<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Canon EF 24-105mm F4 IS USM Lens for video</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pauljoy.com</link>
	<description>Filmmaker</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 10:49:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Noel</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-1665</link>
		<dc:creator>Noel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Dec 2011 16:21:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-1665</guid>
		<description>Hi there, thank for the review - I&#039;m just moving away from vid cams to DSLR, oped for the 60d based on sound and twisty screen, DOF and quality - im gonna opt for the 24-105 too, f4 is a bit of a worry but as you said for the rarer times I need low light shoots, throw on a 50 mm and bobs your uncle. Cheers for taking the time to review, I was torn between the 24 - 70 and the 105 so again ts Noel</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi there, thank for the review &#8211; I&#8217;m just moving away from vid cams to DSLR, oped for the 60d based on sound and twisty screen, DOF and quality &#8211; im gonna opt for the 24-105 too, f4 is a bit of a worry but as you said for the rarer times I need low light shoots, throw on a 50 mm and bobs your uncle. Cheers for taking the time to review, I was torn between the 24 &#8211; 70 and the 105 so again ts Noel</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Flavio</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-1655</link>
		<dc:creator>Flavio</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 11:00:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-1655</guid>
		<description>Interesting article Paul, it&#039;s great to see the some footage of the 24-105mm in use.

It looks and sounds like a good choice for a full frame camera like the 5D. 

I&#039;m a 7D and 60D shooter and 24 just isn&#039;t wide enough if that&#039;s the only lens I&#039;m going to use. Therefore for weddings, christening and other family events I use the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens. It&#039;s not an L but the results are fantastic. No-one I&#039;ve met yet can tell the difference between this and an L series zoom. Sure, it&#039;s not built as well as an L but the glass is brilliant. It has IS and at f/2.8 I get a bit more out of the light before I have to get the primes out.

 At 55 it&#039;s no where near as long the 24-105 but it&#039;s a different style of shooting to get similar results I&#039;d imagine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting article Paul, it&#8217;s great to see the some footage of the 24-105mm in use.</p>
<p>It looks and sounds like a good choice for a full frame camera like the 5D. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m a 7D and 60D shooter and 24 just isn&#8217;t wide enough if that&#8217;s the only lens I&#8217;m going to use. Therefore for weddings, christening and other family events I use the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lens. It&#8217;s not an L but the results are fantastic. No-one I&#8217;ve met yet can tell the difference between this and an L series zoom. Sure, it&#8217;s not built as well as an L but the glass is brilliant. It has IS and at f/2.8 I get a bit more out of the light before I have to get the primes out.</p>
<p> At 55 it&#8217;s no where near as long the 24-105 but it&#8217;s a different style of shooting to get similar results I&#8217;d imagine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Terry</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-1589</link>
		<dc:creator>Terry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2011 09:56:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-1589</guid>
		<description>I bought this lens for hand held work and it&#039;s brilliant! I also tossed up between this and the 24-70 but I think for getting quick shots, fast in changing and uncontrolled environments you need a lens with IS. 

On the fader end I bought a LCW variND Fader because it has a filter thread on the outside, and I found an 82mm rubber circular lens hood on an ebay store (Zykkor make I think) and it works great because now I just twist the lens hood to vary the ND and it&#039;s nothing as fiddly as trying to use the included petal hood or the cardboard and tape solution I had also engineered!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I bought this lens for hand held work and it&#8217;s brilliant! I also tossed up between this and the 24-70 but I think for getting quick shots, fast in changing and uncontrolled environments you need a lens with IS. </p>
<p>On the fader end I bought a LCW variND Fader because it has a filter thread on the outside, and I found an 82mm rubber circular lens hood on an ebay store (Zykkor make I think) and it works great because now I just twist the lens hood to vary the ND and it&#8217;s nothing as fiddly as trying to use the included petal hood or the cardboard and tape solution I had also engineered!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Peng</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-1522</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Peng</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 17:28:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-1522</guid>
		<description>Hi Paul,

I found your review because I was looking to see if anyone else has a problem with the noise of the stabilizer on this 24-105 lens, and your review seems to be the only one that mentions such a problem. I was worried that this may have been a defect in my lens, so I was just wondering if this is the same for all the 24-105mm USM&#039;s out there. 

cheers!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Paul,</p>
<p>I found your review because I was looking to see if anyone else has a problem with the noise of the stabilizer on this 24-105 lens, and your review seems to be the only one that mentions such a problem. I was worried that this may have been a defect in my lens, so I was just wondering if this is the same for all the 24-105mm USM&#8217;s out there. </p>
<p>cheers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Lambert</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-942</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Lambert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Feb 2011 01:47:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-942</guid>
		<description>Hey:

I had the same realization, and bought the same lens for my 7d/60d setup.  It is absolutely worth the money, and I don&#039;t notice noise problems, but then again, I&#039;m doing most of my recording via external mics and sync in post (gotta love the h4n for that - this thing is the best recorder I&#039;ve ever owned).  And the stabilization makes for greatly usable footage, even when handheld, but with a basic shoulder rig, the lens really shines - it&#039;s like having a well designed portable movie camera without having to swap lenses.

Great post: totally agree. 

I do use the 50 1.2 and the 28 1.4 lenses (which I also kit pack) frequently for interviews, and for that they are absolutely fantastic.  But when I&#039;m packing, I usually just throw the 7d, LCDVF viewfinder, and this lens in the bag with an IKAN Multi-K, rode mic and h4n — you&#039;re pretty much good to go after that.  It&#039;s versatile!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey:</p>
<p>I had the same realization, and bought the same lens for my 7d/60d setup.  It is absolutely worth the money, and I don&#8217;t notice noise problems, but then again, I&#8217;m doing most of my recording via external mics and sync in post (gotta love the h4n for that &#8211; this thing is the best recorder I&#8217;ve ever owned).  And the stabilization makes for greatly usable footage, even when handheld, but with a basic shoulder rig, the lens really shines &#8211; it&#8217;s like having a well designed portable movie camera without having to swap lenses.</p>
<p>Great post: totally agree. </p>
<p>I do use the 50 1.2 and the 28 1.4 lenses (which I also kit pack) frequently for interviews, and for that they are absolutely fantastic.  But when I&#8217;m packing, I usually just throw the 7d, LCDVF viewfinder, and this lens in the bag with an IKAN Multi-K, rode mic and h4n — you&#8217;re pretty much good to go after that.  It&#8217;s versatile!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Therault</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-563</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Therault</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 01:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-563</guid>
		<description>Hoping and waiting for a 2.8 version of this lens.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hoping and waiting for a 2.8 version of this lens.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Therault</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-562</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Therault</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Aug 2010 01:42:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-562</guid>
		<description>Paul, I would recommend the Singh-Ray Vari ND over even the new LCW Fader ND Mark II. I&#039;ve seen them side-by-side and while there is some loss of sharpness with both, especially at tele lengths, the Fader ND is unacceptable to me.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul, I would recommend the Singh-Ray Vari ND over even the new LCW Fader ND Mark II. I&#8217;ve seen them side-by-side and while there is some loss of sharpness with both, especially at tele lengths, the Fader ND is unacceptable to me.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: stina</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-558</link>
		<dc:creator>stina</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:59:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-558</guid>
		<description>Hi,

Thanks for your review. It confirmed my suspicion that the Stabilizer was what caused a lot of noise on the sound of my video footage.

Cheers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>Thanks for your review. It confirmed my suspicion that the Stabilizer was what caused a lot of noise on the sound of my video footage.</p>
<p>Cheers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Joy</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-540</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Joy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Aug 2010 06:47:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-540</guid>
		<description>Hi Nick. I&#039;ve not tried to use this lens with a matte box yet but I definitely wouldn&#039;t advise any method where the lens had to support the weight of the box and filters.

If I had to use it I&#039;d probably let the lens move inside the matte box and then adjust the position of the box on the rails accordingly for each shot.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Nick. I&#8217;ve not tried to use this lens with a matte box yet but I definitely wouldn&#8217;t advise any method where the lens had to support the weight of the box and filters.</p>
<p>If I had to use it I&#8217;d probably let the lens move inside the matte box and then adjust the position of the box on the rails accordingly for each shot.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Hamer</title>
		<link>http://www.pauljoy.com/gear/cameras-lenses/canon-ef-24-105mm-f4-is-lens-for-video/comment-page-1/#comment-538</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Hamer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 18:23:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pauljoy.com/#comment-538</guid>
		<description>Hey Paul, great site by the way&gt; Have you got any ideas how to use this lens with a matte box?  I have tired two options both unsuccessfully: 

1. Using a clip on matte box; although lightweight, the matte box was still too heavy, especially once I got those 4x4 glass filters in there. It&#039;s putting real pressure on the lens.  

2. Using a clip on matte box mounted on bars, leaving the matte box loose on the bars so that it moves forward and back with the zoom of the lens. Still too much weight on the lens, it&#039;s definitely putting the zoom barrel under pressure and causing the zoom action to be really heavy.

Any ideas?  Nick</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Paul, great site by the way&gt; Have you got any ideas how to use this lens with a matte box?  I have tired two options both unsuccessfully: </p>
<p>1. Using a clip on matte box; although lightweight, the matte box was still too heavy, especially once I got those 4&#215;4 glass filters in there. It&#8217;s putting real pressure on the lens.  </p>
<p>2. Using a clip on matte box mounted on bars, leaving the matte box loose on the bars so that it moves forward and back with the zoom of the lens. Still too much weight on the lens, it&#8217;s definitely putting the zoom barrel under pressure and causing the zoom action to be really heavy.</p>
<p>Any ideas?  Nick</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

