More information about the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM

Canon Rumors Guy

Canon EOS 40D
CR Pro
Jul 20, 2010
10,779
3,158
Canada
www.canonrumors.com
Canon will officially announce the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM this week, with shipping coming in early September on its own as well as in a kit with the EOS RP.
We’ve known about this lens since its development was announced back in February ahead of the CP+ show alongside 5 other RF mount lenses. Only the RF 85mm f/1.2L USM has started shipping at this point.
Below is more about the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM from Canon themselves. We won’t directly link to the source of the information below to protect the retailer.

Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM
Key Features

Versatile 10x Zoom Range
Near-Silent Nano USM Focusing
Five-Stop Image Stabiliser
Weighs just 750g
Circular, Seven-Blade Aperture
Large Lockable Zoom Ring
Clickless 1/8-Stop Aperture Control
Customisable Control Ring
Full-Time Manual Focusing
Built for the EOS R System

The Canon RF 24-240mm F/4-6.3 IS USM lens is a portable, versatile 10x zoom lens for...

Continue reading...
 
Last edited:
Mar 6, 2019
105
75
The reviews can't be TOO good.

I currently have the 24-105 f4. And though it is an L lens, I wonder if the 24-240 wouldn't be a better option as an all arounder. Basically if the 24-240 stays at f4 (mostly) till 105, then it may very well be the better value lens.

So... like many people on the net, i should be actually wishing for this lens to perform worse than the 24-105 in some notable way so that I can continue being happy with my purchase of the 24-105 :p .

Joking aside. I do wish this performs well. If I ever do pick up the 28-70 f2 or the 24-70 f2.8, then the 24-105 becomes a lens that is too close to those to keep. But the 24-240 would replace it for a travel general purpose zoom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0

koenkooi

CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
3,575
4,110
The Netherlands
The reviews can't be TOO good.

I currently have the 24-105 f4. And though it is an L lens, I wonder if the 24-240 wouldn't be a better option as an all arounder. Basically if the 24-240 stays at f4 (mostly) till 105, then it may very well be the better value lens.

The leaks so far make it look like it will be the same price as the RF24-105L, which made me doubt about what to replace my aging 70-200F4L (non-IS) with. I was thinking of the 70-200 F4L IS II, but the RF24-240 might actually be 'good enough'.
 
Upvote 0

Sharlin

CR Pro
Dec 26, 2015
1,415
1,433
Turku, Finland
canon has been doing that for some time already: 3 of the M lenses are 6.3 at the long end
i wouldn't hold my breath for the 600 6.3...

Doing it with the R is however a bit different than doing it with the M. That said, sticking to 5.6 would be rather silly, with on-sensor AF now able to focus down to f /11 or so.

The rumored 200–600mm is certainly much more realistic a proposition if the tele end can go down to f /6.3!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
canon has been doing that for some time already: 3 of the M lenses are 6.3 at the long end

But not for FF "mainstream" lens lineup. Only for crop sensors.

Really interested to see reviews. As soon as they get price for kit with RP to 1999 they'll sell boatloads. Perfect "entry point with upgrade path" into EOS R system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I think the focus and control ring being combined defeats the entire argument of promoting the control ring in the first place. Just, IMO. For me, it’s been great having the control ring programmed to adjust ISO. If one had to pull focus and then adjust ISO (for what ever reason), it would seem to be adding steps to what would be a simple task if they had a designated focus ring and control ring.

This makes me think of the combination of button presses to switch from still to video mode and vice versa...when it used to be a simple switch on most Canon DSLRs. I guess they’re aligning the R with the 1D’s idea of the “Mode” button.
 
Upvote 0
Apr 25, 2011
2,510
1,885
I think the focus and control ring being combined defeats the entire argument of promoting the control ring in the first place. Just, IMO. For me, it’s been great having the control ring programmed to adjust ISO. If one had to pull focus and then adjust ISO (for what ever reason), it would seem to be adding steps to what would be a simple task if they had a designated focus ring and control ring.
I think that most people will almost never use it as a focus ring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0