Canon officially announces the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM Macro

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,643
831
LOL the 7.1 comments popping up all over the interwebs are hilarious. I shoot at f/8-22 all the time. Ever do macro? Landscapes? A long tele with a TC? What happened to the film rules which still hold true about f/8 and be there. the sunny f/16 rule. This lens is not an L series piece of glass and is consumer grade with an appropriate focal length and aperture spread for the price. It is super compact, versatile and probably wonderful optics (we shall see) Any early dismissals are purely internet knee jerk spec sheet bravado. It's clearly not for everyone but it will be a wonderful addition to many peoples kits.
It does depend on the user. This is a consumer lens designed to hit a price point. Its not intended for professional use. There will be a lot of compromises, but for those who do not need wide apertures or the best IQ, it will be just fine. They will be a kit for the R6 and possibly the RP.

For a consumer walk around lens, the semi macro capability is going to be very useful. For demanding macro work, adapting one of the many very fine macro lenses is still the way to go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee and ethanz

aj1575

EOS RP
Dec 15, 2010
202
0
What I was thinking about is, what will the price tag of the entry level FF mirrorless Canon camera be, when Canon makes 400$ lenses for the system? Maybe the time to move to FF has come.

The EF-S mount is dead, there will only be EF-M and RF in the future. The EOS M line tops out at 800$, so the entry level EOS R should be between 1000-1200$ (well the RP is already there, it just lacks some features). But that is the price point where the EOS Dxx line was, so it would make sense to move to FF from a EOS Dxx
 

StoicalEtcher

EOS RP
Jan 3, 2018
241
146
Yorkshire
All the negative comments about this lens are just crazy. No-one at Canon is saying: "look how clever we are - this is our cutting-edge, best lens we are technically capable of making, at money-no-object levels".

It is clearly a lens built down to a price, for those not at the bleeding edge of photography (be that creative, forensic, or anything in-between), who may want something light, or cheap, or small, or all the above.

If the lens doesn't hit the spot for you - don't get it. Canon have a growing range of better lenses for you, if that's what you need.
 
  • Like
Reactions: slclick
Dec 10, 2016
27
21
UK
In the UK, WEX lists the pre order price as £459 I think this will drop after the pre-launch hype to around £399. A nice travel lens for likes of the RP I might even be tempted myself, it will be interesting to what the max magnification is at F4 and F5.6.

395g is a plus

Nice effort Canon
 

slclick

135L
Dec 17, 2013
3,740
1,446
All the negative comments about this lens are just crazy. No-one at Canon is saying: "look how clever we are - this is our cutting-edge, best lens we are technically capable of making, at money-no-object levels".

It is clearly a lens built down to a price, for those not at the bleeding edge of photography (be that creative, forensic, or anything in-between), who may want something light, or cheap, or small, or all the above.

If the lens doesn't hit the spot for you - don't get it. Canon have a growing range of better lenses for you, if that's what you need.
Yes! And furthermore, shouldn't all you wrote be obvious to these complainers from the price? Once again, so many delusional and greedy people wanting a 1DX at a Rebel cost, a 50 1.2 for the price of a Nifty 50.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StoicalEtcher

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,059
137


Not very surprising, the RF 24-105MM f/4L IS USM is much sharper.



Also not much bigger either, although it is heavier and more expensive.

Yikes, and at 7.1 too.

Doesn’t appear to be THAT much smaller either, although it’s hard to really tell on paper - have to get them in hand.

I would technically be in the market for a nice compact RF zoom for my RP, but I may wait to see what else is offered first. I’m willing to give up some reach to get a faster lens overall (and a smaller size).
 
Last edited:

padam

EOS 7D MK II
Aug 26, 2015
689
295
Yikes, and at 7.1 too.

Doesn’t appear to be THAT much smaller either, although it’s hard to really tell on paper - have to get them in hand.

I would technically be in the market for a nice compact RF zoom for my RP, but I may wait to see what else is offered first. I’m willing to give up some reach to get a faster lens overall (and a smaller size).
It is what it is: basically a FF replacement for the "world's most popular" EF-S APS-C kit lens variants to use with a cheap body like the RP.
What used to be an APS-C DSLR is now slowly progressing towards being a FF mirrorless.
 

Czardoom

EOS M50
Jan 27, 2020
26
52
LOL the 7.1 comments popping up all over the interwebs are hilarious. I shoot at f/8-22 all the time. Ever do macro? Landscapes? A long tele with a TC? What happened to the film rules which still hold true about f/8 and be there. the sunny f/16 rule. This lens is not an L series piece of glass and is consumer grade with an appropriate focal length and aperture spread for the price. It is super compact, versatile and probably wonderful optics (we shall see) Any early dismissals are purely internet knee jerk spec sheet bravado. It's clearly not for everyone but it will be a wonderful addition to many peoples kits.
Yes, I'm sure many forum dwellers think that 7.1 is 2 stops slower than 5.6 - rather than only 2/3rds of a stop. And with lens IS, you won't have any trouble shooting on a cloudy day. Somehow, in the film days we shot at f/8, on ISO 100 film with no lens or body stabilization. We must have been geniuses!
 

Czardoom

EOS M50
Jan 27, 2020
26
52
People wanted smaller, lighter, cheaper...but obviously they wanted just as good as an L lens. Really, how stupid is that? This lens is much smaller (15 mm smaller than the consumer EF version and 18 mm smaller than the RF, an also narrower, and much lighter, 130 g lighter than the consumer EF, 305 g lighter than the RF. And $200 less than the EF. And still somehow folks thought that there would be no compromises????? Duh!
 

Bangrossi

I'm New Here
Feb 5, 2018
15
12
Indonesia
As a R kit lens, 24-105 f4-f7,1 actually significantly better than M system kit lens. The EF-M 15-45 f/4-6,3 translate to 24-70 f6.3-10 on FF. Most people happy with 15-45 even the lens can't do macro.

This lens not for everyone
 
Mar 15, 2018
51
54
United States
I was hating on this lens at first, but you know what... With improvements in ISO, sensor noise reduction and integration of IBIS and lens IS, the f-stop bump on the long end is really not a deal breaker for the target market. I was a prime guy for years, really belittled the 18-135, then picked one up for $60 on letgo a few weeks ago and it's such a joy to use. If a cheaper R body with IBIS is launched with this lens for a sub $1k kit, I'd buy it for my wife as a family/travel cam.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jansberg
Feb 14, 2020
4
3


Not very surprising, the RF 24-105MM f/4L IS USM is much sharper.



Also not much bigger either, although it is heavier and more expensive.

What is the source of these MFTs? - To me the RF f/4-7.1 looks sharp and contrasty wide open - that is good. The chart for the f/4 is of course sharper and a with little more contrast.

I am not the target group for the f/4-7.1 - I am more into using primes with my RP - but I think there is plenty of users for a cheap sharp standard zoom...