Canon RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 review BEST RF kit zoom vs f4L vs 24-240! 

Find out why the RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 STM is the best kit zoom for Canon RF cameras! Check price at B&H: bhpho.to/3arO5XH // WEX: tidd.ly/3ohIVl6 Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book at Amazon: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Like Cameralabs? Get the merch: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop #canon #eos #rf

The 24-105 STM is excellent for the price and weight. Very happy with my copy. I much prefer it to the heavy L version. The STM is great to carry around all day without breaking your back and delivers fantastic results.

Just chose this as my Canon EOS R kit lens, but against the advice of several of my pro photog friends. Glad I did! Appreciate this confirmation.

I really enjoy your reviews. Many thanks.

Thanks for the great reviews, Gordon!! So well done with excellent samples. Just sent you some coffee money! :)

Thank you Gordon! I have the 24-105 4-7.1 together with 35 and 50 1.8. For me they work perfectly.

Thanks Gordon. Happy New Year.

Happy New Year Gordon to you and yours :)

Happy New Year Gordon:)

thanks. this is really really useful references

Thanks for using the RP for those test !

Great review. Many thanks! 🙏🙏😊

I bought EOS R with RF 24-105 F4L a week ago and at 24mm it definitely needs correction for barrel distortion. I tested it in Lightroom and Capture One Pro on a 4K panel with 100% of SRGB coverage. My corners are sharp at 24mm F8 and the corner sharpness at F4 is good. Nothing blurry like you have. I will be renting lens and testing them myself before buying from now on. There is too much discrepancies between many reviews.

Jolly good review, Gordon, thank you. Lovely trees and flower images at the end. Seems a very decent lens, one that I would be glad to accept if bundled with, say, the RP, in which case its price would be quite fair. I like your hint that pairing this with one of the affordable primes might round out one's kit or system nicely.

I own the RF24-105L and it is sharp edge to edge at 24mm f4!!! On my RP it is absolutely stunning especially at 35mm so much so my prime never gets used anymore and even my 16-35 F4L which is also very sharp hardly gets used as well as the RF is better from 24-35mm... This is from side by side tests....

I got this lens with an EOS R the other day and I am really having fun with it. We are still in lockdown here in Melbourne, Australia so the macro function is keeping me entertained around the house. I am not rich (I actually rent my camera body's at a very reasonable price) and photography is just one of my hobbies so I applaud Canon for releasing some full frame lenses that are reasonably priced for people like me even though this is still such a new system.

13:36 - BINGO!!! This is why I only would use the 24-105 at F8 for middle of the day, while hiking/quick snap shots...

Interesting results and confirms that Canons low priced lenses are really good for real use! By the way: I like that I have chosen the RF 35 Macro as my "standard lens" for the RP - just zooming isn't that easy :)

First, another enjoyable review. In my own tests, the 24-240 is very sharp in the center even wide open. It exhibits a bit "different" behavior than traditional lenses in the corners, particularly as the wide end. Effectively. as you get to the corners, the image is squeezed into about half the horizontal and vertical area as in the center. It does not fill the frame without distortion correction as seen when opening in say Adobe RAW without correction. After distortion correction, the image has about 1/2 the resolution horizontally and vertically as it does in the center. Still, the image in the corners has good contrast with extremely little chroma aberrations in the corners. BUT, no amount of stopping down will significantly improve the resolution as the resolution was lost by the lens effectively reducing the image in the corners. A big question is what happens if you have a higher resolution sensor such as the R5? I have not seen this addressed anywhere. As best I can find, the 24-240 has been tested on the R and RP but not the R5 which came out after the 24-240. If all the lens is doing is reducing the image in the corners, then more pixels would give about the same percentage resolution loss. bit still more resolution with a higher resolution sensor. But if the lens is doing other "damage" to the image, then stopping down would improve the sharpness. I think an extremely interesting comparison would be to compare the RF24-240 on say an R6, RP, or R versus on an R5.

Thanks Gordon, I have been thinking of adding this 24-105 budget lens to my R5 kit and you helped me decide it was a good deal. I rarely use this size lens and it should suffice for my needs.

Hi Gordon, Happy New Year! I love your reviews, they are very informative and you explore all important aspects of a lens. Your site is one of the best sources to get accurate information about the quality and performance of a lens. However I'm interested why you do not test the Canon lenses in the same way as Sony, Nikon, Sigma, Tamron lenses (like resolution test with the same test chart, and the same cityscape for long distance sharpness tests, comparison with other lenses, etc.)? I'm sure this is an enormous work, and what we can find on your site required years of hard work, but why Canon lenses are the ones that are not tested with exactly the same way as lenses from other manufacturers? It would be a good opportuntity for exact and detailed cross-platform comparison, which is not available on any site at the moment.

Thanks Gordon I think you helped me make up my mind about the stm. Pretty decent performance for a bang around lens. You can almost buy 3 of them for the current price of the L type. Thanks again.

I've been surprised at the versatility and quality out of 24-105 f4-7.1. I reluctantly bought it with a 70 200 to cover telephoto range and looks like I might not have made a bad decision at all

Happy New Year!

I bought this lens a few months ago off the strength of your review, Gordon, and it’s stellar. I had the F4 L version, but this is so much lighter and easier to lug around - and perfect for shooting video with my R6.

Thanks for this review and comparison.I’m considering the r system and after watching this review it seems the r6 & 24-105 f4-7.1 as a kit is a solid choice to get into the r system.

จากไทยแลนด์ รีวิวได้ชัดเจนมากครับ ขอบคุณ

Thanks for another great and detailed review. I wonder whether the rather mediocre corner results with the RF 24-105/4 L could be explained by field curvature. Have you tried focusing in the corners or followed sharpness across a wider range of distances (e.g. as described by Roger Ciala in a recent DPReview article)? Thanks

Interesting review since many have almost trashed this lens and the F4 version is a much better than the cheaper cousin. Perhaps review against the R5 and R6 since it might have different results? I had the R6 and I've never had a problem with sharpness in the corner, even under low light conditions.

Very nice! That's 24-240 handily beats the 24-105 in every metric except size and price.

Thanks for camparison!!!!

I used an RF 24 - 105 mm F4 L lens on an EOS RP during the summer. I have just looked through the photos of buildings I took at that time. When blown up, the corners of the pictures were marginally softer than the centre but it wasn't noticeable when viewing at "normal" monitor size. However, on the few occasions I used that lens, the light conditions were almost perfect.

nice compact lens, but I was expecting something better in terms of vignetting with the large rf mount, so maybe that is related more to the short flange distance that mirrorless cameras have than to the mount throat diameter....

It was surprising for me that the 24-240 actually held up very well against the 24-105 4-7.1. I expected the lens with the smaller focal range to have better image quality. But the results from the 24-105 L are even more surprising. Most other reviews praise the very even performance to the corners at 24 mm wide open. Looking at the sample image with the guitars from your Flickr album of the EOS R review, real world images still look good in the corners. Regarding the portrait comparison at 105 mm, I would consider the F4 lens to be significantly better. it provides a very nice separation from the background, while the F7.1 image is too busy for my personal taste. Thank you very much for all the work you have done with these lenses!

I wonder how all three lenses compare on the R5 or R6, with better sensors and DIGIC-X processor. I own the R6 and RF 24-105 F/4L and am very happy with both.

Thanks!

For convenience and performance, I've decided on buying an EOS R6 MKII with a 24-105 STM kit lens. - T+C

I thought you were joking saying the kit lens was good because of all the crappy Sony kit lenses that I had: 18-55, 16-50, 16-70 Zeiss, 24-70 Zeiss. Then I got this lens because it was cheap and sharp and newer. It is as good as you and Ken Rockwell are saying. All the new RF lenses are great. I think Canon did the right thing: Unleash small good enough primes and very good kit lenses with the newer RF mount. Not like Sony's cheap and crappy offerings, letting 3rd party release a ton of average performers. This controls quality. Although, I think Canon has to refine the RF bodies to be more user friendly, not having a million options to get the colors and brightness of the exposure just right. (my R8 shoots way to high exposure .3 to .67 too high all the time) Since phone cameras are doing computational AI, reducing highlights to appear having more dynamic range, I didn't know Canon had Highlight Tone Priority to do the same. World's of difference. Just make it default already.

I just bought this for my also freshly bought R6 because there is no Adapter available for months :/. So no EF lenses for me for a while...

What is your opinion on this lens on the R5? i notice all your tests of these lens are on the R and RP, which makes sense based on target audience. But I am a Working Pro who has the R5 and a complete collection of L Lenses, but as you know, the L lenses, are big and heavy and there is no equivalent to this kind of range. So in situations where i am simply out with family, having this sort of lens, even if the quality is not as good as a 28-70 or 70-200, it would be good enough to not have to carry 2 or 3 heavy lenses. so i am considering purchasing the 24-240 as a family lens. whats your thoughts on that?

Good stuff ! It's only $220 refurbished on the Canon site so it's very tempting.

IMO, the RF 24-240mm is the ultimate best kit lens for Canon RP. You get an USM (same as the 24-105mm F4L), slightly better image quality than the 24-105mm STM at corners, twice the zoom range, and higher aperture (F6.3 vs F7.1) at max zoom. It is also slightly cheaper than the 24-105mm F4L.

How is this vs the rf50 mm f1.8 stm lens? Would really appreciate any kind of feed back. Decided to buy my first camera wich is a canon eos rp and my main focus is portraits and small groups of people indoor and outdoor etc 🙏🏻

Hi Gordon, Happy New Year. I'm the owner of a Canon 70D since 2014, with 18-135 and 55-250 IS STM lenses. I want to invest in a prime lens, which one would you recommend? I'm looking for the best sharpness and fastest focusing, and is it worth selling both of the aforementioned lenses? Thanks in advance.

I went through my past years lenses used, and # of Shots: 24-105 F4 - 5,000; 15-35 F2.8 - 15,000; 100-400II - 18,000 - So, I'm going the weight savings route, as I only use the 24-105 during the day for that quick snap shot, and if I'm serious, I'm on the tripod, polarizer on, F8, timed release anyways... "Serious" low light work ends up going to the 15-35 F2.8 RF... ALTHOUGH: I'm "toying" with the idea of a prime either 50 - 80mm, somewhere in that range, just to change it up... Still don't want to pay $400 for this 24-105... I miss the "old days" when you could get a Tokina for cheap that did just as well, if not BETTER....

Dear Gordon, STM version outperforming L version? I have used for many years first the EF 24-105L and now the RF 24-105L on a R6. I bought the EF version second hand, it was not special being soft at 105mm. It broke down three times being repaired by Canon CPS UK. They were embarrassed by the three failures and on the last repair, for the fixed price charge, they rebuilt the lens completely including replacing the scratched front objective lens! The lens returned was a different beast having much, much better IQ The first thing I did with the new RF version was to test it fully open at 24 & 105mm . I cannot complain but then the R6 does use as standard the built in Canon image optimiser software which does correct many deficiencies. My conclusion is that if the cheap STM version has better IQ than the much more expensive L version, I would send L version back to Canon and tell them to fix it. My experience with Canon UK service centre is, whether it is a camera body or lens, the returned item works better than new! My walk around lens on my now quite batted 5D4 is an equally battered EF 24-70mm f4. I have tweaked the 5D4 camera profiles to produce some very sharp A3 prints. Which is better, the 20 mega pixel R6/24-105 L A3 prints or 30 megapixel 5D4 A3 prints ? I can't decide other than to say the R6 prints require less adjustment in Lightroom and no camera profile tweaking My advice is, if a lens produces soft images, immediately reject it and get an alternative or try several alternatives of the same lens.

Just curious if you also had Peripheral illumination correction enabled

Can i use this lens in canon r10 can i ignore 18-150 mm kit lens lens and buy 24-105 stm lens please suggest me for better photography

good lens sir

Would i be crazy to choose this lens as a first lens on a R5?

Hello sir, canon R8 and canon 35 mm f 1.8 , how is the combination? Which is best canon r8 or sony a7iii?

Corner sharpness of the RF zoom is even at f8 not great and worse than my old EF 24-70 f4 L IS USM :(

It looks to me that your sharpness test photo has different distance to the corner than to the middle

Thanks Gordon. The EF 24-105 f3.5-5.6 that I bought as a kit with my EOS RP performs extremely well with an adapter, and is faster, so I'm a bit disappointed by the specs of this new RF lens. EDIT: Oh yes, Happy New Year, and stay cautious for a bit longer in the UK!

24-105mm has always been a weak area for Canon, I was unfortunate to own both EF L versions, not sharp or crisp at all and critical reviewers dont rate the RF version any better. Cant imagine how bad this range will look on the R5S 90MP when its out... oh yes and happy new year, love your content :-)

No weather seal which is stupid

Better than f/4?

Hello I've been kinda struggling to decide on what camera to get I looked at canon eos r with 24 - 105 f4l and canon r6 with 24 - 105 f4 - f7.1 aperture lens Mainly wanna use it for landscape but I wanna look at wildlife eventually so i kinda wanna futureproof myself to some point. I cant, realy afford prime 24 - 105f4l lens with r6 since its gonna cost me more but i can with eos R and with R6 24 - 105 f4 - f7.1 Or should i just buy rf 50mm 1.8 and save up for f4? And i just wanna expand my lens line up slowly eventually I'm just worried and stressing over this for 4 weeks now Many people told me that r6 is better value money wise to get this days :) I also looked at z7 and z6ii with bork 24 - 70 f4 kit lenses Iv been rly going thru all this and its hard to decide. Thanks in advance!

Why are manufacturers making even slower versions of the DSLR alternatives? F7.1 on the long end is getting muddy images due to the increase of ISO on all but great weather days.

The 24-105L isn't really worth the L. I bought it with my original R and sadly - it is pretty much like the rest of the EOS-R series so far. Overpriced and overhyped to what it actually has to offer. If not overheating as well!!! The 15-25 2.8 lens is decent tho with the added features from the EF 16-35. I still don't find it quite as sharp as the EF one so It's not just your copy of the lens Gordon. :)

Something is fishy with the new “affordable” RF lenses, they clearly sacrificed long end aperture speed for profit / pushing people to the L-range. The RF mount should make lens design a bit easier, but I haven’t seen much in that direction, certainly not from Canon. If it doesn’t have a red ring Canon isn’t really trying. Meh lenses at meh prices. Their affordable primes are imo especially meh, with their extending lens barrel designs. Again, they hardly tried to push any envelopes here.

la traduction fonctionne mal...

❤🎉

Hello sir 🎉🎉🎉

As much, as i do like your respected Reviews, Gordon (since the Sony DSC-R1), RU-vidr Christopher Frost came to a different Conclusion about this Cheapskate Kitlens - see here, already 8 Months ago: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Cx9fDx77vgg.html It seems to be more than a meh, average, slowish Kitlens.

Cheap - yes, best no!

No way. 7.1 aperature???? Naaaaa

Who wants a f7?????

F7.1???? Bullshit

I have an R8 and i just bought this one for 129 dollars. You just can't pass that up. 129 dollars from cannon!