RF 24-105 Comparison - To “L” or NOT to “L”?? 

@@ark8tct It's so funny how the timing of different people's upgrade paths changes perspective/strategy - I was looking at used 5d3's and 4's for a while when I was considering what to do after the T7i. I think if I had more lenses at the time and was a bit further along I would have stayed DSLR for my primary and backup. But I was early enough that I figured if I was going to stay Canon I might as well make the switch early. And then the R6 is still very much a "grow into" camera for me after the RP. The 100mm and 50mm 1.4 worked really well on the adapter and I don't hear too many complaints about the adapter use. I don't love that the 100mm ends up being so long if I take it on a hike, but that's the only downside for me. I think if you have a need, and can get some discounts on people offloading their EF stuff, that's not a bad strategy for the future because it will still work well and you'll avoid the RF premiums. One day the RF stuff might actually be sufficiently stocked, and one day after that everything may drop $100, $200 🤞😅 That could be the time to get in for ya. Weather sealing is THE feature I wish wasn't so locked in with the L's haha. I like being able to get that gasket at around the $600/$700 price point with lenses like the RF Samyang/Rokinon 14 and 85... but I don't think we'll see weather sealing on native Canon RF around that point for a long time

I recently bought the RP + 24-105 f4L and I love it! I chose this combo because my move from the Rebel line to full frame was motivated by achieving professional quality images and nice bokeh and this combo delivers. The full frame sensor paired with f4 is often as shallow of a DoF as I need and focusing is also very fast and accurate. The constant aperture is a dream and I would not trade it for the non L version for it allows for pro looking portraits on the long end!

Yeah shelving one might not be a bad option given the preferences you've described. Make sure you have some fresh batteries too 😅 I'm sure they'll be selling the 1DXiii for awhile since that's so new, but that might be overkill and prohibitively expensive for most.

Agreed, I get nervous about that drizzle too!

Thanks, and glad you're liking it! I can imagine for you having that 70-105 all in one lens is even more helpful for street than what I'm typically shooting.

I mean depends on the photographer you are. I doubt wedding photographers will be out in the rain with their subjecta

Of course, glad it helped! I haven't used the 100-500 yet but I'm hoping to use that on a trip sometime in the future as well.

@@DanYosua This is the first time I have ever owned anything over 200mm. I have been on three safaris and regretted not having anything with a greater photo length. I am going on another safari next summer to see the Great Migration and I really want to make sure I can capture the action, both in photo and video, which is why I went with the 100-500. Plus it will fit in my photo backpack. Again, thank you for the review.

@@armeddiver That sounds awesome! I've never done anything like that, but 100-500 is the best distance/quality/lightweight combo

Which one? Hope you like it!

Will the non L be good with the r50?

@@wallyflicksif you need a L lens for a r50, you have some other problems. Getting a Full-Frame like a R8 or R6 will be so much more beneficial for low light and quality than any lens

That's awesome to hear, and a great point about the continuous F4. I don't shoot a ton of video with mine, and haven't shot a wedding other than candids once, but would definitely recommend the L for wedding shooters. Bringing the 85 was smart too. I didn't have my 85 yet for the wedding I was at and should have rented one... was missing something fast in evening for sure.

Did you ever at any point feel like you wished you had F2.8 instead of F4? I want to grow more into wedding photography too but the F2.8 pricetag is so steep for someone trying to get into full frame

@@busansanai well you gave the answer to yourself :) If you do not have the budget, then there is no other option for you except for using only prime lenses or an additional flash. The newer cameras are all capable of shooting at higher ISO, so you can compensate a bit for the missing f Stop. I shot only in an mediocre lighted place and the f4 was most of the time no problem. In the evening and night (outdoor location) I switched to my f2 and f1.8 primes (35 and 85 mm), which worked also good for me. But for the more important moments I loved the zoom Option of the 24-105. Those are my 2 cents but keep in mind, i am only a hobby photographer. For professional use i would get the 2.8 24-70 and 70-200. Or maybe the 28-70 f2.0.

You’re welcome! Which way are you leaning?

Oooo, I still have yet to try that lens as an all-in-one on a trip. Were you finding that you weren't using the long end too much?

I’ve got both of those on my list!!

Thank ya! Trying to keep the fluff to a minimum 😅

@@DanYosua Absolutely, a right decision. Sometimes more than technical details, a real world use case helps as a good example.

Thanks, for a channel as tiny as mine, I'm happy it is doing so well! Some of these types of choices are really tough only a few years into photography like me, so hopefully it has been helpful. That camping trip, the shooting, and the work that went into this edit was definitely a highlight in my year of freelancing.

Of course, which way are you leaning?

I'm glad, thanks for watching!

Thanks! How are you liking the 100-500? I'm looking forward to trying that one, especially when paired with the R6 shooting speed.

@@DanYosua I love it. It stays on the camera more than the others when I’m out shooting. The clarity and sharpness at 500mm are very good, even when using a 1.4x extender.

That’s exciting, I forget about the extenders, that would be fun to try as well

I'm hoping to get my hands on it!

Of course, glad it helped!

The quality difference is sometimes more apparent in the lenses where you shoot wide open. The L is obviously brighter, but for people looking for an outdoor travel lens, that strength of the L isn’t as important in the use case. If you love 24-105mm and plan to keep it, it’s a nice upgrade. If you’re more interested in exploring the focal lengths and moving on, no reason to feel like you’re missing out with the STM!

@@DanYosua yeah, that's the point! I usually shot outside sports, so usually have plenty of light and the apperture doesn't matter that much, since I use Shutter priority and apply motion blur, so I'll have a blurred background anyways! Maybe If I start shooting sports inside F4 would be a deal, but my kit lenses have F3.6 at it's widest and yet it looks like a very dark lens, so yet, F4 wouldn't save me that much on my R50.

I wonder if they'll make an RF 24-70 F4 anytime soon...

How did the EF lenses work on your R5? Were the photos good?

@@RichieColemanSr EF lenses work as normal with the RF adapter. I just got the vanilla one, it is just a tube, there is no glass. I checked it out before I bought the R5, I had 5 EF lenses and it was vital there were no problems. All it does is create a fake mirror box. I held it next to the 5D mk III and the R5 is narrower but the adapter makes it the exact distance for the EF lens.

@Daryl Cheshire Thanks for responding. So the EF lenses worked ok in low light etc?

@@RichieColemanSr They work just the same.

Thanks for watching, glad it helped!

They're pretty good compliments to the zooms. I think the 50mm is a particularly good pickup now that it's $159. I'm still hoping for some options that are weather sealed and halfway between the L's in size/price, but that is probably going to take some time.

That'll be pretty great coverage between just those two. Toss in one of the smaller, faster primes and you're all set!

The 16 might be a great option for that wide and fast astro, I'm hoping to try it eventually. I just used the RF 28mm pancake in place of my Sigma 28mm on my most recent trip, because as you said, I was trying to cut down on flight weight/size.

Thanks for watching and sharing all that info! There are lots of options out there and it gets overwhelming fast, for sure. I can't speak much for the Nikons, I know the least about them right now. The R6 is considerably more expensive than the RP and for a good reason - there's a lot more functionality. Going from the RP to the R6, for me, was incredible. But I feel like I'm also taking advantage of all the big differences frequently in my shooting. I wanted two cards for paid work, wanted weather sealing, wanted very sticky AF for 4k video with little crop for these videos, wanted faster stills rate for dabbling in sports, wanted a bigger battery, and wanted the scroll wheel. I do wish it had no record limit. I could go for a few more megapixels occasionally. And I wish there was 4k 120 without going up to the R5. Otherwise, pretty perfect camera for me. And I loved the EVF, size, and low light bump of the RP coming from my T7i at the time. Stills shooting of people and scenery is kind of that sweet spot where the weaknesses of the RP aren't put on display. So I'm tempted to say: 1) Not overkill, but if you don't plan on using the fast stills rate or 4k video, you'll be paying for lots of differences in the two bodies that you don't use. The RP is a lot smaller feeling so if you like the R6 in the hands, want the bigger battery, and plan to keep it years and years then maybe go for it. Otherwise, refurb RP is $899 freeing up LOTS for L glass. 2) At least a small low light performance bump and you're going to nail focus on the eye more often for fast moving subjects. 3) This is tougher to answer. You probably have a stronger sense of the focal lengths you prefer than me given how long you've been shooting. I like the f4 L's a lot, but you probably want some of the faster lenses for that lowlight evening scenario. The cheaper 35, 50, and 85 are all pretty good. Perhaps not fabulous, but very solid and affordable by RF standards. The 85Ls are spectacular, but massive and so expensive. I haven't tried the 50L yet, the 35L doesn't exist until late 2022? and the 24-70/28-70 also seem solid, but I haven't tried those either. Only other things I would say, it's a little bit of awkward time to grab an RP or R without knowing what will happen to their ii's. Not sure if both with get a refresh or when, but if you want the latest and greatest when you switch you should wait for those, if you can deal with whatever supply chain issues inevitably plague their initial deliveries. Also, if you would consider the crop, R7 seems pretty interesting. But I haven't watched all the first impression videos yet on that myself 😃

@@DanYosua thanks so much for your reply. I have quite a few APS-C cameras so next one will be full frame. I am in high tech for many years. There is always a newer and better version coming out. My last new camera was about 7-8 years ago so am ready. Thanks again

@@nyindallas1 Of course, and that there will be haha. Good luck choosing, and enjoy!

I try to keep em dense and the words flowing over the b-roll 🤣 The cinematic b-roll sequence with music alone has it's place but it gets old in every tech RU-vid video imo.

@@DanYosua agreed.

If you don't need much on the wide end of things, a fast 85 and the 100-400 will have you all set on the long end haha. And thanks for the comment - you can find this similar sentiment on channels of all sizes... as small as 50 subs and on channels with tens of thousands that might feel like they should have hundreds of thousands. I might actually spend some time in my Q3 freelance update video answering this the long way, but the short answer is that RU-vid gave you something super fitting for you, I'm thankful it was from my channel 🙌,, but a wider Canon RF audience probably might not feel that my videos are quite as helpful or useful yet. Hopefully will pick up some broader appeal as I learn to make better ones 🤞

It probably depends too on whether you find things by search or recommendations. For example the video I recently made on the Moment Cinebloom filters... I don't think RU-vid will ever recommend that in a meaningful way, it's way too short of a video. But it's doing really well in search (at least for my channel) because the click through rate is pretty high. So you can end up finding very different content depending on how you find it. Thankfully with camera gear there is a pretty vibrant used market so videos on older stuff will still get surfaced a little, though not nearly as much as when you catch something new on embargo days.

Inspiration is a tough one. I tend to get addicted to learning things, getting better, and competing against myself. With photography, even after a few years, I feel like I'm still learning fairly aggressively so I haven't needed to put in much effort to stay inspired recently. Pair that learning with some of these short solo camping trips (or the road trip from this summer) and I've just been having lots of fun so it's easy to keep shooting. With the lens reviews, especially for the rentals like this 24-105 stm, it becomes a challenge for me to stick to that lens for a whole week or two. These little challenges push me forward to explore what I like or how to shoot while constrained/enabled more than usual. If you feel really stuck, maybe plan to shoot in a style that makes you a bit uncomfortable, or dive into some editing technique videos that are new to you. Or maybe envision a big project that you can start chipping away at piecewise around your typical work schedule. I can definitely try some of those video ideas in the future, thanks for the feedback! I've had an especially busy month but have so many ideas in my backlog - for my next two vids I'm hoping to cover some sports shooting I did recently and wrap up my Q3 freelance review. The more I can grow the channel, the more time I can spend on it and experiment with different video styles. So I'll try to talk about that a bit in the Q3 video.

If you're truly stuck and don't have strong feelings on the f4 either because you don't need it or aren't sure, and you don't have strong feelings on weather sealing... there's a Canon refurb of the STM right now for $249. Even if you want to switch later, you could use that for the next 6 months/year just to affordably learn more about your preferences. And it's smaller.

Good call, I definitely should have has a few sample shots to show that briefly.

I'm not sure how all of them stack up against each other on this without some digging... at least in my uses with my kit, I'll use the 35mm if I know I need to get close (or break out the 100mm if needed). The one lens I've tried that I wish could focus a bit closer was the Rokinon 85mm. I remember running into a few instances while testing that where I had to step back unexpectedly.

Thank ya! Yeah if you like primes and/or don’t mind doing some lens swapping, that’s not a bad way to go to cover a good range anyway. Additionally, you’ll get a good feel for which you use most often and which one you might want to upgrade to an L someday

How are you liking the R5C?

First, I've only shot at one wedding, casually as a friend, so no expert here. And that was before I picked up my Rokinon 85 that I would have wanted. I used my 70-200 F4. That was ok during the day, way too dark at night without flash. If you already have the STM, I would be tempted to give it a try depending on your lighting. If it were me, I'd probably opt for the constant aperture and then would plan to resell if you don't plan to use it after your wedding work longterm. If you're still feeling really stuck in the choice I would maybe try renting.

I have used the RF 24-105 f4L intensively since 4 month now as my travel lens. It's imho worth the extra money for that constant f4: at 105mm and f4 it's actually a nice portrait lens with decent background blur and very nice bokeh, something the STM version, with it's max aperture of f7.1 at 105mm, can't achieve. So the L version should be a great and very flexible lens for outdoor wedding receptions, while indoors i'd rather switch to a fast prime (unless I'd shoot with flash).

These two together is a pretty deadly combo!

I'd be tempted to stay smaller and balanced, would go with the STM, and then would look to add in a small, faster prime to compliment it if you don't have one already.

I would tend to lean with the L for something like that, particularly if you'll shoot any video.

It's a workhorse. On trips where I want to ensure coverage of different scenarios, I'm still packing it almost every time.

Awesome deal!

Sometimes it’s best to start with whatever you have just to learn about what you might need and want for the future!

I’m not positive as I’ve never used the EF version, but if it were me I’d probably hang onto the EF unless it was bulky to the point where I noticed I was avoiding packing it. Like you said, I’ve had great autofocus results with everything I’ve tried adapting over the years.

@@DanYosua Thanks - I actually have the EF f/4 (L) MKI and the EF STM. I wasn’t sure if I needed to save up big for the RF STM or RF (L). This was the only EF STM canon made so I’m keeping it. I like using it on my 90D & C100 MKII for video. Seems like both lenses will be ok on my R62. I just need to start shooting photos & footage. Thank again

Oooof. Didn't know that. Great lens, but I wouldn't advise anyone pay 1399 for it.

Some people don't know or aren't sure - If you think this is a 5-10 year lens and care about weather sealing at least sometimes, absolutely go with the L. That's kind of how I looked at it personally (though I wasn't as sure at the time I'd love F4 over F2.8 in the middle range). If you haven't already upgraded, you'll probably notice a pretty big difference in low light performance. Jumping from my T7i to my RP at the time (I got this 24-105L as a kit) you shoot noticeably cleaner at ISO 6400.

Not a super helpful answer, I know, but I'm gonna hold off on confidently speculating on the nuances in how these two lenses compare at those specific ranges for the R5. I've never used a higher megapixel body like the R5 and no longer have the STM version on hand. I would think when pixel peeping you may notice a bigger difference than I have here. And maybe more on the 24 end of things? But in 40-85 and f8-11... probably still fairly similar in the center. I would think most people opt for the L with the R5

@@DanYosua ok! I'll try to try it first, thank you for your time, have a nice day!

You too, thanks for watching!

Not sure myself, hopefully someone else will be able to chime in

Sounds like a great pickup, and should be a good companion for that camera!

Both of these lenses are for the newer, mirrorless RF mount so they won't work with the 80d. The good news is, if you upgrade to a full frame mirrorless camera when you do, your EF lenses can work adapted on your new RF body.

@@DanYosua well i have the 16-35 and the nifty fifty for right now from canon for my canon camera and I'm still learning aperture mode

Agreed. Pairing this with the fast 50 gives you lots of options and learning potential.

@@DanYosua would even go for a Sigma 35mm f/1.4 for that matter. Nowadays with 4k shooting is starting to get ubiquitous. So glad cropping in is an acceptable thing 😉

Will you plan to keep the 18-45? If you plan to sell that lens, one of the things I would be considerate of is whether or not you'll miss the 18mm end of the range. The F4 may feel fairly front heavy on the r50 so especially if it's a stretch, I would probably go with the STM version. One of the small fast primes would be a good addition to use in low light and separate subjects from backgrounds... but if you aren't sure yet which focal lengths are your favorite, and you mostly shoot landscapes, you can always add that later.

@@DanYosua I plan to keep 18-45 for the wide end. Since you suggested to go for the stm version, should i get the 24-105 first or the 50mm first?

Ultimately you're going to be best to answer the order, so if it's not immediately clear if you'd prefer the wide aperture of the 50mm over the length of the 24-105, no need to rush into either. Both are going to open up some new and different shooting opportunities. If you're liking the length the 45mm on your current lens, 50mm may be a good first choice to play with wide apertures around that same length in a prime lens.

@@DanYosua Thanks! For all your help Dan, I appreciate it!

@@magisterial-2789 Np, thanks for watching, happy shooting!

I would probably lean F4 in this case, but if you have a light, try finding a used or refurb STM to give it a go. I usually recommend renting for those on the fence, but since both of these are kit lenses that people often sell, if you think you might get away with the STM it's probably better to just pick it up do what you can with it. If it's not working, resell and jump to the F4, and you can think of the STM as a cheap, long-term rental.

Rest assured, the two lens you have are a great start, and can cover many different scenarios. If you upgrade, depending on your exact needs, the 24-70 might be something that you could leave on your camera the entire time without needing to change lenses much. You might keep the 50mm for really low light conditions/portraits. The 24-105 might be something you keep if you find you really like the extra reach between 70-105 or occasionally want a lighter lens than the 24-70 for some outings. Otherwise, you may consider selling that 24-105 when you upgrade. If it were me, make sure to shoot with the two you have while you save. Then, by the time you have the money saved, you'll have a good idea whether you still want the 24-70, want something a bit different, or don't need anything new at all.

@@DanYosua sincere thank for your great explenation. The genre I would like to dive in with photography are nature, potrait and concerts. I really don't need a big zoom lens but a lens with a great appeture. I hope these are okay for now but first I want to buy a great body and learn with cheaper lenses and expand from them on. 😁 life is difficult when you need to choose. I didn't want the RP because of the shutter speed so I decided this one. My goal was a full frame mirrorless camera, maybe too overwhelmed as a starter. I know my wishlist and mostly I'm kinda stick to that.

Of course, have fun learning and exploring! The R6 is a great value hybrid, particularly on the photo side and now at a great price. In my experience over the last two years with it, the biggest shortcomings are on the video side for projects of longer length or more professional style. And even those won't be enough to truly stand in the way of creating for most photo-first shooters. I found the RP was a great start, and still very solid for those looking to get into Canon's full frame line really affordably. But you're right, for those looking to own the camera for a few years and grow with it, I try to recommend people consider saving a bit more and bumping up to the R8/R6 to get the stickier autofocus and expanded feature set.

I have shot some ice hockey, and field hockey on sunny days with the constant f4 of the 70-200. You'll want more light indoors but I don't like to let that stop me from trying. The STM version will struggle inside for sure. If action sports is your main use case, I might look at faster lenses. And unless you're close up, longer lenses as well. If it's more occasional, close-up work, and the 24-105 works best for you in all the other use cases, you can give it a try. My 85mm is my longest prime and the AF can't quite keep up with action in burst shooting. I can get some hits, but not the great continuous tracking of my 24-105 and 70-200. Based on what I've seen, the 135mm is a dream prime for this, but obviously much more expensive.

Don't forget that the inexpensive 100-400 has the USM motor and is spectacular at capturing fast action. F8 at the long end but a great lens and great companion to the 24-105.

I didn't have it at the time, but great point. The 100-400 is snappy, and I would have liked to try that for field hockey during the day games.

The red one? It's a Moment Cinebloom, a diffusion filter. They make a few different strengths. I have video comparing the 10% and 20%, but just got a 5% on discount recently as well.

Thank you! I'll take a look.

If you don’t have any other lenses, it might be worth looking into something like the 35mm macro, and you could pair that with the STM. That way you can save some money overall while still getting to experience a fast f/1.8. And then if you find you really want the constant f4 you could upgrade.

where do you take pics? with roughly weather I think you need the L protection.

The R7 is really, really intriguing. You're gonna get an incredible jump in AF performance and all sorts of other features. It's relatively expensive coming from 550d, but I think it's priced competitively given what it is. Would be interested in your initial thoughts if you end up picking one up! I hope to use one here eventually.

I didn't particularly notice, but that's not saying a ton, as I'm not usually paying as close attention. I almost always shoot in awb and tweak later. The one lens I do notice that's consistently warm of mine is the Samyang 85. But nothing jumped out here to me.

@@DanYosua definitely heard that about the Samyang RF 👍appreciated

My typical buying behavior with tech and camera gear is to try to buy the newest/best you can comfortably afford at the time and take good care of it for this reason. Sometimes it's tough with lenses though, particularly with Canon's lineups in RF at the moment. There are some big gaps.

When I started learning photography, someone gave me this tip and I always follow it, I buy L lenses, enjoy them and when I want to replace them, I sold them at 65% of it’s original price and add money to buy my new lens, I don’t care about the bodies , there is always someone selling a good bodies somewhere. Thanks for the reply.

price of RF glass is moving in the wrong direction for some of these lenses 🥲

There's no proof that I drank it! Could have found it 😅 Haha hopefully some Fuji soon! 🤞

@@DanYosua hope so haha

$220 is a steal. I disagree on "rubbish", but definitely not for everyone. For someone who won't miss the light, doesn't want a prime, and doesn't have $1000+ for L zooms.... this lens starts to look more fitting than those 3 options 😉There's a refurb for $159 right now, would be the best way to snag one in my opinion nowadays

@@DanYosua i mean for video, when u must use auto iso in Av mode to fast zoom in and expo change a little darker or brighter. when shooting with rf L zoom I use M mode and haven't any issues.

Ahh yeah, that's a good call out. Not as usable for video.

I figure for a lot of the lenses I've tried there is probably some difference in the higher MP bodies. I have a bit of blind spot there in terms of real world experience/testing for sure. At the same time, for socials, it's probably still pretty negligible most of the time. I typically export with long edges of 2025 px in LR for IG or the shots in these videos. Seems to be a good size for to balance quality and storage. If I print, or for images that I spend a lot longer on, I will go back and export larger. For paid shooting, usually a folder for each. With the 70-200, and now as I've been using the 100-400 for several months, I do understand the desire for some more cropping real estate. Perhaps an R5ii or R5iii some day!

I very much would like to test out some other manufacturers, but short of finding some people nearby to borrow from, will have to grow a bit more before renting some of that stuff 😅

@@DanYosua what crop size do you normally use on your photos?

@@prince2thethrone I end up shooting a lot vertically, then crop 4:5 for insta. I would say I usually keep around 75%+ of any given frame that way. Unless I'm taking a vertical crop out of something shot landscape. For Instagram I usually export 1080_1350 unless I'm being lazy. For these videos I try to export 1620_2025 for the vertical shots so that I can drag it right onto the 4k timeline and they are the appropriate height without needing to then scale it in Premiere.

Try cranking your volume

0.75x speed in the bottom right corner 😝

Sort of. I got the samyang/rokinon 85mm (and had the 14mm) before they were shut down. Apparently Canon will will now selectively review and allow certain lenses. But in a realistic sense, third party is still not much of an option on RF and it won't be, to the degree most would like to see it, for a long time.