@@Psyclonus7 I guess it depends what you mean by value. Value for dollar, value for specs etc.. I was just impressed with the f4 lens that i got for $900 which I think is what it's actually worth imo. Cheers
Isn't annoying so many call this lens a kit lens. It's not! The non-L version is the kit lens. Not many can afford this lens. I love mine! Great walk around lens.
I have this and the 50 rf 1.2 for my R6. The only 2 lenses I bring with me on my travels. The 50 is for portraits and for people in existing low light. For static shots in existing low light, aperture is irrelevant. I’ve shot twilight photos at 5.6 and even f8, at 200 ISO. I have an ingenious device that allows me to do this - a tripod. When I don’t bring a tripod, I always can find something to prop my camera against to take a low shutter speed photo. Growing up in the era of film, I’m used to this. I’d take low light photos of dark church interiors on my Nikon FTn with Kodachrome 64 (yes, 64 ISO). So don’t be scared by this lens because it’s only f4, unless you want to take photos of indoor concerts, then forget it. I have traveled to Europe with only my previous EF 24-105 f4 on a 5D Mark III and it was all I needed. With the more capable RF version on an R6, I’m confident I can tackle any situation. If you can have only 1 lens on your Canon, this is it. If you can have a bunch, you should take this with you anyway. Finally, the new 2.8 version looks good, but it is too loooong. It looks like a 20mm antiaircraft gun hanging from your shoulder. I’ll pass on it and spend the difference in price saved over the f4 on upgrading to business class.
I love the advice about propping up against the wall and using lower shutter speeds. And with the new camera’s IBIS you can get pretty sharp long shutters. Thanks for sharing!
@@BrunoPozo4RealDas Kit Objektiv ist die EF Variante gewesen als Mark I und II die zusammen mit einer EOS 5D Mark I bis IV verkauft wurden. Diese Objektive wurden dann im weissen Karton wieder angeboten! Der Grund war, das dieses Objektiv immer ein Schärfeproblem hatte. Die L Einstufung war schon damals nicht gerechtfertigt! Die aktuelle RF Variante ist nur geringfügig schärfer und das wird in vielen unabhängigen Tests beschrieben! Das Objektiv ist einfach zu weich in der Abbildungsleistung und baut zum Rand extrem ab.
Agree with most of your comments, although it's not really a kit lens as such on Canon's lower end models (in Europe anyway) and I purchased it separately from my own 'R'. I don't think f/8 is an optimum aperture at 24mm for sharpness, although when zoomed in halfway you're right. I've been completely satisfied with my copy of the lens, although to be honest EF 24-70mm f/4 has better contrast and gives the impression of being more rugged.
@@BrunoPozo4Real I understand but kit lens mostly don’t have a fixed aperture, don’t have weather-seal and certainly aren’t “L” lenses. Anyway, I liked the video anyway 👍
@@BrunoPozo4RealDas EF 24-105 L IS USM Mark I und Version Mark II war immer ein Kit Objektiv. Es wurde zusammen mit den Spiegelreflexkameras EOS 5D Mark I bis Mark IV im Paket verkauft. Wer behauptet ein L Objektiv wäre noch ein Kit Objektiv gewesen hat keine Ahnung. Hier werden falsche Informationen verbreitet das man nur den Kopf schütteln kann. Man sollte sich vorher informieren bevor man einen Kommentar abgibt. Gruß aus Bavaria
@@headbang3r519Eine feste Blende gibt es nicht, sonst könnte man diese ja nicht öffnen und schließen! Es muss heißen das Objektiv hat eine Offenblende von 4 bzw. die größte Blende bleibt über den gesamten Brennweitenbereich konstant! Also eine Lichtstärke von Blende 4...
It's all good information. Something left out is that it is a great lens to do all kinds of infrared full conversion cameras (mostly has no hot IR spots at any focal length and aperture combination). Now Canon has a new lens out in the same focal range but one stop faster, but its not an equivalent lens I terms of price, size, weight or uses so I do think its a must have in a Canon Camera bag.
Ive never done infrared conversion Thats really cool tho. Im SUPER excited for the new 24-105 f2.8. But it is sooo different and i think is more for professionals or ppl who can spend the money for fun haha
The RF 24-105mm F4, is my all-around do almost anything lens and on my R6, it's even pretty good in lowlight. Unfortunately for me, last summer I bought the RF 24-70 f/2.8L for a few lowlight events and now I wish that I would have known about the upcoming RF 24-105mm F/2.8 so that I could have used my EF24-70 f2.8 version and saved that $2100 to buy the new RF 24-105mm F/2.8 instead. The RF 24-105mm F4, would still be my workhorse, but the focal range RF 24-105mm F/2.8 in lowlight would have been perfect last year. But I will be shooting those same lowlight events this year, so maayyyybeeee....
I feel u man. The new 24-105 f2.8 is seriously the dream lens. I bought this about a month before the new 2.8 version was announced so im a little sad too haha.
I use this lenses since a year now, it is a great lense, sure the that it is not a fast lens but with all the available Ai denoising solutions and the new focus blur in Lightroom, I could make great pictures in lowlight conditions and get almost similar results of my Samyang RF f1.4 85mm at f1.8.
By garenteed to upgrade from, ( 0:06 ) do you mean guarenteed to replace it, or guarenteed to buy other lenses eventually? If anything i’m considering buying one…. soo.. :3
@@goodtimezproductionz Absolutely it’s fantastic lens, especially if you take one lens with you. But you have to know that it’s f4 and background blur is not good as 2.8 or below.
I don't think this lense serve the purpose. My 3 lenses with R6 mark ii which I always carry: Sigma 18-35 , f/1.8 DC Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2. I think that these three lenses are the way to go in any condition with larger aparture.
It's always nice to see a small channel that literally makes better contents than a 1 million subscribers channel. (gosh where does the Saxon genitive stands here?) anyway ahah No useless talking, no retarded flashy loud intro, straight to the point. Yes, I think the old L series from Canon is definitely still worth buying, ESPECIALLY now that we can find it for less. Having a fixed aperture is always a win. This video was short and very informative.
Thank you so much for the kind words. I try my best, and I totally love the EF lenses still. I use my friend’s 85 f1.2 ef and it works great! That’s definitely been the benefit of the new RF glass- it made EF glass more affordable! Cheers
It is true but the price of this lens should be minimized a little and can be offered as a combo with R6 mark 2. With R6 M2 Canon offer only 24-105 F4-7.1, not others. It should be 999 USD.
Saying this was a kit lens to be upgraded was a shame. Depending on what form of photography you shoot, all you may need as a pro is a 24-105, wide angle, and telephoto. For me as a landscape photographer, a 24-105 is a very sought after lens. Just depends on the f4 vs f4-7.1. Definitely go for the f4 as a pro lens. It its a PRO L lens lmao
That’s fair. I know a few professionals who use this lens primarily. It truly is a great lens despite it being an f4 variant. But honestly that isn’t the only thing that matters, I just know a lot of people are drawn to the 2.8 and faster apertures. Thanks for sharing.
@@BrunoPozo4Real yeah I mean a lot of portrait photographers will love the telephoto/mid zoom 2.8 but for me, im always shooting at f11-f16 haha. Thats why I do have the 15-35 f2.8 for astro photography. Hoping to really use it for astro this year too.
@@EPXPhotography It depends. The 2.8 version is much heavier, so it isn't an easy to grab lens like the F4 version. But as a professional, the jump in quality is awesome. And having that extra stop of light is amazing in that range.
I’m not a fan of zoom lenses. Especially, big fat ones that are getting more common. I bought a Canon direct refurbished one for $799 the other day to try out. It gets nice results, but the lens is 1.5 lbs and my R8 body is only 1 lb. So, it’s sort of a ridiculous setup.
I hear you man. Canon has been making really large and heavy lenses in the RF system. It is a problem that Ive noticed people have and why they might go with Sony cause they do have lighter bodies and lens setups.
i regret buying my r7 seeing the extreme limit about lenses , sits at home and got replaced by a sony a7iii who made me even more wary of aps-c , my 24 mp sony full has much better images than the 33mp aps-c dualpixel ,not to mention lowlight noise. and yes i have ef lenses with adapter , works but is not always reliable when it comes to af and also most non L lenses are meh ,especially when i got my 400 € 50mm macro sony lens who has an incredible sharp rendering even for portrait ,have tested all under 1000 € rf and this one spoken about here and they are not close by a margin. p.s. : also that bokeh cult should calm down a bit , first and foremost a lens has to be sharp ,you can always make it look a bit more dreamy with mf if necessary and out of focus happens with all lenses and really no one cares about bokeh except those talking about ,simply show people a sharp cell phone image and a camera image with bokeh , usual response ,why is a camera so expensive with such a bad picture .
Yeah Im not a fan of aps-c cameras, but thats coming from a video background and honestly my bias for full frame cameras haha. That’s awesome tho, the sony is a great camera. I remember when I didn’t have L lenses, it really is a huge jump when you make that purchase but man is it expensive. Appreciate the comment, cheers!
That lens has a variable aperture of 4-6.3, meaning the exposure can change as you zoom. That’s not the end of the world though. The range is incredibly useful, but that high aperture makes less blurry backgrounds and perform worse in low light. But as a budget travel option outdoors it can be great!
