Deals on Gear

Stock Notice: Canon RF 24mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM $599

This site contains affiliate links to products and services. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.

Adorama has stock of the brand new Canon RF 24mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM for $599 and it’s ready to ship.

Canon RF 24mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM Key Features

  • Dedicated, programmable Control Ring with click-stop operation
  • Equivalent to approximately 38mm coverage when used on cameras with
  • APS-C size image sensors
  • Impressively compact and light at only 270g
  • Circular (9 blades) aperture for beautiful, soft backgrounds
  • Lens Format: APS-C, Full Frame
  • Fixed Focal Length: Focal Length: 24mm
  • Lens Type: Wide Angle Lens
  • Image Stabilization: Image Stabilization: Yes (OIS)

Canon RF 24mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM $599

[tdp_random_reviews reviewstoshow=”5″]

Chaitanya

EOS 5D Mark IV
Jun 27, 2013
1,641
900
36
Pune
Eagerly waiting for reviews of this lens, this would be perfect for wide angle macro on FF cameras(equivalent to using 15mm Macro on Canon crop bodies but with AF and IS).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Aug 28, 2022
6
5
Hi all, there seems to be a complete lack of reviews of this lens despite being available in shops. This seems very strange. None of the usual lens reviewers interested in the 24? If it's like the 35mm it could be a great lens. I want one but, as always I want independent trusted reviews first. Or am I missing something??
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

peconicgp

R6, M6mkII
Oct 18, 2017
14
15
Connecticut, USA
Hi all, there seems to be a complete lack of reviews of this lens despite being available in shops. This seems very strange. None of the usual lens reviewers interested in the 24? If it's like the 35mm it could be a great lens. I want one but, as always I want independent trusted reviews first. Or am I missing something??
I was wondering the same thing the other day. Kinda weird.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

LogicExtremist

Lux pictor
Sep 26, 2021
501
347
I was wondering the same thing the other day. Kinda weird.
I suspect it won't be as good as the the RF 35mm f/1.8m macro which is optically better with low distortion. The RF 24mm f/1.8 has around 11% rectilinear distortion, and is quite heavily software corrected, though not as bad as the RF 16mm f/2.8, which probably excludes it from any of the typical UW applications that need sharp corners, such as landscape, astro, architecture, real-estate.

I've seen Canon promo interviews where they seem to talk about it as lens for vloggng and YouTube type uses. If the focus works well, (unlike the 16mm which can't track focus well on moving subjects, okay for static talking head video) then it might be good for general video work. It would also work as a 38mm f/2.88 equivalent on the RF-S platform, but maybe a bit expensive for a crop sensor 35mm substitute.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

Bonich

EOS 90D
Apr 29, 2019
116
117
Hi all, there seems to be a complete lack of reviews of this lens despite being available in shops. This seems very strange. None of the usual lens reviewers interested in the 24? If it's like the 35mm it could be a great lens. I want one but, as always I want independent trusted reviews first. Or am I missing something??
There is a great "review" done within the spare time of one evening on YT.
Sorry, it is spoken in German, but the reviewer (member of stuff at my photo dealer) was close to euphoric.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

Chaitanya

EOS 5D Mark IV
Jun 27, 2013
1,641
900
36
Pune
There is a great "review" done within the spare time of one evening on YT.
Sorry, it is spoken in German, but the reviewer (member of stuff at my photo dealer) was close to euphoric.
From Korea(unboxing video) :
 
Aug 29, 2022
5
25
I picked up my copy today and can give some first impressions and comparisons with my other wide angle option the RF 15-35 f/2.8
I did a little sharpness comparison on the R5. Wide open (f/1.8 on the prime vs. f/2.8 on the zoom) the lenses are pretty similar regarding sharpness in the center. In the corners the new 24mm is a bit softer tough.
Stopped down to f5.6 the prime is noticeable sharper in the middle but still a tad softer in the corners again. Not soft in general, but a bit less detailed.
Overall I would say the 24mm is a good performer (especially compared to the 15-35mm which is an awesome lens), outresolving the L lens in the middle and being not too far off in the corners.
And yes, the lens has pretty severe barrel distortion but is of course automatically corrected in camera. Lightroom also already offers the lens profile.
Chromatic aberration is definitely present, especially LoCa. Quite similar to the RF 50mm f1.2 in that regard.
The bokeh is definitely nicer on the RF 24mm - if the RF 15-35mm f/2.8 has one weakness it‘s bokeh, especially trees and leaves that can look quite harsh. But the rendering of the 24mm is definitely softer there.
The Macro ability impressed me quite a bit. You can get fairly close (around 4cm to an object) and the sharpness holds up. Only problem here is the LoCa wide open, but it is greatly reduced, once stopped down.
The sunstars are nice and pointy when positioned at an edge, but have the "double-spike" effect similar to the Rf 35mm f/1.8. Flare is absolutely no issue, there is a bit of ghosting but nothing too distracting.
Lastly the IS works nice, giving similar results as the RF 15-35mm, which means for me that I can usually hand hold around 1s.
From my first test I think it‘s a very well rounded lens. Sharp, very good close up capabilities and nice bokeh. The only downsides are the corners that are not quite as sharp and a bit of LoCa. Hope that was useful for anyone interested in this lens.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 11 users
Aug 28, 2022
6
5
There is a great "review" done within the spare time of one evening on YT.
Sorry, it is spoken in German, but the reviewer (member of stuff at my photo dealer) was close to euphoric.
Thanks for the link, will watch that now
 

OskarB

EOS 90D
Jul 17, 2021
103
354
500px.com
I picked up my copy today and can give some first impressions and comparisons with my other wide angle option the RF 15-35 f/2.8
I did a little sharpness comparison on the R5. Wide open (f/1.8 on the prime vs. f/2.8 on the zoom) the lenses are pretty similar regarding sharpness in the center. In the corners the new 24mm is a bit softer tough.
Stopped down to f5.6 the prime is noticeable sharper in the middle but still a tad softer in the corners again. Not soft in general, but a bit less detailed.
Overall I would say the 24mm is a good performer (especially compared to the 15-35mm which is an awesome lens), outresolving the L lens in the middle and being not too far off in the corners.
And yes, the lens has pretty severe barrel distortion but is of course automatically corrected in camera. Lightroom also already offers the lens profile.
Chromatic aberration is definitely present, especially LoCa. Quite similar to the RF 50mm f1.2 in that regard.
The bokeh is definitely nicer on the RF 24mm - if the RF 15-35mm f/2.8 has one weakness it‘s bokeh, especially trees and leaves that can look quite harsh. But the rendering of the 24mm is definitely softer there.
The Macro ability impressed me quite a bit. You can get fairly close (around 4cm to an object) and the sharpness holds up. Only problem here is the LoCa wide open, but it is greatly reduced, once stopped down.
The sunstars are nice and pointy when positioned at an edge, but have the "double-spike" effect similar to the Rf 35mm f/1.8. Flare is absolutely no issue, there is a bit of ghosting but nothing too distracting.
Lastly the IS works nice, giving similar results as the RF 15-35mm, which means for me that I can usually hand hold around 1s.
From my first test I think it‘s a very well rounded lens. Sharp, very good close up capabilities and nice bokeh. The only downsides are the corners that are not quite as sharp and a bit of LoCa. Hope that was useful for anyone interested in this lens.
Great summary, thank you!
How do you find the 24mm compared to the RF 24-105 f4 at 24mm?
 
Aug 28, 2022
6
5
I picked up my copy today and can give some first impressions and comparisons with my other wide angle option the RF 15-35 f/2.8
I did a little sharpness comparison on the R5. Wide open (f/1.8 on the prime vs. f/2.8 on the zoom) the lenses are pretty similar regarding sharpness in the center. In the corners the new 24mm is a bit softer tough.
Stopped down to f5.6 the prime is noticeable sharper in the middle but still a tad softer in the corners again. Not soft in general, but a bit less detailed.
Overall I would say the 24mm is a good performer (especially compared to the 15-35mm which is an awesome lens), outresolving the L lens in the middle and being not too far off in the corners.
And yes, the lens has pretty severe barrel distortion but is of course automatically corrected in camera. Lightroom also already offers the lens profile.
Chromatic aberration is definitely present, especially LoCa. Quite similar to the RF 50mm f1.2 in that regard.
The bokeh is definitely nicer on the RF 24mm - if the RF 15-35mm f/2.8 has one weakness it‘s bokeh, especially trees and leaves that can look quite harsh. But the rendering of the 24mm is definitely softer there.
The Macro ability impressed me quite a bit. You can get fairly close (around 4cm to an object) and the sharpness holds up. Only problem here is the LoCa wide open, but it is greatly reduced, once stopped down.
The sunstars are nice and pointy when positioned at an edge, but have the "double-spike" effect similar to the Rf 35mm f/1.8. Flare is absolutely no issue, there is a bit of ghosting but nothing too distracting.
Lastly the IS works nice, giving similar results as the RF 15-35mm, which means for me that I can usually hand hold around 1s.
From my first test I think it‘s a very well rounded lens. Sharp, very good close up capabilities and nice bokeh. The only downsides are the corners that are not quite as sharp and a bit of LoCa. Hope that was useful for anyone interested in this lens.
Great, thanks for the info. looks like an interesting lense
 
Aug 29, 2022
5
25
Great summary, thank you!
How do you find the 24mm compared to the RF 24-105 f4 at 24mm?
Unfortunately I don‘t own the RF 24-105mm, and it’s been a while since I last used one, so I can‘t directly compare them.

From memory the wide end of the 24-105mm was definitely weaker than the long end, so you might see an image quality boost with the new 24mm prime. But that‘s only guesstimating. You probably want to wait for someone else to do a better comparison of those two lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

LogicExtremist

Lux pictor
Sep 26, 2021
501
347
I picked up my copy today and can give some first impressions and comparisons with my other wide angle option the RF 15-35 f/2.8
I did a little sharpness comparison on the R5. Wide open (f/1.8 on the prime vs. f/2.8 on the zoom) the lenses are pretty similar regarding sharpness in the center. In the corners the new 24mm is a bit softer tough.
Stopped down to f5.6 the prime is noticeable sharper in the middle but still a tad softer in the corners again. Not soft in general, but a bit less detailed.
Overall I would say the 24mm is a good performer (especially compared to the 15-35mm which is an awesome lens), outresolving the L lens in the middle and being not too far off in the corners.
And yes, the lens has pretty severe barrel distortion but is of course automatically corrected in camera. Lightroom also already offers the lens profile.
Chromatic aberration is definitely present, especially LoCa. Quite similar to the RF 50mm f1.2 in that regard.
The bokeh is definitely nicer on the RF 24mm - if the RF 15-35mm f/2.8 has one weakness it‘s bokeh, especially trees and leaves that can look quite harsh. But the rendering of the 24mm is definitely softer there.
The Macro ability impressed me quite a bit. You can get fairly close (around 4cm to an object) and the sharpness holds up. Only problem here is the LoCa wide open, but it is greatly reduced, once stopped down.
The sunstars are nice and pointy when positioned at an edge, but have the "double-spike" effect similar to the Rf 35mm f/1.8. Flare is absolutely no issue, there is a bit of ghosting but nothing too distracting.
Lastly the IS works nice, giving similar results as the RF 15-35mm, which means for me that I can usually hand hold around 1s.
From my first test I think it‘s a very well rounded lens. Sharp, very good close up capabilities and nice bokeh. The only downsides are the corners that are not quite as sharp and a bit of LoCa. Hope that was useful for anyone interested in this lens.
How is the image quality for macro with the lens stopped down, which is how it's usually done, around f/8? Thanks! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Aug 29, 2022
5
25
How is the image quality for macro with the lens stopped down, which is how it's usually done, around f/8? Thanks! :)
I did a quick comparison with the RF 100mm f2.8L IS USM Macro. Both at the maximum magnification of the 24mm of x0.5, stopped down to f8. For the 100mm I moved the tripod back to match the frame of the 24mm as best as I can. Both were shot on the R5 on a tripod with a flash to get enough light.

I attached a screenshot from Lightroom, where both images are at 100%. Unfortunately it is not quite the same frame.
The RF 100mm f2.8 Macro is on the left and the RF 24mm f1.8 is on the right. And yes, I didn't mix that up - the new 24mm seems quite a bit sharper to me. I double checked the shot of the 100mm, but couldn't find that I missed focus or anything. I am really impressed by these results.
The only downside of the 24mm for Macro is, that you are really close to your subject and might cast a shadow. I also had troubles positioning my tripod close enough. Bildschirmfoto 2022-08-30 um 08.58.09_web.jpg
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 3 users

LogicExtremist

Lux pictor
Sep 26, 2021
501
347
I did a quick comparison with the RF 100mm f2.8L IS USM Macro. Both at the maximum magnification of the 24mm of x0.5, stopped down to f8. For the 100mm I moved the tripod back to match the frame of the 24mm as best as I can. Both were shot on the R5 on a tripod with a flash to get enough light.

I attached a screenshot from Lightroom, where both images are at 100%. Unfortunately it is not quite the same frame.
The RF 100mm f2.8 Macro is on the left and the RF 24mm f1.8 is on the right. And yes, I didn't mix that up - the new 24mm seems quite a bit sharper to me. I double checked the shot of the 100mm, but couldn't find that I missed focus or anything. I am really impressed by these results.
The only downside of the 24mm for Macro is, that you are really close to your subject and might cast a shadow. I also had troubles positioning my tripod close enough. View attachment 205378
Thanks for doing the test. Maybe something odd happened with the RF 100 macro there, but it's good to see the results of the 24mm at half-macro, it looks decent! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Aug 29, 2022
5
25
Thanks for doing the test. Maybe something odd happened with the RF 100 macro there, but it's good to see the results of the 24mm at half-macro, it looks decent! :)
I wouldn‘t rule that possibility out, since I‘m not really experienced in high magnification macro photography, so it might be user error.
I use the 100mm only for product photography where it‘s rare to get that close. In my books the 100mm is a very sharp lens overall.
But in this setup I was able to reproduce the sharpness advantage of the 24mm.

Either way, the 24mm f1.8 is definitely a good lens for macro!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

fasterquieter

EOS M50
Jan 31, 2020
28
22
It's funny how so many of the lower end lenses have IS now. Especially given some bodies have it and this particular lens is so wide. I have the Sigma Art 24 F/1.4. This looks appealingly light in comparison, but also a little boring.