The Most Underrated Lens RF 24-105mm F4.0L IS USM | EOS R6
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 июл 2024
- So many people look down on the RF 24-105mm f4.0L IS USM because of the slow speed of this lens, but in my perspective, most of the time, its fast enough! Check out my review for the most underrated RF lens. Once you understand the power of this lens, you'll fall in love with it!
RF 24-105mm f4.0L IS USM
Amazon - amzn.to/3pJ4FYJ
B&H - www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...
A cheaper option - amzn.to/3gic8Lk
Gear Used:
EOS R6 - amzn.to/3hfIpQa
50mm f1.8 - amzn.to/2WWkk9i
Audio - Rode Videomicro - amzn.to/2U4iilN
Lighting - Aputure MC - amzn.to/34Qaafl
Artlist.io | Sign up now for 2 months free - bit.ly/3kqs5yK
Artgrid.io | Sign up now for 2 months free - bit.ly/2DvdGRs
Buy me a ☕️ - Venmo - @tonymellinger
For Product/business inquiries: www.tonymellinger.com/take-ac... 
Кино
Going back 10 years or more and the 5Dii / EF 24-105 L was the greatest all round combo in history. FF to now and I think the R6 / RF 24-105 L is the same. Perfect all rounder pro combo for pro or enthusiast alike. Add RF 70-200 F4 and you’re set to travel the world. Nice video mate.
Totally agree with you! Thanks for watching!
Totally agree, the lens is awesome. The colours and overall image I get are superb and noticeably better than my RF50mm. The F4 is fine and perfect for video. As you say, for the price, weight, size it's just insane, and it negates / prevent me for moving up to the Trinity lenses. So much noise is made about "great bokeh", and low light, but honestly those situations for me are minor and I can get by fine with this lens. Yes I'll certainly get better lenses at some point but at huge cost for minor incremental gain. Love the C70 footage.
C70 footage is so nice to work with. Are your shooting in h265?
Tony, great video. I live right by twin oaks off big bend so that was fun to see. If you haven't seen the park behind the church it's a great place to shoot some portraits. Found it neat to see videos from a fellow STL member, keep up the great work.
Very nice! How fun!! Thanks for watching!!
Great video mate !! I am an "Enthusiast" photographer who loves taking Portrait and Landscape shots, I am planning to buy this lens along with RP so that I could use it in all my travel. Your video gave a lot of confidence to my decision.
That’s exactly what I do for my R6
Totally agree. RF 24-105 F/4 IS USM is a banger lens for video. It doesn't do too bad on photos either. Good stuff.
Thanks for watching! So many people hate on the 24-105, I love it
I’m using the RP with the 24-105 f/4-7.1 and it hasn’t really been something that’s limited me. Work with what the tool gives you, learn it inside and out and you’ll be able to use anything.
However that constant f/4 is absolutely a huge advantage and would recommend it over the f/4-7.1 just because of that. Great video hope to see much more content like this
Totally agree with you! Use what you’ve got and push it to the limit. The problem I had with the non-L 24-105 was I just never felt like the image was great. Mixed next to my other images with other lenses, it was just too noticeable for me. It’s much better glass with the f4.
Thanks for the content, explanations were excellent. After watching countless videos and reviews this one helped me to resolve my dilemma. I’m pairing this glass with an R6 I just bought hoping to pickup photography after many years of inactivity.
Oh that’s a killer setup. My daily workhorse
I was struggling with selling this and getting/financing :-) the RF 24-70, but decided to keep it and put some of that money into a flash package for portraits. You can get some beautiful shots with this thing, and zoomed in, great background separation. Great review.
You sure can!! Thanks for watching!
This lens is a beast, value for money. The only premium “red ringed” RF lens that’s justify its price point. This lens is not for someone who only knows to dial down to F1.2 or whatever the lowest and blur everything out except the subject.
But also at 105 F4 you will get almost the same bokeh as 70mm F2.8 and an extra reach..
I agree with ya! Love this lens.
when i travel, rarely go higher than f4… i just want slight blur where backround still visible… and i shoot wide shots so i dont mind f4…
I agree with you. I bought it with my R5 and it is my most used lens. it is really great.
It really is. I absolutely love it
Agree with your comments, I have this and the 100 to 500, as you say huge coverage, recommended.
I’m excited to try that lens out
Awesome video
I was just in your neck of the wood.
My girlfriend grew up in Augusta.
Love your town.
Oh nice! That’s really close!
Totally agree, I shoot a lot of video I'd much rather have the extended reach than the wider aperture. you can still get great background separation at the long end of the zoom range, and most of the time I'm more interested in getting closer to the subject on run and gun type shoots than having shallow depth of field.
Yea agreed!
Great video! I plan on adapting my EF 24-105 f/4 (L) & EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 STM with my new R6 MKII. I primarily used the STM on my 90D & C100 MKII because of how quiet the autofocus is. I use the (L) for photos on my 5D MKII.
Thanks again and have a wonderful & blessed Christmas Holiday season.
That c100mKII is a sleeper! Still a great camera with excellent quality image
@@TonyMellinger
I use it for our Bible studies & Sunday school. It’s an awesome camera.
@@lb7144 We still have 2 in the camera vault. I should use them more!
Awesome review. Many Thanks!😊😊😊
Thanks for watching!
Thank you for making this! I’m upgrading from a Rebel t6i and I think this would be a great first rf lens
That would be perfect for you!!
yoooo i just upgraded from the same exact camera to the R6
My favorite lens, I got my as a kit with the RP for $1600. I do agree is probably the most underrated RF Lens.
Thanks for watching, glad you love it as much as me!
Had the EF version on my D series cameras and it was an awesome lens for travel and generally so versatile so it was top of my list moving to mirrorless. Laughed at your hesitation on price try getting your gear here in NZ , its NZ $2000 for the RF 24-105 4L. The R5 body is close to $7000 and risen a lot since last November .
Yikes! WOW! That’s crazy expensive… at least you have some of the best views in the world to take photos of!!
I purchased both factory referb R6($1700) and RF24-105 f4 L($720) with all holiday discounts. Camera and lens arrived in absolutely new condition. I used to have R with this lens. Compare images from R6 with R and the same lens, I must say R6/RF24-105 L combination looks sharper and cleaner. I'm very happy with my purchase.
Yea, it’s a great combo! My everyday setup!!
That’s my exact plan this year. Wait for the holidays and get the r6ii with this lens.
Great review 🙂
I sold my RF 24-70 f2.8 and kept this lens. It was giving better images at f4 !
To be fair I have the RF 28-70 f2 anyway but when comparing the three lenses with a view to selling either the 24-105 or 24-70, I honestly thought this one would go. I was wrong. About 5 tests showed this generally to be an easier lens to get good results with than the 24-70 … So that got sold.
In my experience so far it is a huge improvement on the EF version which I had for years but didn’t really rate. This lens is different.
It sure is different. Can’t put my finger on the difference but I love the RF so much more than the EF
Seriously ? I am about to trade my RF 24-105 f4 (and EF 24-70 f2.8) for the RF 24-70 f2.8. Your comment stopped me in my tracks...
Im debating with myself if to get the RF24-70 or RF 24-105 for landscape. I did own the EF24-105mkII but i did not like it so it was sold. Was not sharp enough . Maybe i had a bad copy. I have the RF15-35 2,8 but I need some more reach . Is there a difference in sharpness at f8-f16? any difference in diffraction at f16 ? I dont need the 2,8 so that is not a dealbreaker. More important is the overall picture quality at f8-f16.
@@mikaelhylander6321 you are stretching the lens at f16. I can't comment specifically at f16 but sold my 15-35 as I was disappointed with the sharpness (I had 2 copies too) and went back to the 24-70 f2.8 tbh. My second 24-70 f2.8 was far better than the first and gave me more flexibility than the 24-105 (I think I had a great copy).
@@johnh6535 oki thanks for answer. Yes f/16 is sure a trade off when consider sharpness vs a large DOF , but for descent sharpness in the entire picture without the need to focus stack I found f/16 to work pretty good, Hence I was curious how the 24-105 stood up against the 24-70. About the 15-35, after using it only for a few months for some landscape/woodland im very impressed. I went from the EF17-40 so thats a big step up in image quality if I compare diffrent images from the two diffrent lenses. I only compare real images so no actual testcharts or similar comparison.
The EF 24-105 was my landscape workhorse throughout Eastern and Northern Europe, but I hated the lens creep when it was slung over my shoulder, say. Aside from the lighter weight and better glass, this lens seems to represent a significant improvement, especially feeling that it’s a crime to use an EF lens on my R5. Thanks for the confirming review.
Haha it’s not a crime to use an EF lens on an R5… but… I do much prefer the RF glass
Great vid
Thanks for watching!
Thank you. I’ve owned both EF versions and now have the RF version which I luckily got in a kit when I got my EOS R (now moved to R5). Great one lens solution but in RF I don’t think there is a single zoom that doesn’t extend when zoomed. I don’t shoot video but do any Canon RF zooms work well on a gimbal? Not sure what zooms are internally focus these days except I have a Sony 70-200/2.8 GM II is. So I’m not really sure how videographers work around this issue. Oh well, take care.
I just got the R6 combo with this lens and wow the bokeh and compression of this lens is incredible. The background blur Almost looks like my tamron f2.8.
It’s my favorite!
Im looking at it here in the UK - R6 with the 24-105 f4 is £2800/$2800 - I'm thinking of adding the RF 35 f1.8 as well.
@@markshirley01 the rf 351.8 is the next lens I'm getting too.
I don't shot video so your "cons" don't impact me at all. Got this with my R6 and so far I love it. I thought about the 100-500 but it's a tank and as good as it is, I feel it would be left behind. My next will probably be the 70-200 f/4. Love the form factor, weight, and just that bit more reach.
Yes I agree with all of those things. The 70-200f4 is suuuper tiny and very capable! The 100-500 is pretty large
@@TonyMellinger I came from Fuji so weight, handling and shooting experience are always top of my list. My problem with the previous system was it's built around primes (none of which have OIS) the camera bodies are small and don't have IS, and with the exception of one zoom they are all pretty much overized for the bodies. So glad Canon finally decided to jump into mirrorless and with FF to boot.
Hi, thank you for sharing your interesting video. I'd like to ask you a question please. Would you buy the Sony 24-105mm or the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 di iii vxd to make 4K video with the A7? I know perfectly well that the Tamron is not stabilized, but I would like to know your thoughts. Thank you
Hey there, I only shoot canon. I tried the A7’s and decided Sony just wasn’t for me. At all.
How is the dust sealing on this particular RF lens? I've heard photographers having a nightmare with Tamron and Sigma's current 24-70 due to dust getting sucked in to the lens due to poor sealing on the extending lens barrel. To your knowledge, does the RF F4 24-105mm L have a filter between the extending barrel and the main barrel to prevent dust from getting sucked into the lens? Or in your extensive use of the lens, have you detected any issues with dust [long term use]?
I am not sure how the lens is built but I’ve had this lens in extremely dusty situations and it’s still good to go! Check out this video? It was filmed with the RF 24-105. There was so much dust, dirt and mud everywhere. ruclips.net/video/_qMqFzxEzrw/видео.html
Hi Tony
Great review! This will be my first zoom lens for my R6. You convinced me! You said the image is better then with the RF 35mm f/1.8 and RF 85mm f/2.0. Is it for both photo and video? Can you expalin a bit? Thanks! Great content!
The glass is higher quality in the L series lenses, included the the 24-105. The 35 and 85 are great, cheap, light lenses, but the Autofoucus motors, actual glass and components in the L series will make your image higher quality.
@@TonyMellinger thanks!
What’s your opinion on it for indoor with natural light from window ? Or should I get a lens adapter and get a more affordable 24-70 mm ef . I just ordered the r6 mark ii. I want to shoot indoor with natural window light, still and video. Eventually continuous light and out door for product style photography of my art for my webisite, reproductions etc. or since it’s the r6 mark Ii can I get sharp low grain images at f4 with slower shutter? I got an open box deal on the r6 mark ii and it came with that f7 max lens but plan to include it with my other lenses to trade in for the better.
I'm definitely no professional (yet) but in my experience shooting I normally use a focal range of about 35 for wide view (anything else gives a very unnatural distortion in my opinion) or zoomed to around 70- 80 for more flattering portraits with nice bokke. In my non professional opinion go for a 35mm and 85mm f1.8 macro lense for $500 a pop. Save yourself 100 bucks and get 2 macro lenses that are very good in low light.
The 35 and 85 is a very standard photographer setup, I still use this for weddings quite a bit. The 24-105 just gives you more flexibility and I prefer it for video.
That's a good alternative, but I'd wager many other people want a single lens to take with them. I am one of those persons.
I hike and fish alot and I like to take my camera with me for some photography. I need an all-in-one lens so I am not carrying half of my camera gear in my backpack. Weight is an issue when I need to carry food and water for the hike. A heavy pack isn't fun when rock scrambling on the creek. I've got a Lowepro "camera trek pack" hybrid backpack that is a cross between a regular hiking pack and a camera bag.
It only has room for a body and one lens, but I am able to cheat and include the new RF 16mm just in case I come across a situation where an ultra wide shot is needed.
The 24-105 is perfect for covering your wide angles and is great as a moderate telephoto. I current have the non-L version and it's great, but I want the extras and improved image quality that the L version provides.
Saving up right now!
I have pondered getting this lens for a while. But I’m mostly a stills vs. a video shooter, and I have the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L mk II. So I don’t think I’d be better off - other than losing the adapter. Thoughts?
That’s a good thought. It’s really up to you , the IS is really good for video, i dont think upgrading to the RF 24-70 is worth it for you currently, just depends if you’d rather have the focal reach. I find myself closer to the 105 side of the lens more often than not.
Thansk for great review. Im leaning towards this one instead of the RF24-70 for landscape photos. the extra reach is for me probably more worth than have f2,8. Im just concern not to loose overall image quality at f8-f16. Incase 24-105 has noticeable more diffraction at f16 that could be a dealbreaker
I’m really not sure. I’ve never noticed any quality loss even at high f stops. I’m also not a super super pixel peeper either, I know some people really need those precise details, I just typically don’t.
@@TonyMellinger Thanks for answer. Well I might be overthinking the matter. I will surely be very satisfied with the 24-105. Most people seem to agree its better than the EF versions.
I have the canon m50 for my you channel and shot mainly video with it. I want to purchase the r6 as my next camera is this 24-105 the best starter lens for me? I have a 15-50 now on the m50 camera. I am a bit worried that the 24 won’t be good for arms length vlogging. Thoughts?
Actually if you jumped up to the R6, 24mm = 15mm on your m50. I have the 16mm, but the IBIS is out of control so i end up using my 24-105 typically. I like the 24mm look for vlogging on a full frame camera.
This video was super helpful, I'm looking for an all round zoom travel Lens. Im trying to decide from the 24-105 or 24-70. Im leaning towards 24-105, I'll be doing a bit of portrait stuff which I like the 105 length, but I also want to do a bit of night shots when I travel which I want the 2.8. So hard to decide! I'm looking for a long term investment here. Thoughts?
It’s a little bit of a personal preference. I prefer the extra zoom. Some people prefer the 2.8. My thoughts are use the 24-105 and when it gets dark, switch to the 50mm f1.8.
@@TonyMellinger I ended up getting the 24-70, was a bit of a sacrifice in terms of weight, but leaned towards the 2.8 :)
This RF 24-105 USM is way better compare to the EF 24-105 USM on the EOS R6. I first used the EF 24-105 USM on my R6 with the RF-EF ring converter and found out that the image weren’t that sharp compared to the lens being on the previous 5D models. Since I don’t owned the 5D3 anymore, I decided to trade off the EF to the RF and the sharpness was surprisingly way better. It sure is a workhorse lens for me during studio commercial shots and videos and it just gets the work done!
Agreed!
Underrated but useful then for R6 based camera.
Useful for all of the R series cameras. I love it
for me it was no-brainer to get the 24-105 over the 24-70. I've had it a few years now and love it. I don't know why f4 scares some people. I use full frame cameras and I knew I could bump up the ISO a bit with no problems. And I do music photography. Still, not a problem. I would recommend this lens to anyone.
Totally agree with you. Thanks for watching!!
thanks for the good review, the price of the f4 doesn't concern me as much as the weight, 10oz more than the f/4-7.1... just wonder if the quality of the former is worth the weight?
I really struggled with the variable aperture version of the lens. I just felt like it was really really cheap glass compared to the F4 version.
Just in the middle of watching this and stopped it to type this.
I'm at the part about the filter size. It's not silly at all to have a common size front thread. It's great to have interchangeability of filters, but also lens caps. When I change lenses I just take the cap of the new one, put it straight on the old one and drop it in the bag. No faffing about checking all my pockets to find the right one....
This is probably next on my shopping list (I just bought a body only R6, and use my old EF 24-1-5F4 L)
Yea! You’ll love it! It’s on my camera more than any other lens probably. Either that or the 70-200… also a workhorse
Having a DSLR would this lens be good with running it on that format or should I get a mirror less
DSLRs are good too… and the 24-105 is a very versatile lens. I’ve found the RF version is really great. Same principles with a DSLR and 24-105 though
I am buying a used EF. Can I get an RF? I have a cannon 5D mark iii
Mr tony thanks alot for this video i got one question bro❤️ I got 70-200 and 14-35. And i really want 24-70 or 24-105 which one do i go for .
Up to you. I prefer the 24-105 over the 24-70 for the extended reach. If you find yourself shooting in low light more, that may be a better option
I just grabbed the RP. Will this be a good lens for product photography? Also had the 35mm in mind.
This is a great lens for product. I would shoot around 100mm for incredible looking product shots.
@@TonyMellinger Awesome!!! Thanks for the feedback! Just subscribed as well👌🏼
@@paulcarter5787 thanks so much!!
In the cable TV/ run&gun -- world Canon C300 & 24-105 is like the workhorse combo
Such a killer combo! I spend a lot of time with a c300iii
Would you keep or trade the EF version for the R version of this lens?
I would sell the ef and get the rf if you aren’t using ef mount cameras anymore. No question
I recently picked up the Canon C70 and am looking for a solid work horse RF lens. I was starting to think the only option was the 24-70 2.8 but as you say that costs twice as much and I make only a modest living, so the trinity lenses are cost prohibitive. Is this sharper than the lower cost f4 to 7.1? I’ve tried that lens but felt it wasn’t as sharp as I’d like.
Yea this is much better than the cheaper variable aperture lens. It’s much sharper. Use it on our c70s all the time and it’s great
@@TonyMellinger thanks! I’m going to pull the trigger and pick it up. Loved the video, your response, and am subscribing!
@@TerryPounds I’m sure you’ll love it. Use an affiliate link 😁😝
I recently bought an R6, and the 24-105/4 is remarkably good. On a trip to the mountains it was on my camera 90% of the time for everything from landscapes to portraits.
That’s a perfect use of the lens. It’s seriously magic.
Enjoyed your video. I am in the market for my first mirrorless full frame. I am considering an RP, R and R6. I really like the R6, but if I want the L glass it will have to be the RP or R. I shoot mostly stills of people and scenery. Thoughts? Comments would be welcome. No R’s to be seen locally. Have already seen the RP and R6. Thanks
All three are good. Between the 3 cameras, my thoughts would be to spend the money on the R6 now. It will last you much much longer than the RP or R. The AF just is on another level. You could pick up the R6 with a RF 50mm f1.8 for now and that could really get you pretty far until you want to spend a little more on a lens like the RF 24-105mm f4L. Just my thoughts.
I’ve also heard rumors they are getting ready to replace the R and RP soon. I dont know when that might be though.
I have the lens with EOS RP. Does my camera bottleneck it? I use for photos only.
Not at all, the RP is an excellent camera!
Still use an f/4 24-105L. Even though they give that lens out with so many camera packages I paid retail for mine. Best money I’ve ever spent on photography hands down
It’s the best in my opinion
How's this lens for product videography?
I think it’s amazing for video. Almost always on my camera
It’s a great lens, hardly comes off my r6 now. If only more of the rf lenses could be as affordable, hard to recommend mirrorless while they cost stupid prices.
Same.
I agree; this lens is great, and it really does destroy the negative connotations that come with the "kit lens" label. The range is great, the size is good (not too heavy compared to other lenses that cover that range), and definitely delivers regarding image quality. I'm not sure if I missed it, but another plus is that this lens is weather-sealed, which you don't get with some of the other RF options. Great video as always!
Thanks so much!! Yea! I was going to mention it was weather sealed but it was getting long haha!
@@TonyMellinger LOL! Great stuff. If I remember correctly, I took only the 24-105 and 35 with me on our family trip to Colombia. The other options are great, but sometimes I feel like I want to simplify my kit more and more these days...
@@ofthewayministries I’m the same way. I used to take my 35, 85, nifty fifty, 100mm macro, 70-200, 24-105 lol. Way too many
Hi there. I have the R6 with EF adapter and use EF 24-70 2.8 and EF 70-200 4.0. Would there be any reason to get this lens? Convince me
No, not really. That’s a good setup unless you want to get rid of the adaptor
I agree
👊🏼
@@TonyMellinger my fav rf are 24-105 for video since its versatile and the is helps with handheldrunt & gun, and 85mm f1.4 for photo.
My channel showcase none of this tho, all of the content here is shot on my old canon 600d with kit lens 18-55 xD
To start out in the rf lenses this is the lens that needs to be in your bag alongside the 35mm macro another underrated lens
Hard to beat that 35mm for so cheap!
Can you put the RF24 to 105 on a crop sensor camera like AS L3
Sure can. I use it all the time.
Oh wait I just read that, no? You would need an EF 24-105 for an SL3
Is it better than shooting the 24-240mm at F8 for max sharpness?
The Glass in the 24-105 is better quality so I’d say yes, as long as you dont need the reach!
maybe i should buy this 24-105mm f4 and a combo with sigma 24-70mm 2.8 ef with adapter.
Why the sigma if you’ve got the 24-105 f4?
What about the Sigma 24-105mm? How does it compare to this lens? Thanks
I’m too much of a canon lens snob to know 🤣
@TonyMellinger following your footsteps. Bit the bullet and got a used one yesterday, nice price 👍🏻
I'd buy it for $800
I have the 14-35mm F4 and get sexy quality out of it..
There Is strong vignetting at 14mm F4 but when I stop down it's not so bad.
I been looking at the 24-105 F4 L as a video/travel lens..
Some of my lenses are large and heavy..
I'd like a light kit that covers a. Wide range.. 14-35 & 24-105 would be nice with a couple primes. Still being light I wouldn't need a huge bag to lug around and still get great images.
Well me too 😝
@@TonyMellinger lol sorry, after I wrote that small post while eating I just went back to add a lot more to it.
I'll keep my eye out and Try to snag one for $800-900. I find I'd use it often.
I do have a 24-70 2.8 & 70-200 2.8.. but they are EF and weigh a bit while also being huge. In hand I don't mind the weight buy carrying around all day.. I'd like a lighter bag.. even for some jobs I travel too.
I just got back from FL.. that entire photo/video gig.. I could have gotten away with 2 lenses. 14-35 & 24-105.. throwing in my rf 50 1.8 & 35 1.8 wouldn't add much weight if I wanted some shallow depth of field at 35 & 50 or wanted better low light performance.
@@njrivetelite another one to keep an eye out for is the RF 70-200 f4. It’s so small and great quality!
@@TonyMellinger good point.
I wouldn't mind a 70-200 F4
I could keep the EF 70-200 2.8 IS III and scoop the RF 70-200 F4 for travel
My buddy has the 100-500 and seeing the results from it is pretty unreal it's a solid lens.
@@TonyMellinger $1600 not bad at all for that RF 70-200 F4!
is it good for the R7? im planning to buy this for my R7
It would be a great lens for the r7, it would just be a little tighter because of the crop sensor (closer to 38-160mm)
can i use this lens for canon 77D thanks
You can’t use the RF lenses on a 77D but you could get an EF version
Awesome review. I might sell a few lenses to pick this up:)
Absolutely a great lens!!
I'm frugal, I just purchased two lenses. One is the Canon 17-40 the second is the 24-105. That package would have ran me $1600 to $1800, give or take$100, 10 years ago. I paid $680 for both used.
The 17-40 was one of my favorite lenses back in the day. The 24-105 is my workhorse, it lives on my camera 90% of the time.
What jacket is that?
It’s just an izod jacket I found on the clearance rack at kohl’s 🤣 but I like it 🤷🏼♂️
Honestly, the whole "i need the fastest lens ever all the time" that alot of people have is BS
I do wildlife, yes i sometimes need faster apertures, but most of the time i dont want or need razor thin DOF and ill have to bump it up to f/5.6 or even f/8.
Even in portraits, i did an outside shoot for my brother with my SL3 cropped sensor. I have the EF50mm 1.8. It is at its sharpest at 2.8. I endend up using my 100-400 4.5-5.6L ii at 400mm and stopped down to 7.1 because the angle of view was tighter, glass quality was better.
YUP, i did portrait shots at 400mm(well 640 with the crop factor lol)
I got more bokeh at 7.1 400mm than 50mm at 2.8(even 1.8) because i made my brother stand farther to the background and i got my composition by treating my zoom like a 400 prime.
Work with the "flaws" of your gear people.
This is great! I agree with you compression is always better than just wide open shooting. Great job!
Hello kind sir… I currently have the EOS RP with the adapter. Right now all I have are an EF 50mm prime and an amazing Tamron 15-30 f/2.8.
So here are two questions for you.
1.) Should I even consider getting this RF 24-105 (or maybe an 24-70) if I am using my camera mostly to shoot pictures of my family (mostly candid portraits as they are going about their day)? Please be advised that light is iffy indoors and I do like low light photography although I am really quite bad at it.
2.) How would this lens compare to the Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 Di VC Gii for Canon full frame which would work on the EOS RP with its adapter. ThE Tamron lens seems to have very good reviews and will likely be cheaper than the RF 24-105 f/4 IS.
Your thoughts will be much appreciated.
Hi there, unfortunately I have little experience with 3rd party lenses. I’ve used a few tamrons and was never satisfied with quality and auto focus soy suggestion just from my experience is to stick with canon lenses for the best experience. I know not everyone agrees with that, but that’s my experience. As far as your current setup, if you do mostly indoor portraits, the two lenses you have are great. I personally prefer telephoto for my portraits though, typically I’ll use the 70-200 to get exceptional portraits. I have been using my 50mm though recently for a slightly different look and have been enjoying them. With the 24-105 even at f4 you can get some great portraits because of the focal length at 105. If you’re happy with your setup, I’d say stick with it. If you’d like more versatility, the 24-105 is king
@@TonyMellinger thank you
Can you lock it at any range?
No, only at 24mm
@@TonyMellinger Thanks for the prompt answer. 👍🏻
I will never be a one lens guy. Nevertheless, I am considering this lens, over the 24-70 2.8, because it is a good relatively cheap walk around lens. I'm fortunate to have other faster lenses that I use when I can carry a few lenses, or when I have a specific situation that calls for a faster, wider, or longer, lens. (15-35 2.8, 50 1.2, 85 1.2, 70-200 2.8, and 100-500).
I’ve got the 50 1.2, and the 70-200 2.8. Those are both just fantastic lenses but my 24-105 is my workhorse.
Detroit Tigers? In St. Louis?
Haha I lived in Detroit for 5 years before moving to St Louis
@@TonyMellinger I'm originally from Detroit. It's rare to see anyone outside Detroit repping the Tigers.
Although the F4 is put in a kit, is it a kit lens?
I consider it the pro kit lens
Is this lenses good for Astrophotography ?
Not great. At f4, it’s pretty slow. The 35mm f1.8 is really good for Astro!
It is not sexy but it is a steaaal for the price you could get one for!
Got mine used in mint condition for 700$!!!
That’s a great deal!!!
Wow you were in Ghana ??
For sure! Loved it there. Spent time in Accra and Yendi
is it parfocal?
I don’t think so
As in no zoom while focus, no focus breathing? I believe not but the result in my opinion was VERY good and better than any of my lenses. Please correct me if I misunderstood.
@@HilleCine yea, I know there are lenses are parfocal, but I couldn’t find anything that says this lens is
Since they’re in the price range of each other would you go with this over the sigma 24-70 with the EF adapter?
Personally I’d rather have the canon, but I’m a Canon Lens snob lol. I also dont really like using the EF adaptor, I suppose it’s alright, but I’d prefer the smaller, more versatile (24-105) package opposed to having the f2.8.
@@TonyMellinger that’s a good the sigma is already like 2 lbs before he adapter. Also shooting on the smaller RP
@@nayhtoo141 I love the RP, such a capable little camera!
@@TonyMellinger as a hobby guy only the RP has been more than I could have imagined. Also I am photography only so the shortcomings of the video mean little to me. For the price I’m actually happy about the features it does come with instead of so many people complaining about what it doesn’t have.
I think I will go with the 24-105 for the weight and versatility and bring either the 35 and 85 primes along for the ride depending on what I’m shooting if I need a faster lens.
@@nayhtoo141 that’s pretty much exactly my thought process!
I didn't know 'L' series lenses were suddenly 'kit' lenses.
If it comes in a kit! Why not?! I’m ok with that!
Underrated? thanks to the treatment of the iso of the R6, I have already seen several social and wedding photographers using it instead of the rf 24-70 2.8. With the savings that this entails. And a fact that few people have realized. at f4 if we exceed 24 mm it was 35 onwards, it is in the sweet spot, if we put it at f5.6 it is sharp throughout its range from 24 to 105. That, oddly enough, in the rf24-70 2.8 you don't get it if you don't you go up to f4.
I agree with you! It’s such a killer lens, honestly my go to lens with the r5 and r6.
It’s better than the 35mm f1.8 prime? Show me the tests because I know you’re wrong on that.
Better? In what way? I’m not sure how you’re comparing it, just straight quality at 35mm f4? I’m not sure you’d see a quality difference. It’s much more versatile. The glass is much better quality. The 35 shoots down to f1.8 though.
On the review it said it was better than the F1.8 prime. I was disputing this claim. @@TonyMellinger
Ello fellow riverbender
Hello!
I saw some idiot at Canon Rumors saying that this was a weak lens in the R lineup but then gave no specifics.
Absolutely disagree, it’s my favorite.
@@TonyMellinger If you're gonna say something is wrong with a lens/camera/etc, back it up with a reason or don't waste everyone's time.
You have a Tigers shirt on?
Yea, ha! I lived in Detroit for about 5 years.
@@TonyMellinger respect dude from D-town!
@@michaelkitchen2300 I loved Detroit. We lived near macomb. I wasn’t ready to move
f/4 lens for 1200 dollars... I will judge it by the f/4 ;)
Its good because it has got a red ring and it is the cheapest among those ^^. I get that, I am a gear head myself somehow, but I regretted buying the 24-70 f/4 L IS USM macro back in the day, the lens was not super sharp and also I always used my nifty fifty more ... guess the error is on the buyers side.
If you’re happy with the nifty fifty, they rock that lens! I’ve actually been really happy with the 24-105. It’s just so versatile. The f4 doesn’t scare me, I can get plenty of separation and the ability to go so wide or tight is invaluable in certain cases. Sure it can get a little dark, but the trade off is worth it with these newer cameras that have great ISO
I love it too! It's ONE AND DONE! But I need something more sexy in my bag too :-D
Hehe don’t we all 😏
I struggle to understand how an L-series can be considered ‘only a kit lens’
I’d think that it’s either a kit lens, or an L-series. 🤷🏼
Why cant it be an L series kit lens. You can buy this lens with a camera/lens kit. They also make a non-L camera/lens kit for more entry level cameras.
Underrated? I bought a Canon RP just to use this lens. And my Pentax K1 now stays at home most of the time.
It is a great lens. And I love the RP, very capable camera!
@@TonyMellinger Amazing camera when travelling. Small, light and with very good image quality.
Heavier than the new Sony 24-70/2.8? Usually Panasonic lenses tend to be heavy but this is even heavier than the Panasonic. Nikon's lens goes to 120 and is lighter.
I’m not really sure, I just shoot canon. I’m not really a fan of super light lenses, I feel quality comes with a little weight. And adds a little extra stability in video.
Much difference between this lens and the 28-70 f2.8
About $2000 😅
I have both, f4 is lighter in weight, more reach but the 2.8 has better bokeh and an extra stop of light so it depends what you need if for. Edit: I think you mean the 24-70 2.8? The 28-70 f2 is way bigger and heavier, not really comparable.
Do you mean the 24-70? Or the 28-70? All 3 are good lenses, the faster ones are just significantly more expensive haha
@@TonyMellinger Ment 24-70 f2.8, much difference,
Canon 24-70 good portrait lens?
I would argue that the STM version of this lens is the most underrated. I have both and have done exhaustive testing from a tripod with controlled lighting and remote shutter to keep things consistent, and at anything above f5.6, the cheaper STM kicks the L's ass in terms of sharpness across the frame (it seems to have a deeper DOF with the same settings, and also lets in more light with the exact same settings, being slighter more exposed). The STM also is lighter, shorter (which makes it wider angle if stood in the same spot) and quieter IS. The focus motor seems a little more accurate on the L when shooting insects against a background, like a spider in a web, however the STM seems to be quicker and quieter when it does find focus. You can also get closer with the STM at 0.4m (The L is 0.45m)
In conclusion, for the money I would buy the STM. The L might have better bokeh and shallower DOF if you care about that so much. That seems to be what you are paying for. The background is softer and seems less noisy on the L. It is also slightly less distortion but this is a 1 button fix in LR after registering either lens.
If you are looking to do portrait work, there's not a lot in it, maybe go for the L if you have money to burn, but for close ups and wide landscape shots, buy the STM and turn on chromatic aberration correction. It's images are tac sharper, except at f3.5 which is practically unusable if you are cropping or printing large.
STM isn’t weather sealed
@@YanFries True, but not a deal breaker for me since I don't take my camera out in rough weather
🤣
Interesting thoughts. I def wasn’t impressed with the stm version beside the size/weight. I didn’t really care for anything about that lens other than that
I really don’t understand why to buy an f2.8 lens if when you go to do a family photo shoot you don’t shoot f2.8 because it would be impossible to get the focus on all the members in the photo. The 24-105 f4 lens is much more convenient.
For sure. I do typically shoot wider open that f4 for family portraits though. It depends on how many people are in the shot and how far away I can get!
your pocket and back will thank you later… any rf f2.8 zoom is heavy as gym weights…😅
Haha, that’s the truth.
Not underrated. It’s highly recommended L lens which can take pretty sharp shots.
It’s incredible
Not under rated by me mate, I use it all the time.
It’s the best!
This lens was sold for $999 when it first came out but now it is sold for $1299 to $1500 dollars now.
Yea supply and demand has jacked up everything.
“Especially “. Not ekspecially🤦🏻♂️
Ha!
What is a kit lens these days ???? You make me laugh
Kit lens is pretty easy to understand. It comes in a kit with the camera.
It's not the cheapest
You are right!
How do you come up with a statement as" Most underrated"? It is the stock lens, for reason. The title should say "Most underrated lens by me(who ever post it)"
But it’s not the most underrated by me. I love the lens 😎
I do think it is underrated, because when I get sooo surprised about image quality that I get from that lens my mind tells me “DONT SELL THIS FOR THE F2.8” 😂
Because it is...it's constantly overshadowed by the 24-70, the 28-70 and the L primes. There are far less reviews of this lens compared to those others. It's thought of as inferior to the other L lenses because it's a kit lens (pro-grade kit lens). However, it is a fantastic general purpose, professional lens.
@@DanielFazzari What are your sources? It is the personal assumption of underrated. Multiple websites (like a dpreview) are rated as #4 most popular lenses from canon. #4 does not make it underrated. I was pointing, that title in your video should say "My most underrated lens" and do not generalized to all users.
@@Geekatplaybecause if you know the statistics it’s ranking at #4 spot, coz of the kit body bundle. every bundle which is sold gets also accounted in the popularity of the lens. but people swap it afterwards for the 24-70… source: all of the fking internet.