I love that someone like you such a high quality photographer would review this lens. Thank you thank you for reviewing the lenses that we not so professional photographers use!!!
Gorgeous images with a lens that’s not your typical portrait lens. However, it’s not about the lens or camera it’s about execution of the concept you have in mind. And you did that beautifully!
Depth of field is a function of three different factors (f stop, focal length and distance to subject). You can get a shallow depth of field by zooming in and decreasing the distance to your subject. At 240mm and ten feet the depth of field is 0.18 feet at f6.3. At f4 the depth of field would be 0.12 feet.
Those images are gorgeous and have nice fall off. Lens have came a long way since I had variable F stop lens. They use to create lower quality images with lens problems, heavy light fall off going from center to the sides and were not durable in the long run. But I can't see anything wrong with your images.
ty ty. to your question... yes and no... this lens goes from 24 to 240... so you are losing quite a bit on both sides of the lens. there is a massive difference in a 24mm and a 70mm
great job as always. I'm a NIkon guy and love my NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR - Same deal. Great versatility and with the wide ISO ranges we get these days, low light is not an issue either. Also Kudos to Violet. a lovely range of expressions.
Ok, the 2.5ft at 240 is pretty damn impressive!! The puddle shot, that was awesome!! Now, my question is even though it’s 6.3 at 240, aren’t we really “losing” about a stop of DOF due to the compression at 240? I mean compression has to play a role.
might be getting too nerdy for me... :) we are in essence losing 2+ stops right? 2.8 to 4 to 5.6 are 2 full stops... and then to 6.3... now of course we are talking stops of light, but no way the images look the same at 200m 2.8 and 200m 6.3... of course you will have great compression with both... but the DOF will look different for sure. imo
I bought this lens 7 months ago as a travel lens. In order to keep my kit simple, my plan was one camera, one lens. And, this seemed to be great for wide landscape shots as well as my portrait and telephone needs. I was shocked at how well-built it is and how sharp the images are. I'm glad it's getting the attention it deserves.
I'm thinking of getting this one but for the current time, with the RF 24-105mm lens. What are your thoughts on this? I never had a camera before although I have studied Film Production (but unfortunately never worked as a filmmaker). I thought of getting a camera mainly for photos and videos to start working as a freelancer. Would the 24-105mm be a good start for me? Thanks in advance!
i think this would be a great place to start. i really did enjoy this lens and its cost effective too. and then as you grow - you can look to adding prime lenses, etc.
I bought this lens on a recommendation from Ken Rockwell's website. Super sharp and it was all I needed on a trip to London and Paris this summer, paired with an R6 mk.II
It's excellent for outdoor photography or even in a studio setting, but I am unsure about its performance in indoor low light conditions with f6.5. Perhaps with a higher ISO, it could compensate for this limitation.
![[GETLENS] Обзор Canon RF 24-240mm f4-6.3 IS USM + ПРИМЕРЫ ФОТО](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/x4phqM75Cps/mqdefault.jpg)
![Cody Johnson - I'm Gonna Love You (with Carrie Underwood) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yy9PuYMU29g/mqdefault.jpg)
For travel I'm finding the 24-240 & 28 pancake is a great combination!
good call for sure. i agree. i need this lens in my bag
I love that someone like you such a high quality photographer would review this lens. Thank you thank you for reviewing the lenses that we not so professional photographers use!!!
you are very welcome! I will be adding this to my kit for sure.
Great job Violet!
she nailed it
Gorgeous images with a lens that’s not your typical portrait lens. However, it’s not about the lens or camera it’s about execution of the concept you have in mind. And you did that beautifully!
ty so much!!
Not bad for a $700 Canon non-L lens! The back light was killer, but the creative puddle shot was my favorite. Keep up the high energy videos Sal. 😎♠📸
thanks brother!
700$?
Depth of field is a function of three different factors (f stop, focal length and distance to subject). You can get a shallow depth of field by zooming in and decreasing the distance to your subject. At 240mm and ten feet the depth of field is 0.18 feet at f6.3. At f4 the depth of field would be 0.12 feet.
Those images are gorgeous and have nice fall off. Lens have came a long way since I had variable F stop lens. They use to create lower quality images with lens problems, heavy light fall off going from center to the sides and were not durable in the long run. But I can't see anything wrong with your images.
Lo uso da mesi ed e' incredibile. Ho varie ottiche art. E serie l. Ma questo puo' fare tutto e molto bene.
Sono così felice che ti piaccia. Sono rimasto piacevolmente sorpreso dalle sue prestazioni.
@@SalCincotta1 assolutamente si. Buon lavoro 😀
Hey Sal great shots as always. Can you get the same shots with the RF 70-200 2.8? with depth of field?
ty ty. to your question... yes and no... this lens goes from 24 to 240... so you are losing quite a bit on both sides of the lens. there is a massive difference in a 24mm and a 70mm
@@SalCincotta1 Damn that’s crazy awesome and under $1000 👍🏽
Those images were phenomenal
U da man!
appreciate that,
Butta Sal!
appreciate that!
HOLY 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥
you rocked it my girl.
18N
great job as always. I'm a NIkon guy and love my NIKKOR Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 VR - Same deal. Great versatility and with the wide ISO ranges we get these days, low light is not an issue either. Also Kudos to Violet. a lovely range of expressions.
ty appreciate that!
Crazy images....Bro you never miss!!
Glad you like them!
Great work Sal.
ty ty
Ok, the 2.5ft at 240 is pretty damn impressive!! The puddle shot, that was awesome!! Now, my question is even though it’s 6.3 at 240, aren’t we really “losing” about a stop of DOF due to the compression at 240? I mean compression has to play a role.
might be getting too nerdy for me... :) we are in essence losing 2+ stops right? 2.8 to 4 to 5.6 are 2 full stops... and then to 6.3... now of course we are talking stops of light, but no way the images look the same at 200m 2.8 and 200m 6.3... of course you will have great compression with both... but the DOF will look different for sure. imo
I bought this lens 7 months ago as a travel lens. In order to keep my kit simple, my plan was one camera, one lens. And, this seemed to be great for wide landscape shots as well as my portrait and telephone needs. I was shocked at how well-built it is and how sharp the images are. I'm glad it's getting the attention it deserves.
Good stuff!
@@SalCincotta1¹1
Great Video!!!
Glad you enjoyed it
Loved the images and definitely loved how close you were on some of those shots!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Will a RF24-240 STM version be released?
Gorgeous shots! I'll look into getting this one for sure so, I thank you for sharing. And Violet was amazing!
I'm thinking of getting this one but for the current time, with the RF 24-105mm lens. What are your thoughts on this? I never had a camera before although I have studied Film Production (but unfortunately never worked as a filmmaker). I thought of getting a camera mainly for photos and videos to start working as a freelancer. Would the 24-105mm be a good start for me? Thanks in advance!
i think this would be a great place to start. i really did enjoy this lens and its cost effective too. and then as you grow - you can look to adding prime lenses, etc.
I bought this lens on a recommendation from Ken Rockwell's website. Super sharp and it was all I needed on a trip to London and Paris this summer, paired with an R6 mk.II
yeah i agree. i need this in my life. will be adding to my kit especially for when im traveling.
Finally! Thank you for doing this review on the RF 24-240! I've been waiting to see what this lens can do.
My pleasure!
I must admit I didn’t see that one coming. Great video.
You and me both!
Looks like a good lens to use for fashion show runway shooting also, nice focal length range.
just need to make sure there is enough light... but yes - i agree.
It's excellent for outdoor photography or even in a studio setting, but I am unsure about its performance in indoor low light conditions with f6.5. Perhaps with a higher ISO, it could compensate for this limitation.
yeah valid point... i would think its not going to work for studio work. cranking up iso is always a last resort for me.
Bro owsome as always keep growing brother its my dream to take some shots from u ❤❤❤
Thank you so much 😀
@@SalCincotta1 your welcome bro ❤️❤️