Review: Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM

SteveC

M6 mk II
Sep 3, 2019
852
637
If I were looking for light and convenient, I'd probably pick the 24-240 over the 24-105/4-7.1
Similar IQ, but the 24-240 has more range
Yeah, now that does make sense--if those are your options (which going for light and convenient, they would be).

Granted, I'd be going to crop mode doing this but I could always stick my old Tamron 18-400 (for APS-C) on the thing (with adapter--oh the humanity!) Even more range.
 

Normalnorm

EOS 7D MK II
Dec 25, 2012
641
259
not sure I quite understand the excitement:

distortion at 24mm end and f/8

"... Brace yourself. We're going to look behind the curtains, and this is going to be painful. Here are the uncorrected test results from our standard distortion test (captured at f/8)..."

Buyers of this lens are scarcely doing architecture. This is a lens for the snapshooter who will be surprised the whiskers on their cat are so sharp.
 

BakaBokeh

EOS T7i
May 16, 2020
63
84
This looks like something that is historically a money maker for Canon. Cheap lens for the masses. But they don't have the body to match it. It's akin to a kit lens for a Rebel body. The RP at the bottom end is still too expensive for that market. It's for the people who buy a 500 dollar kit from big box stores which has been the money maker for Canon's camera division. I don't think they'll have a APS-C RF line, so unless they come out with an even more entry level body than the RP for 500 bucks, I don't see them having the volume that Rebel DSLR's have.

I suppose it could mean, they are using the EF-M line to fill that need.

Or cheap DSLR's will continue to occupy this market.

Or even sadder, this market disappears because of camera phones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kten

Joules

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
817
861
Hamburg, Germany
Users need to go through menu if they want to switch from AF to MF and vice-versa.
I think that's what I wrote. Control, or manual focus override. Sure, if it is set in the menu toF only there's nothing to override.

I don't think it is stupid. I like using MF, but there's a lot of people that probably are happy with the degree of 'manual' offered by tapping on the touchscreen to focus. For special cases like focussing on stars at night or the like, there's still the menu.

As somebody else already pointed out, you can basically get this lens for free with certain RP bundles right now. Can't complain about that.
 

Czardoom

EOS T7i
Jan 27, 2020
73
173
This is an inexpensive lens for those looking for cheaper, lighter and smaller. It's almost 1/2 the weight of the RF 24-240mm. Less than 1/2 the cost of both the RF 24-240mm and the RF 24-105 f/4. That's why I ordered mine. As a general purpose lens, I will do the job more than adequately.

For those that don't get the automatic in-camera or automatic in-software correction, that is the way of mirrorless and has been for some time. Sony, Olympus and others have been doing it for years, with no outcry. Canon takes the same approach, and suddenly it's shocking! The correction is automatic. If you are using any of the popular softwares to convert your RAW files, the correction is automatic. If you shoot JPG you will never see the uncorrected version. It's a non-issue with my Olympus 12-100mm lens (perhaps the best lens I have ever owned in terms of quality and versatility). It's a non-issue with my RF 240 lens. It will be a non-issue for this lens as well. Get over it! :)
 

secant

I'm New Here
Jun 11, 2020
11
4
Between this kit and the 35/1.8 kit with the RP, I'd get the 35. But I can see people getting this just for versatile use such as travel and what not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanonFanBoy

Steve Dmark2

EOS T7i
Mar 30, 2016
82
16
32
Germany
Hey Everyone,

I have this lens for a month now. I did family shooting and was in the Netherlands on vacation.
I made both stills and videos. (Family and landscape)

For this price point an awesome lens!

I also compared it to my 24-105 STM EF version.
Yes EF is sharper in the corners but the RF makes more up for it with smaller size and weight (also no adapter needed)

Generally at home, I have no problem with 7.1, because if I need shallow depth of the field, I use my EF85mm 1.8 (might buy the new one which comes this year)

But being on vacation, having (with the Canon RP) such a small and light package...

Comparing it to the F4 L version is like comparing a Fiat to Mercedes.

People who can afford will get the F4 and people which can or do not want to will get the STM version.
And on the last note:

Today most people are looking at photos on their smartphones or 17'' screens the most. For that purpose this lens is plenthy good enough. For making A0 prints I would also not choose the RF F4 version.

Anyways, Canon will sell tons of these!

Happy shooting!
 

CanonFanBoy

Really O.K. Boomer
Jan 28, 2015
4,962
2,969
Irving, Texas
Sure makes the humble rf 24-105mm f/4L IS look like a super-hero! (BTW, I LOVE that f/4 lens.)
If I had to make the choice, I'd take the RF 24-105mm f/4 also. Great lens. On the other hand, I can fully remember when I bought my XSi years ago and how I thought spending $300 on a lens was very expensive. :) It does not surprise me that this lens doesn't get a warm reception here. However, when I look at buyer ratings at Adorama or Amazon for much maligned lenses on this forum, I see a lot of happy buyers. Canon will sell a lot of these and those folks will be happy. They aren't pixel peeping their corners or fretting about uncorrected distortion like many of us do. They generally don't care about a manual/auto switch either. They would probably think we are all crazy. :)
 

SteveC

M6 mk II
Sep 3, 2019
852
637
For those that don't get the automatic in-camera or automatic in-software correction, that is the way of mirrorless and has been for some time. Sony, Olympus and others have been doing it for years, with no outcry. Canon takes the same approach, and suddenly it's shocking!
Because we expect schlock from those other companies. :D

Seriously, yes I see a market for such lenses (though it'd be nice if they were labeled as such so someone with higher ambitions will know to avoid them), but that market almost certainly won't be me.
 

EverydayPhotographer

EOS RP, M50, and M2
I don't think that it's a fair comparison to say that the 24-105 and 24-240 distortion/vignetting issues are the same or even similar. The 24-240 flat does not project an image circle that covers the sensor at wider angles. It requires the image corrections to be turned on in order to do its job. The 24-105 has some pretty severe problems, but it is still delivering a full image. I think the 24-105 non-L is optically challenged, but not like the 24-240.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

David - Sydney

EOS 80D
Dec 7, 2014
156
82
www.flickr.com
I think that's what I wrote. Control, or manual focus override. Sure, if it is set in the menu toF only there's nothing to override.

I don't think it is stupid. I like using MF, but there's a lot of people that probably are happy with the degree of 'manual' offered by tapping on the touchscreen to focus. For special cases like focussing on stars at night or the like, there's still the menu.

As somebody else already pointed out, you can basically get this lens for free with certain RP bundles right now. Can't complain about that.
Removing the AF/MF switch is clever! People who are inexperienced with manual focus get upset when they inadvertently bumped the switch and all their photos were out of focus. Having the option in the menus reduces that risk although if they change it there accidentally....
I remember getting annoyed with a borrowed 5Div (I had 5Diii) when my shots were out of focus because the last user had setup back button focus and didn't set it back!
 

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,029
940
The whole point is that you shoot this lens corrected, all the time. I don't understand the disconnect here.

Sure, the f/4 is better uncorrected. It also costs a lot more and is way heavier. Doesn't invalidate the approach here.
The whole point is that so called correction here is destructive. Image quality suffers in result considerably. Some folks will be happy with such a toll / penalty. and other would not.
Personally, I would not recommend this product to anyone. It is a rubbish in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

SecureGSM

2 x 5D IV
Feb 26, 2017
2,029
940
Buyers of this lens are scarcely doing architecture. This is a lens for the snapshooter who will be surprised the whiskers on their cat are so sharp.
Well, LOL. Thank you.
however at 550 euro or even USD 400 a pop, seems a bit to rich for what it is.
US$250? Yeah, may be... it will get to that price point on grey market rather quickly, I think.
 

esglord

EOS RP
May 9, 2019
21
14
At the moment, for roughly the price of the RP + 24-105 f/4L, you could pick up the RP + this kit lens + the RF 35 + 600ex speedlite. I already have the f/4L, but it seems reasonable to me that someone shopping today without unlimited funds might choose the latter route.
 

koenkooi

EOS 6D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
1,011
790
Removing the AF/MF switch is clever! People who are inexperienced with manual focus get upset when they inadvertently bumped the switch and all their photos were out of focus. Having the option in the menus reduces that risk although if they change it there accidentally....
I remember getting annoyed with a borrowed 5Div (I had 5Diii) when my shots were out of focus because the last user had setup back button focus and didn't set it back!
I like what Canon did on the M6II: an AF/MF lever around the back-button-focus button. Switching AF/MF doesn't require me to search for the button on the lens, I can keep my eye on the EVF. The downside is that it doesn't work for lenses with an actual AF/MF switch :(
 

yeahright

EOS T7i
Aug 28, 2014
82
49
So a lens aimed at the casual user doesn't have manual focus but does have programmable control ring... That doesn't seem like the right option to offer.
That's not true. The 'Focus'-setting is exactly the same as the 'MF' setting on other lenses. Use the ring to manually control focus. The 'Control' setting is identical to the 'AF' setting on other lenses PLUS the option to use the ring for another function (while the focus ring on other lenses is useless in AF mode), so there is actually MORE functionality than there is on EF-lenses. There is only less functionality when you compare these cheaper RF-lenses to high-end RF lenses (because you can't simultaneously use manual focus and the control ring for changing e.g. ISO or aperture). I think it's a smart choice.

edits: incorrect assumptions on my side
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Joules

CaMeRa QuEsT

EOS M50
Sep 12, 2016
31
24
It's a better $100 kit lens than Sony's, and neither Nikon or Panasonic have anything remotely as inexpensive. Otherwise, it's not worth paying a penny more than $100. Since the R6 has only 20Mp, the pairing actually makes sense, resolution-wise.
 

Joules

EOS 6D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
817
861
Hamburg, Germany
Those who want cheap, small, light, slow camera, and care only for the corrected jpeg, can use a smartphone.

Roger Cicala reports correcting the EF 24-105mm f/4L loses 15% resolution in the corners. The new lenses lose even more. Why not buy an older DSLR & lenses from ebay? I knew a wedding photographer who made a living with such lenses as an EF 28-80mm f/2.8-4L from ebay.
Calm down. Canon is offering a new choice for budget minded customers here. For those who can spend more or bear the weight there are already better options in the focal range available, native as well as EF and third party.

A smartphone is still equipped with a tiny sensor. Only phones with multiple lenses even stand any chance of competing with a FF zoom. By the time you get to the smartphones that have these, you aren't saving much if any money compared to the RP kit. And you are using a smartphone. There is more to the joy of photography than the end result. Noteworthy examples are Ergonomics and the flexibility to change the lens when better quality is desired or your skills outgrow what you started with.

No offense to you, but reading some responses on this forum to the newer approaches Canon takes is quite concerning. The "go big or go home" attitude of some folks doesn't help anybody. The market isn't just about pros. Especially in these times, the people who are in for the fun of it should matter a lot to Canon. As you said, a pro can get what they need with a variety of gear. An enthusiast may spent even in a time where demand for professional photography is low. But they need to start somewhere.

Without customers on the low end, fewer people enter the system and there's no cash for pushing forward L and big whites. Canon isn't Leica.