Canon RF 24-105mm vs RF 24-70mm - Review and Comparison!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 3 июл 2024
- When buying a high-end Canon mirrorless camera, you’re stuck between choosing the RF 24-70mm f2.8 or the RF 24-105mm f4 lenses to go with it. But what’s the main differences and which one will suit you best? Here we’re going to review these two lenses and put them head-to-head in a test to see which one suits landscape and portrait photographers.
See the images in more detail here: www.theschoolofphotography.co...
Get current prices and buy the lenses here: tidd.ly/4eQiKfQ
Support us:
Get 10% OFF our Online Courses here - bit.ly/3Jt12kZ
Our Recommended Photography Equipment - bit.ly/photog-gear
Check out our Book here - bit.ly/photog-book
Check out our eBook here - bit.ly/photog-ebook
Grab a Freebie:
Get our Free eBook for learners of photography here - bit.ly/2DwNS4c
Get 15 Free Lightroom Presets - goo.gl/xvTPT7
Music by Epidemic Sound. Try for free here - share.epidemicsound.com/wBdh6
Create a website with Squarespace. Free trial here squarespace.syuh.net/TSOP
Free trial of Photoshop and Lightroom here - prf.hn/l/9mEZ58x
Get weekly tutorials and special offers delivered straight to your inbox, subscribe at www.theschoolofphotography.com
Join our learning community on social media:
Facebook ► / theschoolofphotography1
Instagram ► / theschoolofphotography1
Follow my personal photography work here:
Facebook ► / marcnewton
Instagram ► / marcnewton
And remember - Learn photography properly at The School of Photography
NB: Above are some affiliate links and TSOP will receive a small percentage of some purchases made.
#canonlens #cameralens #lensreview
4 years ago I transitioned to mirrorless and ordered the R5 and 24-105 L. I received the 24-105 4 months before the R5. For 3 years I was a happy landscaper. Then I photographed blue hour city scapes with a buddy who was using a Nikon Z9 and 24-120 f4 and I could see the Nikon images were superior. In Lightroom versus Nikon, highlights (streetlights) on my images looked like a small amount of Vaseline had been applied! I tested my other lenses (14-35,70-200 f4,100-500 and 85 f2) and highlights were all good. As a CPS member living in LA I was able to take my camera and lens to Canon to be checked out. The lens was “in spec”. I then purchased the RF 24-70 to test against my 24-105. To my eye the 24-70 blew the 24-105 away in sharpness and contrast. I sold the 24-105. I really miss its light weight and versatility, but am blown away by the 24-70 images. Wow
Good comparison, I chose the 24-70 f2.8 because I have the 70-200 f2.8, they make a nice combo!
Thanks for sharing 👍
Same here)
I have the 24-105 and I am quite happy with the DOF of it. It’s a great all around lens. For me it’s the extra reach that helped make my decision
I started with ND filters that I found eventually. Enjoyed the test to better understand my canon lenses😊
Great test and video. That's a lot of money for a bit more cream. Before the R5 I had the 5DS and the EF 24-70 F2.8. When I went mirrorless with the R5, I sold my EF lenses and bought the RF 24-105 F4. It's my base lens I use for walkarounds, some portraiture, and all around photography. I like the little bit of extra reach when I need it. and the cream level suits me fine even losing a stop.
Thanks for sharing Jim 👍
Great video. I am a hobby wildlife photografer with the Canon R6M2 with the RF 100-500mm 4.5-7.1 L and the RF 24-105 mm f4 L. For wildlife I use the 100-500MM mostly. The 24-105 for citytrip and other common things. I do think that for portrets the f 2.8 should be the winner for the background. As for me I like the 100-500MM and the 24-105 for the things I do with them. Greatings Leo from Holland.
Thanks for sharing Leo 👍
Thanks Mark, great video.
Being weighing up between these two and same for the 70-200.
Now leaning to the 24-105 just for that extra reach and only needing to take 1 lens at times and then would potentially get the 70-200 f2.8.
Glad to help John ☺️
For my paid work, I'm still using my EF L lenses, but as I look towards retirement, I'm selecting lenses that will suit me better for size and weight. The 24-105 I've had for 5 years now, and I'm very happy with its performance. It's sharp enough, does well for portraits at 105, and is great for landscapes. I've two other RF f4L lenses, the 70-200 which is beautifully compact, and the 10-20, which is simply astonishing.
Nice review
I got the 24-105 when I bought my R6ii, it's my go to lens, I love it.
If I had to do it all over again, I would have skipped the RF 24-105 f/4 and gone with the RF 24-70 f/2.8. On the R5 if you only occasionally require the extra reach you can easily use crop mode. Additionally, I picked up the RF 70-200 f/2.8 for extra reach and the kit lens now stays at home.
Thanks for sharing 👍
What a fantastic real world test thank you backed up the decision I made the extra reach the 24-105 F4 gives me for street photography is absolutely invaluable. Funnily I met a real camera snob last week who had the 2.8 and he made the comment "oh you have the kit lens" 😡 Yes I replied and saved £1200 which got me the battery grip and a flashgun. With the low light performance of this camera the reach is far more important to me than an extra stop I will be able to get the shot while you are trying to get closer to the subject or swapping lenses for your 70-200. As long as you are happy that's fine, I know I made the right choice for me thanks 😂 Really excellent no nonsense in the field test thank you Mark. As for Bokeh and background blur it can be added with a single click in post so there's that advantage of the 2.8 dealt with as well!
You're welcome 😊 🙏. And anyone that calls the 24-105 L lens a kit lens is a d*ck! 😁
Great comparison video and I acknowledge your findings and opinion. I have always used the EF 24-70 2.8 early version and traded up to the series ll and complement with the 70-200 2.8 ll I appreciate the extra stop as I frequently shoot in low / lower light. For almost 4 years now, I have been using EOS R-5 and have never felt the urge to upgrade my robust EF lenses to the RF lenses. Thank you and Keep up the great work 😊
Thanks Jean 🙏😊
For me, the cost/benefit came down to 2.8 vs 4.0 and the extra reach. My most frequent use was for indoor sports where 2.8 lenses have ruled for years. In making my decision, I considered the much improved high ISO capabilities of today’s cameras as well as the fantastic noise reduction options now available in post processing. Considering these factors I traded one stop of light for greater reach and I have not regretted my decision. The 24-105 is a great all round lens and (for me at least) the significant cost savings is a bonus.
Thanks for sharing Darrell 👍
Great comparison Mark. thanks for sharing... What is your view on the rf24-70 f2 ??? That's a beast ... is there a marked difference between f2 and f2.8?
Not used that one Rich so can't say.
I bought RF 24-105 f4L, it is a good all around lens. But I immediately sold it after I tried RF 24-70 f2.8L. For me personally, it is worth the extra cost for an additional f-stop. More background blur and better low light performance is important for me .
As the video clearly shows there's no "performance" difference if you mean sharpness they are the same The background blur can be enhanced in post with a single click so for me the extra reach is far more important. I think Mark's excellent real world test shows both are excellent lenses and get what works best for you. I did and saved £1200!
Thanks for the info and idea, I have the Sigma 24-70 f/2.8 Art and the RF 24-105 f/4. I going on a party cruise to take some family photos and was on the fence about which lens to take. And after making a similar comparison between the two with my trusted mannequin bust. My results are about to same on the telephoto side.
Thanks for sharing 👍
I do events at night in terrible light and I like my f2.8s, but if the stage is well lit the 105mm is way more convenient.
I have the f/4 trio of lenses . As a hobbyist who mostly does travel and landscape they generally meet my needs. Usually if I am shooting portraits I rely on the 105 focal length for the very reasons you have explained.
Thanks Steve 😊
I have the 24-105 and use the techniques I learned from your beginner course to get a great background blur. In my opinion, spending extra money on the 2.8 would not be worth it.
Thanks for sharing 👍
Great thank you, I got the 24-105
Glad it helped
24-70 2.8 is a pro workhorse lens that whenever you need extra stop light. Think the cost effective of a 24-105 + 50 1.8 + 85 2 still less a 24-70 2.8 and the 3 lens combo would more beneficial for your photography.
I had the EF 24-70 F2.8 and when moved to the R I sold it and bough the RF 24-105 F4 L. Had it since it came out and mostly used for travel. Honestly never been happy with the edge performance and I think its time I swap it out for the F2.8 RF. I see photos from Sony and Nikon with their 24-105 and 24-120 and the photos look crips edge to edge so I dont know if its just my lens or I'm too picky. I tested between F8 and F11 and still not happy with it when shooting landscape or city photos during my travels. I was trying to keep the lens light but I think edge to edge sharpness is more important now. I shoot with the R5 and the R6Mk2. I also have the RF 70-200F4 which is much better edge to edge.
24-105 is a great travel lens as it's lighter, and has more reach. If I'm getting serious, I switch to my primes anyway.
Thanks for sharing Tom 👍
Nice review! I have the RF 24-105. I like it. The 24-70 f2.8 is a nice lens, but put it on your camera and walk around the zoo for a few hours. I would be willing to bet you may like the 24-105 a whole lot more. It is lighter. With the ISO performance of the R5 and R6, I see little problem. If I was doing a ton of indoor nightclub/band shoots, I may opt for a 24-70, but right now, I am good with my choice.
Thanks for the tips!
24-105
Nice and clear compare! I'm make photos most at events, indoor. So using f2.8 lenses (15-35, 24-70 and 70-200) on my R5. The extra stop is very welcome. The 24-105 is a very nice lens for outside (travel) and studio photos.
Why you edit DNG files in Lightroom and not the CR3 files?
Thanks for sharing. That's all explained here ruclips.net/video/5qiIC1D14WU/видео.html
@@theschoolofphotography Thanks!
IMO, as I own sigma 18-50 f2.8 on Sony e mouth, and various canon lens telecoms at f4- 5.6 I would say the f2.8 does has a very lovely bokeh effect, however I have achieved the same effect with f6-5,6 lens. By choosing my locations, distance to subject, and distance of subjects to back ground.
Personally I would not pay canons stupid price for f2.8, go for the f4 as it is far more useful for general photography. The f2.8 is only worth is money if you only shoot f2.8 Al, of the time, or you ate in low light venue, ie sports area.
Save your money and get the f4
Have the 24-105 f4, love it, bit shocked that you have to pay 1400gbp, it is still available here in Australia for $1700..
As a hobby photographer shooting with a Canon R100, I choose the RF24-105mm to save a ton of money as compared to the RF 24-70mm lens. I mainly shoot flower n foliage photos with my R100. I use a EF 100mm f2.8 lens with an adapter on my R100. I also have an RF 100-400mm zoom lens f5.6-8. Some years ago I paid $600. for my EF-100mm lens used. And I paid under $700. for my 100-400mm lens new.
Thanks for sharing Matt 👍
Excellent comparison, for hobbyists like me 105 is fine. Excellent content indeed, I am a subscriber, liked and commented. 🙂
Awesome, thank you!
r6 mark ii 24-105 f4 for £ 2650 i think is worth it, thanks for the test.
No problem 👍
Im not a canon shooter for me im Nikon and fuji but found this to be very interesting
Thanks Andy 😊
I can see a professional making this purchase but for the rest of us who make photography a hobby, lens prices are ridiculous. Not that it wouldn’t be cool to own one of these lenses. Reality is that there are better choices for a fraction of the price one should consider. As a hobby, there are affordable lenses out there that can be found on Amazon, eBay, Facebook Marketplace, and other such sites. Obviously they will not give you the same quality but for the smidgin improvement compared to the thousands of Pounds, Euros, Dollars, extra really isn’t required. Don’t forget what makes photography fun. It’s a bit in the gear but not at the cost of brand new equipment. Thanks for the video and looking forward to your next.
Thanks 😊 🙏
I understand the point, kinda, but different lenses suit different purposes. You can never declare one lens type to be better than another, only more or less appropriate to the task at hand.