Correction: Canon is bringing us an RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM Macro

freejay

EOS M6 Mark II
CR Pro
Feb 3, 2015
81
53
Well f8 would be one stop darker than 5.6. So 7.1 is about half a stop? It ("7.1") looks bad but seems to be not much difference to the typical 5.6...
 

Diltiazem

Curiosity didn't kill me, yet.
Aug 23, 2014
184
35
Small, light and cheap (hopefully) in the most commonly used focal range. That's the idea of the lens. It will suit many people . A lot of people shoot mostly at f/8. With 5 stops of IS it won't be any worse than 24-70/2.8 without IS for low light except for moving subject.
If anyone thinks f/7.1 is not good for creating amazing images, artistic or not, I will ask them to think a little deeper about their own knowledge.
 

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,397
584
35
Pune
Point taken, I almost never use my 100L (at macro distances) at f/2.8. It's always stopped down quite a bit.

But some might shoot a 100 macro a hair wider than f/8 (say f/5.6 or so, where the lens is sharpest) for focus stacking.

- A
For focus stacking(macro) photographers do use dedicated lenses while this RF 24-105mm is a lens for the occasions when carrying macro lens is not an option. I can see this as a good lens for travelling with decent macro capabilities covering enviornment(24mm) to closeups(105mm).
 
  • Like
Reactions: ahsanford

LDS

EOS 5D Mark IV
Sep 14, 2012
1,715
248
f=7.1is a hard one to swallow.
A cloudy day, and you have to pack and go home.....

People will crank up the ISO.

I was thinking more about doing portraits at 105mm... it could be hard to teach people about DOF with such aperture.
 

Chaitanya

EOS R
Jun 27, 2013
1,397
584
35
Pune
Personally, I'd only want to take macros of pit vipers with a 3,000 millimeter lens or greater.

(Edit: Unless, of course, there's zoo glass between me and the venomous beastie.)

(Another Edit:

I routinely shoot macro at f/5.6, but in my case I'm shooting a fairly flat object through a layer of plastic that's often scratched. f/5.6 generally puts the object in focus but the scratches out of focus. But, as I have said upthread, my situation is extremely unusual.
Depending on the mood of snake and toxicity of venom I do use a sheet of acrylic mounted to front of lens to protect my hands. Only times I shoot wider than f/8 is when I am working in lab with dead specimen and I need to create stack of characters which tend to be quite small requiring high mag ratios. Like you said reproducing flat objects and art does need to be photographed at wide apertures but that use case I belive is a small niche among macro lens owners. Most commonly I see photographers using macro lenses for in field subjects and flowers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SteveC

sulla

EOS RP
Dec 31, 2012
334
103
Austria
www.flickr.com
While I think f/7.1 ist very ok for a (dedicated) macro lens (for sufficient DOF), I consider it unacceptable for a general purpose lens. Perhaps ok in bright sunlight, but I would be too limited in lower-light situations or even already indoors.
 

Jasonmc89

EOS 80D
Feb 7, 2019
300
327
UK
Tone it down a little bit. You have to be fanboying hard to spin f7.1 as a good lens. Shooting 560mm at f8 is a lot different than 105mm at f7.1.

It'll be cheap and good enough for the current Rebel soccer mom crowd. That's it.
Do Rebel soccer moms need full frame?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sharlin

wanderer23

EOS M6 Mark II
CR Pro
Feb 8, 2020
69
75
Def not a lens for me, but very interesting! Assuming this will be priced quite low, maybe great for food Instagramers and youtubers?
 

koenkooi

EOS 5D Mark IV
CR Pro
Feb 25, 2015
1,577
1,402
Here are some shots taken using 100mm Macro either at f11 or lower with last photo of Hump nosed pit viper shot on 5D mk 4. Unless someone is using macro lens for portraits I dont know anyone who uses macro lenses at apertures wider than f/8.
[..]

Most, if not all my macro shots are in the f/8-f/11 range, but sometimes a narrower aperture also works. Here's a picture by Jared Polin from his Nikkor Noct 58mm f/0.95 review, it's shot at f/1.2:
FRO_7125.jpg
 

Andy Westwood

EOS R6
CR Pro
Dec 10, 2016
147
229
UK
Well the lens is a nice compact size and a comfortable weight keeping it positive, just a pity about F7.1 but I think it will work on the RP as a cheap kit.

I wouldn’t think it’s going to be a lot of money, as already mentioned it will be interesting discover at what magnification it passes F5.6

I’m sure it will sell most consumers and many enthusiasts won’t be as bothered about F7.1 as we are.
 

uri.raz

EOS RP
Jan 5, 2016
213
134
Here are some shots taken using 100mm Macro either at f11 or lower with last photo of Hump nosed pit viper shot on 5D mk 4.

Great photos!

Unless someone is using macro lens for portraits I don't know anyone who uses macro lenses at apertures wider than f/8.

IIRC, I've read the 100mm f/2.8L doubles as a portraits lens.

Question is who is the target audience for a 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM 0.4-0.5x macro lens. As a walk around lens, e.g. something I'd take to shoot a family event, I think f/7.1 is too slow, and I would rather buy an RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. Maybe it was designed for macro, but not having shot any macro myself, I wouldn't presume to say whether its fit for that purpose or not.
 

tomri

EOS M50
Jun 4, 2014
43
15
Canon marketeers probably think that many of their prospective customers do not understand the meaning of those "f.." numbers at the front of the lens, and they are probably right when it comes to consumers. Everybody can however see the advantage of a long zoom range combined with small size in a shop. This also shows that Canon is aiming at consumers now with the R series. Makes me wonder about EOS M more than anything.

Problem only is that consumers are using smartphones nowadays so the only prospective customers left for any dedicated camera are enthusiasts who a) know f-stops and b) already own decent gear. Problem not solved.
 

Joules

doom
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2017
1,592
1,909
Hamburg, Germany
Also, you could adapt EF non-L 24-105 with the control ring adaptor and get:
  • an f/5.6 long end
  • a dedicated focus ring
  • fun RF control ring action
No cripple hammer at work there -- that's inexpensive and fully featured. Have at it.
It is worth noting though how compact this lens here is. Numbers are RF 24-105mm 4.0-7.1 | EF 24-105mm 3.5-5.6

Length: 89 mm | 104 mm (+ 24 mm Adapter)
Diameter: 77 mm | 83 mm
Weight: 395 g | 525 g

So it's not like you aren't also getting something exclusive with this zoom.
 
<-- start Taboola -->