Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z to be announced this week

[EricN]

I just read somewhere that the Tamron 35-150 is a much better choice!
Canon don't understand what real professionals want!
Oh my God, I've ordered the 24-105 f2,8 two weeks ago, if I only had known...

I guess that's what we get for being circle-jerking apologists and bootlickers...

 

[neuroanatomist]

Canon don't understand what real professionals want!

Especially real professionals that shoot low-budget weddings in Italy and post under the forum name @Walrus. Clearly, Canon is disappointing a major and important demographic.

 

[EricN]

Especially real professionals that shoot low-budget weddings in Italy and post under the forum name @Walrus. Clearly, Canon is disappointing a major and important demographic.

I was thinking they have some white camera bodies, maybe Canon should design some lenses to look like tuxedoes? Could wedding people be more likely to hire people with cute wedding themed equipment?

 

[DhlcadR6]

Meanwhile poor me using Tamron EF 35-150mm f2.8-f4 with speedbooster on my R50 to achieve pseudo f2-f2.8

 

[Surab]

That Tamron is heck of a lens. I can see why Canon would not want it on RF mount as it would compete, probably very well, with this lens.

But unlike the new RF 24-105 it seems to be a much more targeted lens and if you need it you know you do.

 

[DhlcadR6]

That Tamron is heck of a lens. I can see why Canon would not want it on RF mount as it would compete, probably very well, with this lens.

But unlike the new RF 24-105 it seems to be a much more targeted lens and if you need it you know you do.

The Tamron is praised because E/Z mount has no 28-70L equivalent.

I would not say Canon don't want it to compete, Canon needs to act up and finish their catalogue asap before the patent period runs out and 3rd parties all in to the RF market.

 

[DhlcadR6]

I was thinking they have some white camera bodies, maybe Canon should design some lenses to look like tuxedoes? Could wedding people be more likely to hire people with cute wedding themed equipment?

White R50 with RF 70-200L ?????

 

[Surab]

The Tamron is praised because E/Z mount has no 28-70L equivalent.

I would not say Canon don't want it to compete, Canon needs to act up and finish their catalogue asap before the patent period runs out and 3rd parties all in to the RF market.

I meant that I assume both the RF 24-105 F2.8 and Tamron 35-150 will have very distinct user groups with some obvious overlap. Certainly, there should exist Canon users who would love the Tamron's range. From what I've seen on forums it's less the F2 but the range that draws many wedding or event photographers and many would pick it over any other currently available zoom.

I might be wrong.

 

[Surab]

White R50 with RF 70-200L ?????

That would be RF 70-200 with white R50.

 

[john1970]

Was informed by my local shop, that I can pick up my copy tomorrow or Friday.

 

[DhlcadR6]

That would be RF 70-200 with white R50.

All white combo looks nice and girls love them

 

[danfaz]

If anybody wants to get one NOW!

Street Price, In Stock: RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z for $2899 | Canon Camera and Lens Deals - Canon Price Watch

www.cpricewatch.com

 

[Del Paso]

If anybody wants to get one NOW!

Street Price, In Stock: RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z for $2899 | Canon Camera and Lens Deals - Canon Price Watch

www.cpricewatch.com

I no longer want it!
Mine got delivered this morning
And it's raining outside... cannot even test it. But my time will come!

 

[Del Paso]

Meanwhile I could perform some tests at infinity settings, only to check corner sharpness, since I'll be mostly using the 24-105 for landscapes and travel.
Though the TDP test results didn't impress me at all, speaking of 70 to 105mm corners, I was quite surprised at the corner sharpness. Much much better than expected! Also much much better than the F4 version.
Kudos to Canon for another great lens!

 

[danfaz]

I was quite surprised at the corner sharpness. Much much better than expected! Also much much better than the F4 version.
Kudos to Canon for another great lens!

Yep, I agree. This lens is on a new level.

 

[Del Paso]

Yep, I agree. This lens is on a new level.

View attachment 213624

But Lightroom Classic not yet, as you also noticed! I get on the upper, right and left borders precisely defined "prismatic" lines when shooting RAW.
PS: the 35 and 50mm settings can almost compete at F5,6 with Leica M lenses...I'd never expected that.
And, mechanically, it also plays in a different league.
The high price is, in my opinion, fully justified!

 

[EricN]

Yep, I agree. This lens is on a new level.

View attachment 213624

Canon has definitely been going to 11

low cost small size and small weight
or
higher cost with the priority of image quality.

Too bad EVERYBODY wants mid priced mid quality lenses...

 

[EricN]

But Lightroom Classic not yet, as you also noticed! I get on the upper, right and left borders precisely defined "prismatic" lines when shooting RAW.View attachment 213627
PS: the 35 and 50mm settings can almost compete at F5,6 with Leica M lenses...I'd never expected that.
And, mechanically, it also plays in a different league.
The high price is, in my opinion, fully justified!

I was not expecting it to be close to Leica M lenses! Another lens I hadn't been eager to buy and suddenly...

 

[Del Paso]

Canon has definitely been going to 11

low cost small size and small weight
or
higher cost with the priority of image quality.

Too bad EVERYBODY wants mid priced mid quality lenses...

You're totally wrong!
Everybody wants 3rd. party on Soni bodies!

 

[dcm]

The Tamron is praised because E/Z mount has no 28-70L equivalent.

I would not say Canon don't want it to compete, Canon needs to act up and finish their catalogue asap before the patent period runs out and 3rd parties all in to the RF market.

Patent duration in Japan is 20 years. US patents are 17 years, but US will recognize international patents up to 20 years. I think they still have some time...