I bought it with my R6. A perfect combo, especially for travel. I have it and the RF 50 1.2 as my only lenses. The zoom is my general walk-around lens. The 50 is for low light and head and torso portraits of adults and head shots for kids. It is also the most incredible glass I have ever seen. I dont need anything else, ever. I had the first EF version of the 24-105 for my prior 5D Mk III, so I knew this would be a winner. Ive been shooting for many decades, starting as a teen with my beloved Nikon Photomic FTn. I used only primes, as zooms were not that optically good. From my experience, my favorite lenses were the 24, 50 and 105. The 28 was not wide enough, and the 20 was too wide. The 24 provided that perfect balance of really wide angle without the overly pronounced perspective exaggeration. The 105 provided the most flattering and natural portrait perspective for head shots. The 50 was too wide for close up head and shoulder shots of adults, and the 135 squashed faces a bit too much. My 50 1.2 Noct Nikkor was perfect for low light street shooting, especially at dusk. In those days, I shot Kodachrome 25 and 64! I tried a friend's 70-210 Nikkor, and realized that 70mm was useless for everything I was interested in shooting. Not wide enough for flattering tight portraits or general photography, and not tele enough for travel architecture. I also had the 35 1.4. Never liked that focal length, except for architecture when I didnt want anything dramatic. It was boring. I know a lot of photographers love it for people photographed "in their environment", but for me, its images were too photojournalistic. I don't like photos of people whose legs stretch out. Hardly ever used it. So I knew that the Canon RF 24-70 2.8 was not for me, and certainly not the monstrous 28-70. As a general, do-everything lens, the 24-105 f4 is unbeatable.
i don't have issues with it during wedding receptions even it's a dark setup, the lens works perfectly fine and the autofocus is amazing even in low light situations.
@@enriquesilvaphotographylowlight changes drastically depending on commenter. But you can find out how it will perform. Just set your existing lens to F4 and shoot around when you think its lowlight. Thats the only true test for your own happiness.
Hi Vasko, thanks for making this video, which I enjoyed very much. Could you please provide your thoughts comparing the 24-105 F4 ISM versus the new 28-70 F2.8 IS STM that recently came out in Sept 2024? Tx
I personally have to slightly disagree regarding low light statement but only related to noise. It is so ironic that considering it is just an F4, it does so well in low-light conditions in regards to noise. Normally, after denoising images, there is still something left near the darker areas of the images. However, I have shot this lens in concerts, outdoors during evenings without any flash, producing some of the work that was eventually published. When post processing in Lightroom, I noticed everything looked so clear after denoising that shadows were well defined so well. Images are rendered extremely well, nicely, and sharply. The highlights of different light sources in concerts and even outside in lamps seemed so controlled in the images. This is a sharp lens for studios, concerts, and outdoor evenings as well as for cinematic images. Of course, during the day it is great as well but I was just surprised at how well the images were denoised during post-processing. That really did surprise me. Definitely the best F4 lens I have ever used for editing and image stabilisation. If anyone wants bland and clear images which react extremely well with Lightroom's sharpening tools then this is a great lens. I like shooting at F8 because I like saving details as much as possible for more control and it spookily seems as though this lens was produced by canon for what I normally try to achieve most of the time.
A good lens for the money. I have had one for over 6 months. I am not a pro making money anymore but for a light, walk around lens for general photography it is a winner for my needs. It works well on my R5. My kit is the 24-105, 100-500 and for special needs the 70-200 f/4. The 2.8, 70-200 would be great but it is larger and my needs do not justify 2x's the price of a 2.8
Totally agree. It's perfect walk around lens. Price vs quality is well worth it. I haven't used the 100-500 yet but I hear a lot of good things about it. How are you liking it by the way? Thanks for the comment.
I did a glow in the dark new years gig with my 24-105mm.. I took plenty images and I only had one image that was out of focus.. It's my first ever professional lens and I use a canon 7d mark ii.. I was shooting iso 800 to 1600 all evening.. Was my second time using it and definitely impressed with it.. But apparently there is f2. 8 version out? I guess that's even better in low light situations and a must have for my next purchase..
I just picked up an R7 last week to make some UA-cam content with it. I'll have a bunch of R7 videos coming soon. The 24-105 works well on the R7. It just becomes a longer lens on the APS-C sensor. A 34mm to 168mm.
Agree 100%, it was the first RF lens I bought having had a really good run with the EF version which I found to be the perfect one lens only travel lens, and yes at 68 weight really does start counting 😀
Sure you can shoot all that kind of stuff with the 24-105 no problem. It's a great general purpose lens. But if you want to get into shooting wildlife I would recommend the 70-200 as a good starter lens. Have fun shooting on your trip.
IMO this is the best run and gun lens on the R system. Not perfect by any means but an excellent performer when you just want to have your camera with you for documentary photo and video and not really sure what lens the moment will call for. Nothing can replace my 70-200 or 35 prime, but with the weight of the 70-200 and limitations of a 35 prime the 24-105 is a perfect happy medium in my kit.
100% agree with you. The versatility of the 24-105 is unmatched despite it's limitations. If you need one lens to do it all this is it. Appreciate the comment.
The STM version will start to give you issues if you shoot in low light. At 7.1 it's really slow and you'll have to bump up the ISO and that will cost you image quality. To be honest I would suggest buying old EF lens for landscape photography. They work perfectly on the RF mount. You'll save money and get better quality images. Look into a used EF 16-35mm f2.8 L or EF 24-70mm f2.8 L. Those would be good starter lenses for landscapes.
It looks a great lens but it suffers from high CA when used on high MP cameras like R5. I watched many videos and looked at many photos. What do you think?
Hi vasko ❤ yr content. Ive got the eos r and want to get this lens. Im looking at doing baby, kids and family portraiture. Can you give me some advice on the filter to keep on my lens i should be using for this type of photography & lens hood...thanks
Thank you I'm glad you're enjoying the content. All you really need is a good UV filter on the font of the lens to protect the front glass from being damaged. I would recommend a B+W UV filter. I've been playing around with NiSi filters recently and I find their quality to be really good as well. a NiSi UV filter would be my second choice. If you're looking to get dramatic with your setups or want to ad that soft glow to your shots NiSi make a filter kit with a Black Mist filter, ND filter and VND filter. I have a video about the Mist filter here. ua-cam.com/video/9BbIsn1yoTM/v-deo.html Hope that helps.
Great video. I just ordered a second hand EOS RP from MPB and i have a 3 day trip to Rome coming up in March, so I was wondering if this lense could be the only i need on that trip, or maybe a nifty fifty to go along with it too. Regarding the dust issue. In those situations, could it be an idea to bring some soft of spray can like the ones the camera shops use to blow dust of inside the camera houses ?
Hi thanks for the comment. and RP with the 24-105 would be a pretty good combo. That would be the lens I would take with me if I wanted a walk around lens. A 50mm prime would be a good second lens for low light shots. I suppose you could use canned air to blow dust and sand off your camera. Never hurts to keep it clean. Have a good trip.
I took a look at the videos on your channel and for your style of filming where you are sitting 2 meters away from the camera the 24-105mm would be perfect for you. If you want the camera to be closer to you than the RF 15-35mm f2.8 would be a good choice. Thank you for the comment.
Tripods are so handy right, they also help you slow down and compose a shot too. I'm sure you've gotten some fantastic shots with the 24-105. Thank you for the comment I really appreciate it.
Marco It all depends on what you want to use it for. What didn't you like about the RF 24-70? The RF 24-105 is basically the same lens but slower, smaller and with more range on the long end.
@@vaskoobscura_ I need a always on the camera lens for landscape and family Photos/videos. Also weather sealed. Had a lot of chromatic aberration and softness in the corners with that lens… perhabs I had a bad copy? 🤷♂️ At the moment I have the rf16mm, RF 35mm and 70-200mm. It‘s also a good combo. But I don‘t like change lenses when I‘m outside 😬😁
My first series EF24-70mmf/2.8L is a beautiful lens but even with the 5DmkIII I was leaving it home. I did consider the mkII version and then the EF24-70mmf/4L which was much smaller.
Thanks for your thoughts on this lens, Would I find it better than my EF 24-70 F2.8 L ii for landscape photography, I also use the EF 70-200 F4L IS ii both with the ring adapter on the R5?
hmmmmm because you already have a 70-200 f4 I would stick to the 24-70 f2.8 you already have. It really makes no sense for you to buy a 24-105 f4. It doesn't allow you to do anything you can't already do.
Great video, mate. I am looking for my next lens at the moment, A 85mm 1.4 or the 24 to 105mm f4. Have you used the 85 mm 1.4 before, and what are your thoughts on that lens?
Hey thanks for the comment. I've never used the 85 1.4 but I do own the 85 1.2 and I love that lens. Here is the main difference between the lenses. The 85mm is sharper and you have that dreamy bokeh but the 85mm is limited to a short telephoto focal length. It shines as a portrait lens so if you shoot a lot of portrait work or candid shots of people's faces that the 85 will be your favorite lens. On the other hand the 24-105 offers a lot more versatility but it's an f4 so the bokeh won't be as nice if that's what you're going for. The 85 is a specific lens for a specific type of shooting and the 24-105 is a jack of all trades but master of none. So it all comes down to what you shoot. Hope that helps.
Hi Vasko, Thank you for your video. Someone suggested to me this lens but after your video I don’t know if it’s the best choice. I’m an amateur photographer and love to shoot Birds, Wildlife and Landscapes. I have Canon r7. Would you be able to recommend to me a good all around lens? I own the kit lens and RF 100-400 already. But want to carry one good lens when I travel. Thanks in advance for your suggestion. 😉
Very helpful, Vasko! I have this lens with my R5. Very versatile. Question: for the second half of your video, what video frame rate and settings were you using there in your workroom? Thanks, man!
Hi. I've recently bought one of these lenses second hand - it's the mark 1 EF version - and I'm in the middle of testing. Everything seems fine apart from the zoom ring, which takes more effort to turn than I had expected and is a little 'sticky' (for want of a better word) at the long end. Is that normal for this lens? For context I'm used to using broadcast (ENG/EFP) lenses, where the zoom ring is silky smooth.
The mark 1 version of this lens is pretty old now. Maybe the ring has stiffened up over time. I used to own the mark 1 back in the day and the zoom ring was ok. It wasn't silky smooth but it wasn't hard to turn. You could test it against another lens of it's era to see how it compares.
Now i have the 70-200 f4 Hmmm gonna have to consider if i should still go 24-105 f4 or 24-70 f2.8 Im quite stuck tbh. Any opinions? I already have the 24-105 4-7.1, but i want weather resistance
I haven't used the f2.8 yet so it's hard to say. I think it all comes down to what you shoot. If you want portability and a good travel lens the F4 is great. If you shoot in studio with strobes the F4 L is perfect. If you want to shoot in low light (weddings and events) and don't might the extra cost and weight the f2.8 L is great but not as good as primes in low light. Hope that helps. Thanks for the comment.
The 24-240 produces ok quality. Canon made a lot of sacrifices in quality for that zoom huge range. The RF 24-105 would produce sharper and cleaner images in my opinion. Hope that helps.
Which of these 2 would you recommend for general purpose travel and vlogging lens to stay on my camera 90% of the time? 24-70 2.8L IS or 24-105 4L IS ? I'm leaning towards the 24-70 since I find myself in low light situations sometimes like when I'm recording video at night, or trying to do street photography at night. I'm upgrading from a T7i to a R6 ii. I've used a 10-18mm EF-S and 50mm 1.8 but I think it's time to expand my range, I felt like I needed more range in the lens to practice different shots. The 10-18mm is good for vlogging in daylight but is sometimes too wide for the shots I want.. I know the 15-35 is also an option but that would be a 2nd lens soon down the road.
To answer your first question I would say the f2.8 24-70 is the better choice. It's a lot better in low light. But to be honest 24mm is not wide enough for vlogging. Your face will be too big in frame. At least that's my opinion. If you want to save some coin I would recommend the EF 16-35 and EF 24-70. Those older EF lenses can be found used at a good price and they work perfectly on the RF mount with an adapter. something to think about.
I’ll be doing wedding photography soon. I have an R6 and have been considering the versatility of this lens. How well do you think it will work with the R6 for weddings? I’m also considering getting the 35mm RF 1.8 along with it.
I would not recommend this lens for weddings unless you are shooting outdoor weddings. The 24-105 f4 is too slow for indoor weddings. You'd be better off buying an RF 24-70 f2.8 or even the older EF 24-70 f2.8.
@@vaskoobscura_ It wouldn’t be my go to lense though. I’ll probably use it for in aisle shots, face shots or even ring shots. I just like it for its versatility. I’m also waiting for RF 35mm 1.2. But thanks for the reply!
Even the RF 24-240MM was fast enough for indoor weddings. And that wasn’t even that great of a lens. Depends also on the camera. I’ve experienced excellent shots with this indoors.
Good video. I acquired a R5 last year and have the (all RF) 24-105, the 100-500 and the 70-200 f/4. I am happy but not completely satisfied. I am considering the 50mm f/1.2 and maybe the 15-35 or the 14-35. Which wide angle is the hardest for me to decide. I am a long time Nikon shooter and I still have the d810 and the d4s. I sold almost all of my f/mount lenses but the 24-70, f/2.8 and the old but reliable 80-200mm f/2.8 When I am in a difficult location or weather conditions I use the Nikon set up. I am also concern about the expanding barrel on the RF lenses. I may just rebuy a 16-35, f/4 Nikon to use instead of the canon RF lenses. Yes, some remorse about changing systems but gosh the R5 and the RF lenses I do own are light over all and SHARP.
Hi thanks for the comment welcome to the channel. The R5 is pretty amazing. I say it's the best photo camera Canon has ever made. In terms of the ultrawide zooms I use the 15-35 a lot. It's a fantastic lens. Really sharp and very little distortion at 15mm I would recommend it. If you want a magical lens try out the 28-70 f2. I can't believe how much detail it resolves combined with the R5 sensor. My mind is blown every time I use it.
Hi! I'm watching you from Uzbekistan. Subscribed to your channel. Thank you for such a cool review and talking about this cool lens. I am a recent owner of a DSLR-free R6 Mark 2, but I have RF 35 mm stm 1.8 optics. Regards to your new subscriber Dr.Babah
Cars are big so typically you want to be at f5.6 to f8 to make sure the DOF covers the whole car so the 24-105mm should be good. If you're shooting in natural light f4 ISO 400 should be good for natural light shots.
@@vaskoobscura_ Why use 5.6 to f8.0 tha tis not good and not very sharp, why is the point of having a f4.0 lens if you're not going to use that aperature?
I have R6 camera and 24-70MK ii 2.8 USM with an adaptor....is it worth selling it and buy 24-105 rf f4? I am asking in terms of image quality,if is sharper then 24-70?
I don’t know if the lens is going to make much of a difference on an R6 to be honest. It might be a bit sharper but it wont make a huge difference. The R6 does not have a high resolution sensor. If you want sharper image quality I would upgrade your camera to an R5. In a month or so when the R5 Mark II comes out the R5 price will drop. Might be a good time to upgrade.
The R5 mkII hasn’t been officially announced yet. All we have is rumours so it’s hard to compare the two cameras. In the end it depends on what you shoot. If the R5 mkII offers you features you need for your work than get it. But if the R5 has everything you need buy and R5 and take the money you saved and put it towards a really sharp lens like the 28-70 f2.
I use it mainly for landscape,I know the new r5 is not available yet but what is on the paper i asked if is worth it to buy the new r5...the 28-70 is a bit to heavy for traveling...
It's hard to say I haven't used the Tamron lens before. The f2.8 is good is you plan on shooting in low light but otherwise the 24-105 gives you amazing range and you're getting the L quality optics.
@@vaskoobscura_ thanx for the answer, is hard choice but I have rf35mm for low lights and night time sooo I think I’m going for 24-105 it also has the L quality. The Rf24-70 is very expensive..
Thank you for the Review, I just picked one up today, but I do a lot of videos in low light so idk I might change it for the 15-35mm F.2.8 also I wanna ask you man are you Dominican ?!?
Hey thanks for the comment. Glad you like the review. I'm not Dominican. If you do low light work I would say the 15-35 f2.8 is a better choice or the 24-105 f2.8 or 24-70 f2.8. Hope that helps.
You can shoot at higher ISO now and there is also software that can help reduce noise. The issue with those is that you lose clarity when you remove the noise. It's always best to shoot it proper in camera but ultimately it always comes down to each photographer's preference. Everyone has a unique look.
I just got this. I hate Bokehs. Not my thing. I wanted sharpness, clarity and versatility. I just ordered this lens a few hours ago. Composition is very important to me. I want the background to look natural most of the time.
Were you able to import your RF 24-105mm Lens data into Digital Photo Professional 4? EOS keeps telling me it can not be registered to the EOS R6 Mark II. Seems funny, being as that lens came with the camera.
Oh ya you can shoot with modern cameras at ISO 3200 and still get clean images. We are so lucky in this day and age with the cameras we have access to.
@@vaskoobscura_ of course! My camera often automatically sets my aperture higher when walking around in daylight, plus I'm more of a photojournalist in style with that particular lens. I save the bokeh shots for my 50mm prime and my 70-200 f/2.8 lenses.
hahahahaha. Ya tell me about it. I was chatting with a model on IG and I said in the comment " I like your look would love to shoot you some day" and IG flagged the comment. lol. I guess I have to say I'd love to take your picture one day. lol. Thanks for the comment.
Funny guy worrying about weight, I'm in my 60s and I chase wildlife and I don't worry about weight . Get over the weight enjoy the great outdoors. Take the lens you enjoy and capture your memories...
I have this lens because it came with my kit but man I can’t seem to get good photos with this,colors look washed, looks boring, aperture is bad because it only goes to 4 at the lowest ,all the nice photos I’ve seen on instagram and Lightroom it’s always prime lenses,
Prime lenses are definitely a step up when it comes to image quality. When it comes to lenses each lens has it's perks and drawbacks you just have to spend time with it to learn how to use it and get the best out of it. Keep practicing with it and I'm sure your photos will get better.
Watched many videos about this lens and also others now, but apparently content creators are more keen to show themselves instead of showing sample images or videos while they talk.
Thanks for the feedback appreciated. If you’re talking about a product it’s important to show off that product and its features too. Welcome to the channel if it’s your first time here.
@@vaskoobscura_ I'm sorry to have to say this, but I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean this as praise for this video. Just compare your you-time with the time you actually show footage of the lens.
great video I appreciate the production value of all your added in clips but I cringed when you soaked your set up at the 7 minute mark, literally said under my breadth "WTF are you doing." Can't say your not dedicated and a believer of the weather sealing!
lol. Thanks for the comment. Glad you liked the content and the soaking of the camera. Canon does a pretty good job with the weather sealing their higher end cameras can handle getting wet without issue. :)
nope for that price it is not sharp enough sorry , im an old film trained shooter and i consider it lousy that a over 1000€ lens gets easily outperformed by most vintage manual lenses with an adapter. plus we never really cared about bokeh back then , out of focus will happen anyway ,that bokeh fixation with low image quality was a good excuse to hide the bad quality from the first digital cameras with artistic reason.🥴
Thanks for the comment. I don't find the lens soft at all. I use it primarily in studio and shoot at f8 with strobes. Maybe if you compare it to vintage Leica or Zeiss glass it might seem soft but those lenses are exceptional. But the 24-105 is a lot sharper and cleaner than most vintage lenses and I've used a lot of vintage glass. May you just used a bad copy I have no complaints with the image quality from this lens.
@@vaskoobscura_ im used to still use on my r7 and a7iii a Meyer OPTIK Görlitz Oreston 50mm F.1.8 , Isco-Göttingen Westagon 50mm 1:2 , OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO AUTO-S Objektiv f1,8/50 , Helios-44-2 exklusive , Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1Q 4/135 , Industar-61L\Z MC , Helios-44M-7 MC , Helios-44M-4 Objektiv F2 58 and ,a bit crazy since it has a special adapter for e-mount made of 3 d print and aluminium mount, Olympus D.Zuiko 1:2,8/40mm. i agree im a bit spoiled when it comes to quality ,but i wish i would get a reasonably priced autofocus with the same quality ,either its very cheap and acceptable for the price or insanely expensive and why can canon for example not at least put a simple cheap as hell joint at least at the mount to avoid dust entering the body. and dont say its difficult ,have the original ef to r adapter from canon and it has the joint for free on it and costs 50€
100% agree with you. Sometimes I follow the trends to help build up my channel but the video concept is a little silly. Also agree that the reviewer should own and use a product for at least 6 months before making a review. I mean how could you really know a product without putting it through real world situations. Lots of fake reviewers out there who’ve never even worked as a professional photographer before.
Well if you want to make video's with and APS-C camera you're going to have to look at a wider lens. I would recommend the RF 15-35mm if you want to get people into the shot. If you just need food from a distance without people I would suggest the RF 24-70mm. Hope that helps.
Do you own this lens or want it in your kit? What are your thoughts on this lens?
I own it. A good lens.
It is my walk around lense. I also have a 50mm f/1.2 that I love.
I bought it with my R6. A perfect combo, especially for travel. I have it and the RF 50 1.2 as my only lenses. The zoom is my general walk-around lens. The 50 is for low light and head and torso portraits of adults and head shots for kids. It is also the most incredible glass I have ever seen. I dont need anything else, ever. I had the first EF version of the 24-105 for my prior 5D Mk III, so I knew this would be a winner. Ive been shooting for many decades, starting as a teen with my beloved Nikon Photomic FTn. I used only primes, as zooms were not that optically good. From my experience, my favorite lenses were the 24, 50 and 105. The 28 was not wide enough, and the 20 was too wide. The 24 provided that perfect balance of really wide angle without the overly pronounced perspective exaggeration. The 105 provided the most flattering and natural portrait perspective for head shots. The 50 was too wide for close up head and shoulder shots of adults, and the 135 squashed faces a bit too much. My 50 1.2 Noct Nikkor was perfect for low light street shooting, especially at dusk. In those days, I shot Kodachrome 25 and 64! I tried a friend's 70-210 Nikkor, and realized that 70mm was useless for everything I was interested in shooting. Not wide enough for flattering tight portraits or general photography, and not tele enough for travel architecture. I also had the 35 1.4. Never liked that focal length, except for architecture when I didnt want anything dramatic. It was boring. I know a lot of photographers love it for people photographed "in their environment", but for me, its images were too photojournalistic. I don't like photos of people whose legs stretch out. Hardly ever used it. So I knew that the Canon RF 24-70 2.8 was not for me, and certainly not the monstrous 28-70. As a general, do-everything lens, the 24-105 f4 is unbeatable.
HI @@yannisvaroufakis9395 so I would be better with the 24-105 F4 and 50mm 1.2, for the portrait in your opinion
Have the AF lens. Works great on my new R8. Thanks for sharing
we've reached a point where we now have to cut down on image sharpness with filters - what a time to be alive
hahahaha. I know right. Back in the day nothing was sharp enough now things are too sharp. Thanks for the comment.
Good point
i don't have issues with it during wedding receptions even it's a dark setup, the lens works perfectly fine and the autofocus is amazing even in low light situations.
I was wondering how works in low light environments
@@enriquesilvaphotographylowlight changes drastically depending on commenter. But you can find out how it will perform. Just set your existing lens to F4 and shoot around when you think its lowlight. Thats the only true test for your own happiness.
Great review. Many thanks! 🙏
dang dude love your review style/points/information you give. Thank you!
You're welcome glad the review was helpful.
Hi Vasko, thanks for making this video, which I enjoyed very much. Could you please provide your thoughts comparing the 24-105 F4 ISM versus the new 28-70 F2.8 IS STM that recently came out in Sept 2024? Tx
Great review, I'm actually want to get into photography and just try to learn from UA-cam. This helps a lot.
Thank you for the comment. Glad you liked the video. Welcome to the channel.
I personally have to slightly disagree regarding low light statement but only related to noise. It is so ironic that considering it is just an F4, it does so well in low-light conditions in regards to noise. Normally, after denoising images, there is still something left near the darker areas of the images. However, I have shot this lens in concerts, outdoors during evenings without any flash, producing some of the work that was eventually published. When post processing in Lightroom, I noticed everything looked so clear after denoising that shadows were well defined so well. Images are rendered extremely well, nicely, and sharply. The highlights of different light sources in concerts and even outside in lamps seemed so controlled in the images. This is a sharp lens for studios, concerts, and outdoor evenings as well as for cinematic images. Of course, during the day it is great as well but I was just surprised at how well the images were denoised during post-processing. That really did surprise me. Definitely the best F4 lens I have ever used for editing and image stabilisation. If anyone wants bland and clear images which react extremely well with Lightroom's sharpening tools then this is a great lens. I like shooting at F8 because I like saving details as much as possible for more control and it spookily seems as though this lens was produced by canon for what I normally try to achieve most of the time.
A good lens for the money. I have had one for over 6 months. I am not a pro making money anymore but for a light, walk around lens for general photography it is a winner for my needs. It works well on my R5. My kit is the 24-105, 100-500 and for special needs the 70-200 f/4. The 2.8, 70-200 would be great but it is larger and my needs do not justify 2x's the price of a 2.8
Totally agree. It's perfect walk around lens. Price vs quality is well worth it. I haven't used the 100-500 yet but I hear a lot of good things about it. How are you liking it by the way? Thanks for the comment.
I did a glow in the dark new years gig with my 24-105mm.. I took plenty images and I only had one image that was out of focus.. It's my first ever professional lens and I use a canon 7d mark ii.. I was shooting iso 800 to 1600 all evening.. Was my second time using it and definitely impressed with it.. But apparently there is f2. 8 version out? I guess that's even better in low light situations and a must have for my next purchase..
Hi, can I use this lens for weddings
How does it perform on an APS-C sensor like R7?
I just picked up an R7 last week to make some UA-cam content with it. I'll have a bunch of R7 videos coming soon. The 24-105 works well on the R7. It just becomes a longer lens on the APS-C sensor. A 34mm to 168mm.
Agree 100%, it was the first RF lens I bought having had a really good run with the EF version which I found to be the perfect one lens only travel lens, and yes at 68 weight really does start counting 😀
lol. Yup that weight starts to add up. Thanks for the comment and glad to hear you're enjoying the lens and welcome to the channel.
Hello Vasko,
Does rf 24-105 f4 is good enough for shooting wildlife bison in Yellowstone? and mountain landscape?
Thank you for your advice 😇📸
Sure you can shoot all that kind of stuff with the 24-105 no problem. It's a great general purpose lens. But if you want to get into shooting wildlife I would recommend the 70-200 as a good starter lens. Have fun shooting on your trip.
get 100-500 or even 200-800 for wildlife
Very helpful sir. Thanks for the video. Keep it up❤
Appreciate the feedback. Glad the video was helpful.
Thank You for taking the time and effort.
Glad it was helpful! Thank you for the comment.
IMO this is the best run and gun lens on the R system. Not perfect by any means but an excellent performer when you just want to have your camera with you for documentary photo and video and not really sure what lens the moment will call for. Nothing can replace my 70-200 or 35 prime, but with the weight of the 70-200 and limitations of a 35 prime the 24-105 is a perfect happy medium in my kit.
100% agree with you. The versatility of the 24-105 is unmatched despite it's limitations. If you need one lens to do it all this is it. Appreciate the comment.
Would this lens be a good lens for landscape photography on an R8 compared to the f/4-7.1 STM version?
The STM version will start to give you issues if you shoot in low light. At 7.1 it's really slow and you'll have to bump up the ISO and that will cost you image quality. To be honest I would suggest buying old EF lens for landscape photography. They work perfectly on the RF mount. You'll save money and get better quality images. Look into a used EF 16-35mm f2.8 L or EF 24-70mm f2.8 L. Those would be good starter lenses for landscapes.
@@vaskoobscura_ what if we would like to use it for event photography or portrait? Is the STM still good for F4?
This is my everyday lens on my Canon R & R3, Love it.
It’s such a versatile lens. Thanks for the comment.
How’s the auto focus in low light environments?
It looks a great lens but it suffers from high CA when used on high MP cameras like R5. I watched many videos and looked at many photos. What do you think?
Hi vasko ❤ yr content. Ive got the eos r and want to get this lens. Im looking at doing baby, kids and family portraiture. Can you give me some advice on the filter to keep on my lens i should be using for this type of photography & lens hood...thanks
Thank you I'm glad you're enjoying the content. All you really need is a good UV filter on the font of the lens to protect the front glass from being damaged. I would recommend a B+W UV filter. I've been playing around with NiSi filters recently and I find their quality to be really good as well. a NiSi UV filter would be my second choice. If you're looking to get dramatic with your setups or want to ad that soft glow to your shots NiSi make a filter kit with a Black Mist filter, ND filter and VND filter. I have a video about the Mist filter here. ua-cam.com/video/9BbIsn1yoTM/v-deo.html Hope that helps.
Great video. I just ordered a second hand EOS RP from MPB and i have a 3 day trip to Rome coming up in March, so I was wondering if this lense could be the only i need on that trip, or maybe a nifty fifty to go along with it too. Regarding the dust issue. In those situations, could it be an idea to bring some soft of spray can like the ones the camera shops use to blow dust of inside the camera houses ?
Hi thanks for the comment. and RP with the 24-105 would be a pretty good combo. That would be the lens I would take with me if I wanted a walk around lens. A 50mm prime would be a good second lens for low light shots. I suppose you could use canned air to blow dust and sand off your camera. Never hurts to keep it clean. Have a good trip.
Is it the best lens for youtube videos like this one?
I took a look at the videos on your channel and for your style of filming where you are sitting 2 meters away from the camera the 24-105mm would be perfect for you. If you want the camera to be closer to you than the RF 15-35mm f2.8 would be a good choice. Thank you for the comment.
I use it successfully for landscape, with a tripod if extra light needed.
Tripods are so handy right, they also help you slow down and compose a shot too. I'm sure you've gotten some fantastic shots with the 24-105. Thank you for the comment I really appreciate it.
Would you recommend this lens over the non-L version for landscape photography paired with an R8?
I responded to the other question you left :)
Would you recommend this as a studio lens? 😉
Thanks for the insight 👍🏼
Absolutely! 100% It's a perfect studio lens.
Thank you so much Vasko. How will it perform on the Canon R5? I testet the RF 24-70 but for the price I was not very happy and I sent it back.
I have this lens on my R5 and I love it. I had the first series EF24-70mmf/2.8L with adapter and thought it was too massive.
Daryl ,Ya that adapter adds a lot more length to every lens. Changes the balance of the camera for sure.
Marco It all depends on what you want to use it for. What didn't you like about the RF 24-70? The RF 24-105 is basically the same lens but slower, smaller and with more range on the long end.
@@vaskoobscura_ I need a always on the camera lens for landscape and family Photos/videos. Also weather sealed. Had a lot of chromatic aberration and softness in the corners with that lens… perhabs I had a bad copy? 🤷♂️ At the moment I have the rf16mm, RF 35mm and 70-200mm. It‘s also a good combo. But I don‘t like change lenses when I‘m outside 😬😁
My first series EF24-70mmf/2.8L is a beautiful lens but even with the 5DmkIII I was leaving it home. I did consider the mkII version and then the EF24-70mmf/4L which was much smaller.
Thanks for your thoughts on this lens, Would I find it better than my EF 24-70 F2.8 L ii for landscape photography, I also use the EF 70-200 F4L IS ii both with the ring adapter on the R5?
hmmmmm because you already have a 70-200 f4 I would stick to the 24-70 f2.8 you already have. It really makes no sense for you to buy a 24-105 f4. It doesn't allow you to do anything you can't already do.
@@vaskoobscura_ Thank you for your thoughts much appreciated.👍🙂
Great video, mate. I am looking for my next lens at the moment, A 85mm 1.4 or the 24 to 105mm f4. Have you used the 85 mm 1.4 before, and what are your thoughts on that lens?
Hey thanks for the comment. I've never used the 85 1.4 but I do own the 85 1.2 and I love that lens. Here is the main difference between the lenses. The 85mm is sharper and you have that dreamy bokeh but the 85mm is limited to a short telephoto focal length. It shines as a portrait lens so if you shoot a lot of portrait work or candid shots of people's faces that the 85 will be your favorite lens. On the other hand the 24-105 offers a lot more versatility but it's an f4 so the bokeh won't be as nice if that's what you're going for. The 85 is a specific lens for a specific type of shooting and the 24-105 is a jack of all trades but master of none. So it all comes down to what you shoot. Hope that helps.
Is this good with the Canon R8?
It’s a great lens for the R8.
Hi Vasko, Thank you for your video. Someone suggested to me this lens but after your video I don’t know if it’s the best choice. I’m an amateur photographer and love to shoot Birds, Wildlife and Landscapes. I have Canon r7. Would you be able to recommend to me a good all around lens? I own the kit lens and RF 100-400 already. But want to carry one good lens when I travel. Thanks in advance for your suggestion. 😉
This lens is your best option for an all around travel lens for wildlife and nature or maybe a 70-200mm.
@@vaskoobscura_ Thanks so much!! :)
Very helpful, Vasko! I have this lens with my R5. Very versatile. Question: for the second half of your video, what video frame rate and settings were you using there in your workroom? Thanks, man!
Thanks glad you enjoyed the video. I always shoot my videos in 4k 24p.
Hi. I've recently bought one of these lenses second hand - it's the mark 1 EF version - and I'm in the middle of testing.
Everything seems fine apart from the zoom ring, which takes more effort to turn than I had expected and is a little 'sticky' (for want of a better word) at the long end. Is that normal for this lens?
For context I'm used to using broadcast (ENG/EFP) lenses, where the zoom ring is silky smooth.
The mark 1 version of this lens is pretty old now. Maybe the ring has stiffened up over time. I used to own the mark 1 back in the day and the zoom ring was ok. It wasn't silky smooth but it wasn't hard to turn. You could test it against another lens of it's era to see how it compares.
@@vaskoobscura_ Many thanks for your helpful reply. Have a great day.
are there any differences between EF and RF? I have full frame dslr and I found EF version for a good price so I'm asking if it would be good purchase
If you have a DSLR you can only use the EF version. The RF version only works on Canon's mirrorless cameras.
@@vaskoobscura_ yeah I know, that's why I am asking if EF version is good as well
how does it do for still life video with window and reflector light only?
It works great with window and reflector light.
@@vaskoobscura_ oops still life.
Decisions decisions . Tough one ok. Thanks . Good to know
Now i have the 70-200 f4
Hmmm gonna have to consider if i should still go 24-105 f4 or 24-70 f2.8
Im quite stuck tbh. Any opinions? I already have the 24-105 4-7.1, but i want weather resistance
I haven't used the f2.8 yet so it's hard to say. I think it all comes down to what you shoot. If you want portability and a good travel lens the F4 is great. If you shoot in studio with strobes the F4 L is perfect. If you want to shoot in low light (weddings and events) and don't might the extra cost and weight the f2.8 L is great but not as good as primes in low light. Hope that helps. Thanks for the comment.
Which one is better，rf24-240 or rf24-105 f4l？I mostly shooting portrait in travel，hope u can give me an advice ，thx.
The 24-240 produces ok quality. Canon made a lot of sacrifices in quality for that zoom huge range. The RF 24-105 would produce sharper and cleaner images in my opinion. Hope that helps.
Which of these 2 would you recommend for general purpose travel and vlogging lens to stay on my camera 90% of the time? 24-70 2.8L IS or 24-105 4L IS ? I'm leaning towards the 24-70 since I find myself in low light situations sometimes like when I'm recording video at night, or trying to do street photography at night. I'm upgrading from a T7i to a R6 ii. I've used a 10-18mm EF-S and 50mm 1.8 but I think it's time to expand my range, I felt like I needed more range in the lens to practice different shots. The 10-18mm is good for vlogging in daylight but is sometimes too wide for the shots I want.. I know the 15-35 is also an option but that would be a 2nd lens soon down the road.
To answer your first question I would say the f2.8 24-70 is the better choice. It's a lot better in low light. But to be honest 24mm is not wide enough for vlogging. Your face will be too big in frame. At least that's my opinion.
If you want to save some coin I would recommend the EF 16-35 and EF 24-70. Those older EF lenses can be found used at a good price and they work perfectly on the RF mount with an adapter. something to think about.
@@vaskoobscura_ Thank you for the honest input. I will definitely think about using the EF lenses. I did get an adapter to continue using my 50mm.
Those EF lenses still work great. I should make a video doing some focus tests.
I’ll be doing wedding photography soon. I have an R6 and have been considering the versatility of this lens.
How well do you think it will work with the R6 for weddings?
I’m also considering getting the 35mm RF 1.8 along with it.
I would not recommend this lens for weddings unless you are shooting outdoor weddings. The 24-105 f4 is too slow for indoor weddings. You'd be better off buying an RF 24-70 f2.8 or even the older EF 24-70 f2.8.
@@vaskoobscura_ It wouldn’t be my go to lense though. I’ll probably use it for in aisle shots, face shots or even ring shots. I just like it for its versatility.
I’m also waiting for RF 35mm 1.2.
But thanks for the reply!
Even the RF 24-240MM was fast enough for indoor weddings. And that wasn’t even that great of a lens. Depends also on the camera. I’ve experienced excellent shots with this indoors.
You can setup your kit however you want. As long as your clients are happy with the photos you create that's all that matters.
@@vaskoobscura_ I'd agree as we nit pick most clients don't necessarily but editing is vital to straighting and enhancing the images 🙏😊
Good video. I acquired a R5 last year and have the (all RF) 24-105, the 100-500 and the 70-200 f/4. I am happy but not completely satisfied. I am considering the 50mm f/1.2 and maybe the 15-35 or the 14-35. Which wide angle is the hardest for me to decide. I am a long time Nikon shooter and I still have the d810 and the d4s. I sold almost all of my f/mount lenses but the 24-70, f/2.8 and the old but reliable 80-200mm f/2.8 When I am in a difficult location or weather conditions I use the Nikon set up. I am also concern about the expanding barrel on the RF lenses. I may just rebuy a 16-35, f/4 Nikon to use instead of the canon RF lenses. Yes, some remorse about changing systems but gosh the R5 and the RF lenses I do own are light over all and SHARP.
Hi thanks for the comment welcome to the channel. The R5 is pretty amazing. I say it's the best photo camera Canon has ever made. In terms of the ultrawide zooms I use the 15-35 a lot. It's a fantastic lens. Really sharp and very little distortion at 15mm I would recommend it. If you want a magical lens try out the 28-70 f2. I can't believe how much detail it resolves combined with the R5 sensor. My mind is blown every time I use it.
What do you, as a Nikon shooter, think of the Z series?
compare it to the 2.8 that came out
I would like to do that. I just need to get my hands on the 2.8.
Hi! I'm watching you from Uzbekistan.
Subscribed to your channel.
Thank you for such a cool review and talking about this cool lens.
I am a recent owner of a DSLR-free R6 Mark 2, but I have RF 35 mm stm 1.8 optics.
Regards to your new subscriber Dr.Babah
Hi from Toronto. Welcome to the channel. Thank you for the comment glad you enjoyed the video.
How's this lens for product videography?
Absolutely great. The lens IS + IBIS gives you really steady video plus the focal length of 24-105 makes it really versatile.
How about for car photography? mainly shooting in the day time with natural light?
Overall is F/4.0 going to be fast enough and enough aperature?
Cars are big so typically you want to be at f5.6 to f8 to make sure the DOF covers the whole car so the 24-105mm should be good. If you're shooting in natural light f4 ISO 400 should be good for natural light shots.
@@vaskoobscura_ Why use 5.6 to f8.0 tha tis not good and not very sharp, why is the point of having a f4.0 lens if you're not going to use that aperature?
@@jasonswift7098because of depth of field, mang… it’s basic photography knowledge. you want the car sharp? all of it? close down your aperture…..
I have R6 camera and 24-70MK ii 2.8 USM with an adaptor....is it worth selling it and buy 24-105 rf f4? I am asking in terms of image quality,if is sharper then 24-70?
I don’t know if the lens is going to make much of a difference on an R6 to be honest. It might be a bit sharper but it wont make a huge difference. The R6 does not have a high resolution sensor. If you want sharper image quality I would upgrade your camera to an R5. In a month or so when the R5 Mark II comes out the R5 price will drop. Might be a good time to upgrade.
do you think is worth to pay more for r5 mk ii or get an r5 reduced?
The R5 mkII hasn’t been officially announced yet. All we have is rumours so it’s hard to compare the two cameras. In the end it depends on what you shoot. If the R5 mkII offers you features you need for your work than get it. But if the R5 has everything you need buy and R5 and take the money you saved and put it towards a really sharp lens like the 28-70 f2.
I use it mainly for landscape,I know the new r5 is not available yet but what is on the paper i asked if is worth it to buy the new r5...the 28-70 is a bit to heavy for traveling...
Rf 24-105 f4 or Tamron G2 24-70 2.8 for canon RP ?
It's hard to say I haven't used the Tamron lens before. The f2.8 is good is you plan on shooting in low light but otherwise the 24-105 gives you amazing range and you're getting the L quality optics.
@@vaskoobscura_ thanx for the answer, is hard choice but I have rf35mm for low lights and night time sooo I think I’m going for 24-105 it also has the L quality. The Rf24-70 is very expensive..
Thank you for the Review, I just picked one up today, but I do a lot of videos in low light so idk I might change it for the 15-35mm F.2.8 also I wanna ask you man are you Dominican ?!?
Hey thanks for the comment. Glad you like the review. I'm not Dominican. If you do low light work I would say the 15-35 f2.8 is a better choice or the 24-105 f2.8 or 24-70 f2.8. Hope that helps.
@@vaskoobscura_ I figured, I just went back and exchanged it for the 15-35 F2.8 a week ago. Thank you for your help
What cannon lense can I get to where it doesn’t blur the background
Any lens will do. Just decrease the size of the aperture and you'll get a sharper background.
Given the R line up does really well with high ISOs, I don't think low light will be much of an issue. Then again, I don't own one, soooo.
You can shoot at higher ISO now and there is also software that can help reduce noise. The issue with those is that you lose clarity when you remove the noise. It's always best to shoot it proper in camera but ultimately it always comes down to each photographer's preference. Everyone has a unique look.
Can you shoot higher ISO because the scale has changed or because you can shoot higher ISO with less noise than before (or maybe both)?
I just got this. I hate Bokehs. Not my thing. I wanted sharpness, clarity and versatility. I just ordered this lens a few hours ago. Composition is very important to me. I want the background to look natural most of the time.
I think you’re going to love the lens.
Were you able to import your RF 24-105mm Lens data into Digital Photo Professional 4? EOS keeps telling me it can not be registered to the EOS R6 Mark II. Seems funny, being as that lens came with the camera.
Thanks for the comment. I don't use that program so I really can't help with an answer. I'd contact Canon support and see if it's a known bug.
this one or 2.8 24 70
The 24-70 2.8 is better in low light. So if you shoot in dark situations like wedding halls or concerts the 24-70 is better.
I shoot outside in less light lens work good set iso 800
Oh ya you can shoot with modern cameras at ISO 3200 and still get clean images. We are so lucky in this day and age with the cameras we have access to.
Great review, thank you fro making this video!
Glad you enjoyed it! Thank you for the comment.
AWESOME lens
Thanks for the comment. Appreciate it.
For daytime walk-around photography is a great lens. Versatile, sharp, and lightweight.
You're right its definitely a better daytime lens at f4 unless you really like to push your ISO. Thanks for the comment.
@@vaskoobscura_ of course! My camera often automatically sets my aperture higher when walking around in daylight, plus I'm more of a photojournalist in style with that particular lens. I save the bokeh shots for my 50mm prime and my 70-200 f/2.8 lenses.
Great review
Thank you
24x105 wanted
I’ve never been a big fan of the 25-70mm range either
Thanks for the comment. Lens has got to be exciting right.
"If your shooting people"
Jesus
What a frase
We got to change that expression at some point 😂
hahahahaha. Ya tell me about it. I was chatting with a model on IG and I said in the comment " I like your look would love to shoot you some day" and IG flagged the comment. lol. I guess I have to say I'd love to take your picture one day. lol. Thanks for the comment.
👍👍👍
Thank you
Funny guy worrying about weight, I'm in my 60s and I chase wildlife and I don't worry about weight . Get over the weight enjoy the great outdoors. Take the lens you enjoy and capture your memories...
Thanks for sharing.
Throw your weight around, and you'll be fine 😂
you wont need any other video about the RF 24-105 f4 after this one !
Thank you for the comment. I'm glad you liked the review.
I have this lens because it came with my kit but man I can’t seem to get good photos with this,colors look washed, looks boring, aperture is bad because it only goes to 4 at the lowest ,all the nice photos I’ve seen on instagram and Lightroom it’s always prime lenses,
Prime lenses are definitely a step up when it comes to image quality. When it comes to lenses each lens has it's perks and drawbacks you just have to spend time with it to learn how to use it and get the best out of it. Keep practicing with it and I'm sure your photos will get better.
Well now there's a 2.8 version
I know. We have even more choice now.
That's a real cannon...
Watched many videos about this lens and also others now, but apparently content creators are more keen to show themselves instead of showing sample images or videos while they talk.
Thanks for the feedback appreciated. If you’re talking about a product it’s important to show off that product and its features too. Welcome to the channel if it’s your first time here.
@@vaskoobscura_ I'm sorry to have to say this, but I think you misunderstood me. I didn't mean this as praise for this video. Just compare your you-time with the time you actually show footage of the lens.
great video I appreciate the production value of all your added in clips but I cringed when you soaked your set up at the 7 minute mark, literally said under my breadth "WTF are you doing." Can't say your not dedicated and a believer of the weather sealing!
lol. Thanks for the comment. Glad you liked the content and the soaking of the camera. Canon does a pretty good job with the weather sealing their higher end cameras can handle getting wet without issue. :)
nope for that price it is not sharp enough sorry , im an old film trained shooter and i consider it lousy that a over 1000€ lens gets easily outperformed by most vintage manual lenses with an adapter.
plus we never really cared about bokeh back then , out of focus will happen anyway ,that bokeh fixation with low image quality was a good excuse to hide the bad quality from the first digital cameras with artistic reason.🥴
Thanks for the comment. I don't find the lens soft at all. I use it primarily in studio and shoot at f8 with strobes. Maybe if you compare it to vintage Leica or Zeiss glass it might seem soft but those lenses are exceptional. But the 24-105 is a lot sharper and cleaner than most vintage lenses and I've used a lot of vintage glass. May you just used a bad copy I have no complaints with the image quality from this lens.
@@vaskoobscura_ im used to still use on my r7 and a7iii a Meyer OPTIK Görlitz Oreston 50mm F.1.8 , Isco-Göttingen Westagon 50mm 1:2 , OLYMPUS OM-SYSTEM ZUIKO AUTO-S Objektiv f1,8/50 , Helios-44-2 exklusive , Carl Zeiss Jena Sonnar 1Q 4/135 , Industar-61L\Z MC , Helios-44M-7 MC , Helios-44M-4 Objektiv F2 58 and ,a bit crazy since it has a special adapter for e-mount made of 3 d print and aluminium mount, Olympus D.Zuiko 1:2,8/40mm.
i agree im a bit spoiled when it comes to quality ,but i wish i would get a reasonably priced autofocus with the same quality ,either its very cheap and acceptable for the price or insanely expensive and why can canon for example not at least put a simple cheap as hell joint at least at the mount to avoid dust entering the body.
and dont say its difficult ,have the original ef to r adapter from canon and it has the joint for free on it and costs 50€
l
Thanks for the comment.
These videos are getting so dumb, Before you Buy. But these clowns never buy, More respect for those few that actually buy gear then do reviews.
100% agree with you. Sometimes I follow the trends to help build up my channel but the video concept is a little silly. Also agree that the reviewer should own and use a product for at least 6 months before making a review. I mean how could you really know a product without putting it through real world situations. Lots of fake reviewers out there who’ve never even worked as a professional photographer before.
Please help 🙏
What’s good for making Food Reels on Instagram? I just got a R7.
Well if you want to make video's with and APS-C camera you're going to have to look at a wider lens. I would recommend the RF 15-35mm if you want to get people into the shot. If you just need food from a distance without people I would suggest the RF 24-70mm. Hope that helps.