]

Another great review. Thanks Chris!