Canon Stealth Adds RF24-105mm F4 L IS USM Firmware 2.0.7

[Askeladden]

One thing I have noticed with the 24-105 F4 L is that it used to be sold with a body at a substantial discount which made it available on the used market for quite cheap, but it seems Canon has stopped doing that which caused the used prices to go up. Just an observation of Canon's market strategy. I think they used to bundle the RF 24-105 F4 early on, but then stopped whereas in the EF era it was regularly available in bundle packs where you actually saved money compared to buying separately. As it is now you only get a measly $20 off when getting it as a bundle. Maybe this is to entice people to buy other types of glass as I suspect a lot of users were perfectly fine with using the 24-105 as their only lens.

 

[DocInfoSci]

I have no idea what reference you’re referring to or who the people are that you’ve discussed this with, but FTM is #2…by definition. That’s what ‘full time’ means – you can turn the ring and adjust the focus at any time, including during servo focusing. I've never heard the term you used, "Full time manual override focus," before...probably because it's redundant.

Maybe. But then with 400 million people in North America plus you on the East Coast and me on the West Coast we probably hang out with different crowds and have different needs for confirming activities.

In wondering how weird my crowd is I did some 5 second Googling to see what came up. Some top of the list hits:

• https://grokipedia.com/page/manual_focus_override
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manual_focus_override
• and discussions: https://photo.stackexchange.com/questions/11005/when-would-one-need-manual-focus-override

Not so weird, probably just a different era / location than you. And now you know should you bump into one of us at a seminar somewhere.

Note there is a difference between Lens Electronic MF and Electronic Full-Time MF. Most of my RF lenses have a dedicated AF/MF switch that sets the lens/camera to manual focus only. An "MF" indicator appears in the viewfinder, and the AF-ON button (which is how I autofocus the camera) does nothing. That's manual focus (MF), not full time manual focus (FTM).

Here’s how Canon describes FTM:
“When set to [Enabled], you can manually adjust the focus at any time with a specific lens mounted while the camera is on (including while Servo AF is active).”

And I very much appreciate the clarification from a dedicated RF guy. I stand educated!

Perhaps you need to enable the setting properly – it needs to be set to ‘Enable (actual size)’, the other settings restrict MF to One Shot not Servo. Also, note that the R, RP, R50 and R100 are absent from the list of FTM lenses so probably it’s not supported on those cameras. Also, the only lens you mention that supports FTM is the 16/2.8 (the 50/1.8 and 24-105/4-7.1 do not).

Possible, to be sure. Or my last serious check was a while ago with older firmware and what the store had at the moment. I very much should have checked again, but my EF stable has been holding its own just fine. Interesting that I had no dice with the 16 but you do, so I'll check the setting next time. Perhaps Canon will "fix" the other lenses as well? I see no need for any Canon lens to not have FTM.

But... now I know. I love my EF L prime collection... but I look at the VCM prime collection. And I'm starting to think... woah, Christmas is going to be expensive this year. What do I need to get my wife to keep the balance?!

I keep my R1 set to Enable (actual size), I just tried with the RF 24-105/2.8L Z that was on the camera and with servo focusing active (blue box in EVF), turning the focus ring shifted the focus. I also swapped on the RF 28/2.8 (which lacks a dedicated focus ring), and with the lens switch set to AF the FTM function behaves as expected, turning the lens ring changes the focus while servo focusing is active.

Cool. I appreciate the confirmation!

 

[David - Sydney]

One thing I have noticed with the 24-105 F4 L is that it used to be sold with a body at a substantial discount which made it available on the used market for quite cheap, but it seems Canon has stopped doing that which caused the used prices to go up. Just an observation of Canon's market strategy. I think they used to bundle the RF 24-105 F4 early on, but then stopped whereas in the EF era it was regularly available in bundle packs where you actually saved money compared to buying separately. As it is now you only get a measly $20 off when getting it as a bundle. Maybe this is to entice people to buy other types of glass as I suspect a lot of users were perfectly fine with using the 24-105 as their only lens.

The resellers used to split the bundle ie body and lens and hence sell them separately to make more money.
That is how I got my new EF24-105/4 ie it had no box. I didn't know better at the time.

 

[m4ndr4ke]

Also, note that the R, RP, R50 and R100 are absent from the list of FTM lenses so probably it’s not supported on those cameras. Also, the only lens you mention that supports FTM is the 16/2.8 (the 50/1.8 and 24-105/4-7.1 do not).

I really, really must be missing something

AFAIK, the RP, R100, and the 50 1.8 allow FTM.

The RP supports it (I still have the camera), and the R100 (I had it) has manual focus override permanently on without the possibility of disabling it in the camera body (it was actually annoying, I lost a few photographs for that reason with the RF 70-200 f/2.8 on the R100, since its focus ring turns so easily).


EDIT:

I keep my R1 set to Enable (actual size), I just tried with the RF 24-105/2.8L Z that was on the camera and with servo focusing active (blue box in EVF), turning the focus ring shifted the focus. I also swapped on the RF 28/2.8 (which lacks a dedicated focus ring), and with the lens switch set to AF the FTM function behaves as expected, turning the lens ring changes the focus while servo focusing is active.

Wait, do you mean performing manual focus while the camera is actually performing servo AF?
I don’t think I ever tried that, it seems like a contradiction to me, but I’d expect the camera to override the lens in such situation, since I’m pressing the AF button.
I remember some EF lenses with mechanical focusing rings (not necessarily Canon but also third parties) mentioning in their user manuals to avoid turning the rings while autofocus was being performed, so it kind of became a discipline to me.

 

[Exploreshootshare]

One thing I have noticed with the 24-105 F4 L is that it used to be sold with a body at a substantial discount which made it available on the used market for quite cheap, but it seems Canon has stopped doing that which caused the used prices to go up. Just an observation of Canon's market strategy. I think they used to bundle the RF 24-105 F4 early on, but then stopped whereas in the EF era it was regularly available in bundle packs where you actually saved money compared to buying separately. As it is now you only get a measly $20 off when getting it as a bundle. Maybe this is to entice people to buy other types of glass as I suspect a lot of users were perfectly fine with using the 24-105 as their only lens.

The RF 24-105mm F4 made a substantial price hike during the covid pandemic...
In 2019, it was sold with a suggested retail price of 1.199 € in Germany. As a kit bundle the price went down to 999 €. I luckily got an addition cash back of 100 € and 10% in-store discount so I actually paid 800 €. After Covid, the kit-bundle discount disappeared and the lens price peaked at 1.649 €. Today, the price is steady at 1.399 € (although some stores still list it at 1.499 € now only 1.399 €) and with every now and then there is a 200 € cash back putting it at 1.199 €.

Two things come to mind when thinking about the price of the 24-105mm F4:
1. I should have sold my copy for 1.200 € during the pandemic.
2. I wonder what long-term effects covid had on Canons pricing... It really seems the calculations were different in 2019, but maybe that was just a "entry bonus" to the RF mount.

 

[Del Paso]

Perhaps instead of griping, you could have looked into it…or asked. Most RF lenses have FTM focusing (a few previously had it added via firmware as was just done for the 24-105/4L).

On the other hand, if you were just looking for an excuse to not spend the money, maybe staying with griping was the right choice.

FYI, here’s the list of FTM-capable lenses:

Canon : Supplemental Information : Lenses Compatible with [Electronic full-time MF]

I have no idea what reference you’re referring to or who the people are that you’ve discussed this with, but FTM is #2…by definition. That’s what ‘full time’ means – you can turn the ring and adjust the focus at any time, including during servo focusing. I've never heard the term you used, "Full time manual override focus," before...probably because it's redundant.

Note there is a difference between Lens Electronic MF and Electronic Full-Time MF. Most of my RF lenses have a dedicated AF/MF switch that sets the lens/camera to manual focus only. An "MF" indicator appears in the viewfinder, and the AF-ON button (which is how I autofocus the camera) does nothing. That's manual focus (MF), not full time manual focus (FTM).

Here’s how Canon describes FTM:
“When set to [Enabled], you can manually adjust the focus at any time with a specific lens mounted while the camera is on (including while Servo AF is active).”

Perhaps you need to enable the setting properly – it needs to be set to ‘Enable (actual size)’, the other settings restrict MF to One Shot not Servo. Also, note that the R, RP, R50 and R100 are absent from the list of FTM lenses so probably it’s not supported on those cameras. Also, the only lens you mention that supports FTM is the 16/2.8 (the 50/1.8 and 24-105/4-7.1 do not).

I keep my R1 set to Enable (actual size), I just tried with the RF 24-105/2.8L Z that was on the camera and with servo focusing active (blue box in EVF), turning the focus ring shifted the focus. I also swapped on the RF 28/2.8 (which lacks a dedicated focus ring), and with the lens switch set to AF the FTM function behaves as expected, turning the lens ring changes the focus while servo focusing is active.

Merci beaucoup! I had forgotten to "enable" on one camera...That's why the 70-200 f/4 didn't focus manually when set on AF.

 

[Nemorino]

The only lens I miss is a 50mm macro, but I don't believe it will ever come from Canon.

Have You thought about Laowa? They offer a 58mm macro with 2x magnification and a 55mm TS macro with 1x magnification.

 

[Del Paso]

Have You thought about Laowa? They offer a 58mm macro with 2x magnification and a 55mm TS macro with 1x magnification.

Nope!
I want an AF, so no 58mm Laowa. Besides, I have the 60mm Macro Elmarit which is optically perfect, but lacks AF.
And, as a universal lens, the 55 TS is not even an option, far too heavy. I'm looking for a universal lens, not for a dedicated macro (I have already 50mm, 60mm, 90mm, 100mm, 180mm real macros). What I "need" is the equivalent of the Zeiss 50mm f/2, but better at infinity and with AF.
Fact is also that I prefer to buy my lenses from Canon, being not so fond of buying from dictatorships...

 

[DocInfoSci]

Wait, do you mean performing manual focus while the camera is actually performing servo AF?

Yes! That's what we were discussing.

As a working example: I might have my camera in AF servo tracking something -- let's say a dog in a farm field -- and the camera might become distracted by the movement or appearance of something else -- let's say some tall grass -- so while still in servo tracking I can manually adjust my lens' focus to get it back in the zone of the dog, at which point the (edit: DPAF, not contrast) AF will pick the dog back up.

I don’t think I ever tried that, it seems like a contradiction to me, but I’d expect the camera to override the lens in such situation, since I’m pressing the AF button.

Throw in back-button focus, and once you pop you can't stop.

I remember some EF lenses with mechanical focusing rings (not necessarily Canon but also third parties) mentioning in their user manuals to avoid turning the rings while autofocus was being performed, so it kind of became a discipline to me.

The original EF lens motors were not compatible. An example of an older EF motor that does not have FTM is:

EF50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro - Canon Camera Museum

Here, you can find out about Canon's EF Lenses > MACRO / CLOSE-UP Lens > EF50mm f/2.5 Compact Macro.

global.canon

It used an arc-form drive that required the MF switch to engage if you wanted to manually focus the lens. Once mechanical USM came along the EF lenses with such a motor typically supported full time manual focus. Just grab the focus ring and twist at any time for any reason.

When I first grabbed my R6 I headed to the store and tried a bunch of RF lenses, and they either required the use of the MF switch (if they had one) or a menu setting, but in all cases I couldn't just override the camera's AF drive if in servo. All of my EF lenses had override in servo so for me it didn't matter how sharp or mechanically fast the lens was -- they went backwards for my use case.

Hence in my mid-life crowd we distinguish between full-time manual (flick the MF switch, but then no AF) and full-time manual override (keep the AF switch and periodically give the AF a manual assist).

So when I saw this post I was like, "hooray -- 1990s again!" But then neuroanatomist told me to try again (or harder) with my experimentation. In all fairness, a number of RF lenses and R6 firmware updates have occurred since my initial experiment. My EF lenses + DLO just didn't really leave me feeling the need to revisit the experiment and online was always vague or ambiguous (to me) in terms of whether the feature had actually made it back into the RF series with servo engaged.

 

[OldrockyGN]

This is a confusing mess of a firmware update from Canon for the RF24-105mm F4 L IS USM. Times like this make me wonder what is really happening over there. Nonetheless, this is a worthy update to the Canon RF 24-105L as it adds some features to the lens that simply weren't there before. I […]

See full article...

All this talk about what the update could be/is/isn't is fine. BUT - I just want to hear what your experience is with downloading and updating the firmware.

 

[neuroanatomist]

...so while still in servo tracking I can manually adjust my lens' focus to get it back in the zone of the dog, at which point the contrast based AF will pick the dog back up.

Are you using a Live View on 13+ year-old DSLR? Canon introduced dual-pixel autofocus (DPAF) on the 70D in 2013, it is a phase detect AF system that's been used (with some technical updates over the years) for DSLR Live View AF since then, and is used on all of Canon's MILCs.

https://www.usa.canon.com/learning/training-articles/training-articles-list/intro-to-dual-pixel-autofocus-dpaf

 

[DocInfoSci]

Are you using a Live View on 13+ year-old DSLR? Canon introduced dual-pixel autofocus (DPAF) on the 70D in 2013, it is a phase detect AF system that's been used (with some technical updates over the years) for DSLR Live View AF since then, and is used on all of Canon's MILCs.

Gah, you're right. DPAF.

 

[DocInfoSci]

All this talk about what the update could be/is/isn't is fine. BUT - I just want to hear what your experience is with downloading and updating the firmware.

What was off about the article? It seemed pretty clear to me:

1. There is new firmware for the lens
2. The firmware's availability is mixed, potentially confusing to some
3. The lens' performance is improved in specific manners (enumerated)

So some poetic waxing is thrown in. Like most of our replies aren't all over the place with woulda / coulda / shoulda and some emotional opinions and casual banter?

 

[OldrockyGN]

What was off about the article? It seemed pretty clear to me:

1. There is new firmware for the lens
2. The firmware's availability is mixed, potentially confusing to some
3. The lens' performance is improved in specific manners (enumerated)

So some poetic waxing is thrown in. Like most of our replies aren't all over the place with woulda / coulda / shoulda and some emotional opinions and casual banter?

DocInfoSci - "Just the facts, maam." ??? I wasn't objecting to the all over the place - just wanting to know more about the
actual update. I bit the bullet and went ahead and performed the update without the reports ... took much longer to load
the new firmware than I expected (close to 10 minutes). Camera and lens work after update complete ... but haven't, yet,
done anything other than the most basic testing (does it still put images on the card). Have not tested any of the new
features provided by this update.
Canon has always been good about any firmware - at least for me - so I'm not expecting problems. But my normal thing is
to wait until any update has 'been tested by actual users in the field' ... but, *SIGH* I didn't do that this time. TTFN - Jim

 

[DocInfoSci]

DocInfoSci - "Just the facts, maam." ???

Dr. works best, or Mr. if you must. Sir in this context.

I wasn't objecting to the all over the place - just wanting to know more about the
actual update. I bit the bullet and went ahead and performed the update without the reports ... took much longer to load
the new firmware than I expected (close to 10 minutes). Camera and lens work after update complete ... but haven't, yet,
done anything other than the most basic testing (does it still put images on the card). Have not tested any of the new
features provided by this update.
Canon has always been good about any firmware - at least for me - so I'm not expecting problems. But my normal thing is
to wait until any update has 'been tested by actual users in the field' ... but, *SIGH* I didn't do that this time. TTFN - Jim

Ah, makes sense. Fair. Good luck!

 

[m4ndr4ke]

Yes! That's what we were discussing.

As a working example: I might have my camera in AF servo tracking something -- let's say a dog in a farm field -- and the camera might become distracted by the movement or appearance of something else -- let's say some tall grass -- so while still in servo tracking I can manually adjust my lens' focus to get it back in the zone of the dog, at which point the (edit: DPAF, not contrast) AF will pick the dog back up.

Thanks for the explanation

Throw in back-button focus, and once you pop you can't stop.

Yes, I use back-button focus, I have two separate configurations on my R6 (two rear focusing buttons), but I probably have something else set-up differently, because the buttons are overriding my focus ring. I can use override in One Shot AF (after changing the value of Option 1 in menu AF4), but not in Servo AF, nothing happens, regardless of the lens.
Actually, I prefer it this way, to avoid unintentional changes, I was just curious about your conversation.

When I first grabbed my R6 I headed to the store and tried a bunch of RF lenses, and they either required the use of the MF switch (if they had one) or a menu setting, but in all cases I couldn't just override the camera's AF drive if in servo. All of my EF lenses had override in servo so for me it didn't matter how sharp or mechanically fast the lens was -- they went backwards for my use case.

Hence in my mid-life crowd we distinguish between full-time manual (flick the MF switch, but then no AF) and full-time manual override (keep the AF switch and periodically give the AF a manual assist).

I've always known FTM as the ability of performing manual focus while autofocus was selected in the lens, period. This was the first time I heard of doing it while the elements are actually moving.

 

[DocInfoSci]

I've always known FTM as the ability of performing manual focus while autofocus was selected in the lens, period. This was the first time I heard of doing it while the elements were actually moving.

Oh, interesting! I hadn't thought of it any other way. I guess that would be useful too -- as in prefocus for a portrait or event, such as cars coming around a corner?

I figure for $1k+ a lens can bend to my will without breaking, and that means while the AF drives. Taking my finger off the back-button just to tweak the focus is only slightly less annoying than having to completely disengage my effort to flick a switch.