Canon officially announces the RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS STM

[Sharlin]

Ugh, I was hoping for f/4 at least up to 105mm, but only until 27mm?

And I was hoping for unicorns and invisibility powder, a wish slightly more realistic than yours. Good luck trying to find a 24-105mm f/4 lens that as a bonus gives you extra zoom range up to 240mm at slightly smaller aperture! The laws of physics are called "laws" for a reason.

 

[AlanF]

And I was hoping for unicorns and invisibility powder, a wish slightly more realistic than yours. Good luck trying to find a 24-105mm f/4 lens that as a bonus gives you extra zoom range up to 240mm at slightly smaller aperture! The laws of physics are called "laws" for a reason.

According to the laws of physics, an entry pupil of diameter 38.1mm that gives f/6.3 at 240mm will give f/3.15 at 120mm.

 

[hamish]

If anyone doubts Canon's ability to produce a sharp lens at low cost, they need only pick up an EF-S 55-250 to know that Canon is very capable of doing both sharp and cheap.

Agree 100%. I have a 200D (SL2) and I love using the EF-S 55-250 as it is so sharp across the full range (slightly less from 200mm+, but still excellent).

I'm someone who is enjoying getting back into photography. As mentioned I have a 200D (SL2) and a few Canon lenses, including the 18-135, 55-250 and 24 prime. My primary uses are travel and walk-around. I do a little bit of birding, but recognise the limitations of the gear I have. Still, it works pretty well (see bird shots from portfolio linked in my profile).

I don't count $US1999 ($AUD2800) as being anything remotely close to "entry level". If I had a lot more money, I'd be VERY interested in the RP + 24-240 and then mabe add a longer lens for birding/wildlife. I can dream ...

 

[Don Haines]

Agree 100%. I have a 200D (SL2) and I love using the EF-S 55-250 as it is so sharp across the full range (slightly less from 200mm+, but still excellent).

I'm someone who is enjoying getting back into photography. As mentioned I have a 200D (SL2) and a few Canon lenses, including the 18-135, 55-250 and 24 prime. My primary uses are travel and walk-around. I do a little bit of birding, but recognise the limitations of the gear I have. Still, it works pretty well (see bird shots from portfolio linked in my profile).

I don't count $US1999 ($AUD2800) as being anything remotely close to "entry level". If I had a lot more money, I'd be VERY interested in the RP + 24-240 and then mabe add a longer lens for birding/wildlife. I can dream ...

Agreed!
Most people around here conside entry level to be under $1000 Canadian, or about $750 US …. and that is for a body and a lens!

 

[Talys]

Agree 100%. I have a 200D (SL2) and I love using the EF-S 55-250 as it is so sharp across the full range (slightly less from 200mm+, but still excellent).

I'm someone who is enjoying getting back into photography. As mentioned I have a 200D (SL2) and a few Canon lenses, including the 18-135, 55-250 and 24 prime. My primary uses are travel and walk-around. I do a little bit of birding, but recognise the limitations of the gear I have. Still, it works pretty well (see bird shots from portfolio linked in my profile).

I don't count $US1999 ($AUD2800) as being anything remotely close to "entry level". If I had a lot more money, I'd be VERY interested in the RP + 24-240 and then mabe add a longer lens for birding/wildlife. I can dream ...

For me, the problem with the price is that$2k could go towards a lens that I really wanted that is awesome. So the only way I will buy this one is if it is totally awesome. I am not sure that is possible, but I'm willing to keep an open mind until I see, feel, and try it. At that price, the IQ has to be great, and it must be excellent mechanically.

 

[neuroanatomist]

For me, the problem with the price is that$2k could go towards a lens that I really wanted that is awesome. So the only way I will buy this one is if it is totally awesome. I am not sure that is possible, but I'm willing to keep an open mind until I see, feel, and try it. At that price, the IQ has to be great, and it must be excellent mechanically.

$2K is RP + 24-240. The 24-240 is $900. When you consider that the EF 24-105 f/3.5-5.6 plus EF 70-300 f/4-5.6 combo costs $1100 and the RF superzoom covers nearly that range with similar IQ in a smaller, lighter, cheaper package that doesn’t require lens changes, the RF 24-240 appears to be a good value.

 

[danfaz]

And I was hoping for unicorns and invisibility powder, a wish slightly more realistic than yours. Good luck trying to find a 24-105mm f/4 lens that as a bonus gives you extra zoom range up to 240mm at slightly smaller aperture! The laws of physics are called "laws" for a reason.

Wow, thanks for such a friendly and witty comment, fellow board member. You make this a great place to be!
Tamron's old 28-300 does far better than this (though admittedly not what my wish was), with f/4 lasting until around 55mm, and f/5 lasting til around 100mm.
I'm not too knowledgeable on the physics of lens design, but was my desire really that crazy?

 

[AlanF]

Wow, thanks for such a friendly and witty comment, fellow board member. You make this a great place to be!
Tamron's old 28-300 does far better than this (though admittedly not what my wish was), with f/4 lasting until around 55mm, and f/5 lasting til around 100mm.
I'm not too knowledgeable on the physics of lens design, but was my desire really that crazy?

You were not breaking any laws of physics and that comment about your perfectly reasonable question was uncalled for and unhelpful.

 

[canonical]

Tamron's old 28-300 does far better than this () with f/4 lasting until around 55mm, and f/5 lasting til around 100mm.
I'm not too knowledgeable on the physics of lens design, but was my desire really that crazy?

Interesting! Looked up the numbers and did a quick comparison. Looking at hard specs it seems Canon did not really tap into "superior optical design potential of RF mount" with RF 24-240. Waiting to see reviews, maybe they invested mount potential into "superior IQ". However, sample images I saw up to now looked rather soft/low contrast to me beyond 150mm. But will hold judgement for now.







Sources used for aperture progression info:

Tamron 28-300 VC:
https://dustinabbott.net/2014/08/tamron-28-300mm-f3-5-6-3-di-vc-pzd/

Canon RF 24-240:

- around 1:10'

Nikon 28-300
https://kenrockwell.com/nikon/28-300mm.htm

Sony FE 24-240
https://kenrockwell.com/sony/lenses/24-240mm.htm

 

[neuroanatomist]

Surprisingly good for a FF superzoom lens, particularly one that is not an L quality lens. I bet it sells very well

To pre-order or wait for reviews? Hmmmm...

 

[Don Haines]

To pre-order or wait for reviews? Hmmmm...

I have yet to see the R body that will tempt me over into the mirrorless camp, but this looks like one of the lenses that would do it for me. The package with the RP looks like a tempting way to get a foot in the door.....

 

[ethanz]

To pre-order or wait for reviews? Hmmmm...

Someone has to bite the bullet. Come on and take one for the team, John! You can let us know how it is in real world.

 

[Photo Hack]

https://www.adorama.com/tm35150eos.html?utm_source=rflaid64393

Not quite the zoom range but Tamron’s 35-150 f2.8-f4 looks much more tempting than this.

Kind of a bummer and hoping Canon will make something else in between, even if it costs a little more. A 28-200 f2.8-f4 or 3.5-5.6 more likely?

 

[Kannon]

Let us all hope that there's not a big breathing hole in the back of the lens to suck the dust in that the moving inside elements can circulate inside and spit on the sensor. Amen

 

[unfocused]

Let us all hope that there's not a big breathing hole in the back of the lens to suck the dust in that the moving inside elements can circulate inside and spit on the sensor. Amen

I prefer to worry about real things, not internet myths.

 

[neuroanatomist]

Let us all hope that there's not a big breathing hole in the back of the lens to suck the dust in that the moving inside elements can circulate inside and spit on the sensor. Amen

Yeah, like that horrible RF 24-105/4L IS dust pump I’ve been using on my EOS R that has led to no dust on the sensor at all.

 

[SecureGSM]

To pre-order or wait for reviews? Hmmmm...

wait for reviews, obviously... I am sure that you do not buy a product based on marketing mambo jumbo. I trust your lens collection is substantial enough as is.
I would wait until The Digital Picture review at least.

 

[Quirkz]

wait for reviews, obviously... I am sure that you do not buy product based on marketing mambo jumbo. I trust your lens collection is substantial enough as is.
I would wait until The Digital Picture review at least.

Ssssshhhhh.... I’m waiting for a review. Let’s just let neuro do that for us

 

[SecureGSM]

I have yet to see the R body that will tempt me over into the mirrorless camp, but this looks like one of the lenses that would do it for me. The package with the RP looks like a tempting way to get a foot in the door.....

I am ready to swallow the hook, the line and the sinker.. but, I need a 5D IV equivalent body: sensor, ergonomics, weather resistance, size and handling, a joystick, second memory card with price being under US$3500 please.

 

[SecureGSM]

Ssssshhhhh.... I’m waiting for a review. Let’s just let neuro do that for us

nuh. Bryan (a wise man) at The Digital Picture will be up to speed pretty quickly. His reviews are very detailed and excellent from the practicality perspective.
I never offer an advice that I would never have taken myself.

On an unrelated note: I have a SONY product support story to share. Would anyone be interested to hear that? It is a .. saga..