Field Report: Canon's New 24-240mm Lens for Mirrorless (and who definitely should not buy it!)

[@TheCruiseSpotter]

Its so satisfying when you hear good things about a lens you already got!

[@LeonDieBoer]

Sorry guys, you’re wrong. I have this lens on a Canon EOS R. It’s simply fantastic in JPG sooc and 95% of users who buys this lens will use it to shoot jpegs. If you’re into RAW photography then what you say is correct. I use DXO Photolab and it takes care of everything on import of RAW. This lens is HIGHLY RECOMMENDED. Simply an amazing lens on an EOS R...

[@BassamIsmailtv]

I found it ok in raw would this be a new version or what? I tested it in both raw modes with all camera lens corrections turned off?!!

[@Aneliuse]

@@BassamIsmailtvthats because the atrocious vignetting is visible when you have it at 24mm After 38mm its not that bad anymore

[@okaro6595]

Cameras can do the corrections if you set them on. On some lenses you cannot even set geometric corrections off.

[@steves563]

This video is the reason I pulled the trigger on the 24-240... Before mirrorless I was using old Canon glass on my 5D 3 but with the secret weapon in place, which is the (lens profile file) provided by Canon which are available for pretty much all of their lenses. Which corrects a lot if not all the weaknesses of the older non L glass (some of the L glass too). It was very cool to be able to shoot the old 24-85 non L lens from Canon and see the images were TOTALLY useable with the profile corrections right out of the camera! Now I may get crap from other photographers but I shoot RAW as a back up to my Jpegs! And I think the reason why I shoot jpeg first is that I come from decades of shooting reversal film.. KR 64 was my go to! So when you're shooting reversal film you need to get it in the camera.. and with digital cameras it's like you're shooting a Polaroid for every shot how can you lose?! When I shoot, most of the images I give to the client are jpegs already corrected in camera, I love not having to do all that extra post work! But I've got the RAWs as back up if I mess up! This is 2022 the 24-240 is fine with little under the hood help! I also shoot in auto when I can.. Shhhhh don't tell anybody!

[@michaelmarques8887]

Hey Scott not entirely sure but the new Canon Mirrorless bodies have lens corrections built in. Turn the feature on and you can still lens corrections on camera.

[@foxkellan2187]

instablaster...

[@tuannampham7555]

It will not work in raw file right?

[@bobuk5722]

The latest Canon cameras include Digital Lens Optimizer (DLO) and can correct this lens, and may others, internally. No need for Adobe's subscription Lightroom or any other external correction. If your Canon camera does not have DLO then this lens will benefit from post shooting correction.The latest R series Canon cameras can maintain their full burst rate with DRO enabled. On earlier models shooting JPEG an slow the burst rate significantly. Technology is overtaking this video! BobUK.

[@johntyson8932]

I have just seen this video. Recently I took an overseas trip and took my R5 with the RF 15-35 and the RF 24-240. Of around 4000 photos, 99% were with the 24-240 and I was really impressed. Thanks for the lightroom tips - I will look further into those but, for now, I am extremely happy with this lens. And, yes. I purchased a lens hood for it. I have been told that only L lenses come with a lens hood these days.

[@carloscalens398]

Before buying the lens I have seen many reviews, but this one definitely convinced me, and I use it on trips (I usually carry the 24-105 and the 16-35). I have an R6 and the updated lens firmware. By setting the camera the distortions are no longer seen , nor the chromatic aberrations, even if we don't use Lightroom (I use it). There are many reviews on KZbin, but this was the best. (I was also in China releasing photos to those mountains so particular) Thank you very much from Argentina.

[@ArifKhan.]

The OG has spoken! Learned so much from Scott back in the day when I started my digital photography journey....and still learning.

[@GeorgegtStergiou]

Got this lens before it was available as I preordered it in UK, I love it for the same reasons as you. In the meantime I bought a cheap rubber hood and thought the vignetting was from that but no, it’s on the lens. I agree with every comment. BUT: You can fix both chromatic aberration and distortion and vignetting in camera with the lens correction features on so you can also shoot jpgs if needed. A couple of things not mentioned, which I believe are crucial: a) The f-stops change very fast across the zoom range (24mm f4, 28mm f4.5, 47mm f5.0, 100mm f5.6, 150mm f6.3). I also shoot it 90% of the time at f11, which I believe it’s the sweet spot of this lens, BUT, there is another catch. The more you zoom in the more the f stops change the range so technically, throughout the zoom range goes all the way up to F36. I’d recommend to people to bear that in mind as the “sweet spot” of the lens changes depending on the mm you are at. Also at 240mm at f6.3 the lens bokeh is really good and even better if you use the x1.6 crop you get more separation cause of the compression. Good thing is that the f stop doesn’t change like if you had a teleconverter on. b) The control ring and zoom ring are located back to front comparing to all other RF lenses and it is a pain to get used to if shooting handheld cause you always have to think back and forth with the rest of the RF glass. And no clicks on the ring makes it hard to know how many 1/3 stops you add to the exposure. I prefer the clicks. I can’t wait for your RF15-35mm review as I’m planning on getting one in the next couple of months.

[@ScottKelby]

thanks for sharing through additional thoughts. A lot of my shots on a tripod were at f/11, and I think you might right on the money about f/11 being the lens' sweet spot. The clicks would be nice on the ring, but that only works if we do exposure compensation - there are a lot of other things you can assign to that ring where it wouldn't work as well. As for the 15-35mm, I'm expecting a lot, because it costs a lot - I'll let you know after I can a chance to field test it. :)

[@GeorgegtStergiou]

Scott Kelby I shoot only manual and have ISO on the ring. When shooting a live concerts it’s quite crucial for me to feel how many stops I change of ISO. Shooting Av for landscapes it doesn’t differ much. I’m sure you’ll come across these things when you get the RF15-35! And see the difference. Make sure you update for aware 1.2-1.3-1.4 to get all the new good sweetness in it ;)

[@cooloox]

@@GeorgegtStergiou Can't you see the ISO in the viewfinder?

[@GeorgegtStergiou]

cooloox it’s not the same, when you shoot gigs or very fast moving subjects and you want your shutter speed and Aperture to be fixed then it’s not easy without the clicks

[@GeorgegtStergiou]

Of course you can see it

[@BassamIsmailtv]

I bought this lens yesterday and tested it with the eos r there are no signs of vignette whatsoever neither in Jpeg or raw, I ve tested it with all camera corrections turned off so it was just the bare lens. I am still working on the message that the lens is not recognised and needs update of the firm ware to work correctly, but this lens is extremely good for travelling and I don't mind the 6. stop aperture overall it is a very good lens

[@mkayyyo]

Great review but with all due respect you badly messed up the jpeg/ who should buy. When shooting jpeg it automatically corrects the chromatic and distortion. It outputs like you've put it through LR. You only see images like you did raw. I shoot raw but your review is doing a huge disservice to those that don't.

[@grampawwillie1665]

@Silviu Vulcan Canon: DPP

[@nordic5490]

Canon engineers have engineered the system to use DPP. Light Room and Photohop is irrelevant. Canon DPP gives superior results.

[@cdave2006]

not really, it's not a big deal. Who cares about jpg.

[@v1rg]

@@cdave2006a LOT of people.

[@adrianmay9468]

I’ve got this lens but not been able to use it yet for logistical reasons, but really looking forward to using it after seeing your inspiring photos taken with it. I shoot jpeg so corrections made automatically as mentioned previously. I can see from your Lightroom demo on raw files it actually stretches out the barrel distortion in the corners to replace the vignetted corners so no real image is actually lost in the process which other reviewers don’t mention. Fantastic computing from Canon! I have Nikon system and all the usual lens, but for daytime travel the 28-300 has it covered, but that extra 4mm wide here as you say makes a big difference. Thank u

[@sproesser1]

How about for video? Can I apply in Camera chromatic aberration and vignetting correction? I’m thinking about getting this lens for carrying while on a motorcycle to keep the weight down. Thanks!

[@stanybuyle4016]

The best lens correction software for the RF 24-240 is DPP software from Canon and that is for free. It is rather slow software but the results are great.

[@trevor9934]

I do mostly travel and wildlife work, plus some general photography. I use it with the Canon EOS R6 and I too hate changing lenses in the field - I prefer to carry a body for each lens, but that creates a bulk and weight situation. When I got this lens I had also got the Rf 24-105 f/4 and the RF 100-500, but I had to wait 5 months for the former to be delivered due to COVID manufacturing and delivery issues. So, I got the lens after checking out a series of reviews, in particular the one by Gordon Laing, that convinced me to just try it and I have not been disappointed. I see this lens as the first in a generation of camera optics that rely much more on algorithms as a part of the image delivery process - edging towards the kind of computational photography that cell phones have leveraged with great effect. Lets face it, zooms in particular are using this technology more and more. I find that firmware within the R6 is correcting a lot of issues as regards viewing the image during shooting - I certainly didn't see any issues as regard vignetting or CA when I was shooting. The JPGs have been corrected by the time they are generated, and if one is using RAW, one assumes that it is because the images are going to be PP in some kind of software anyway. As always the suitability of gear depends on what one is going to produce. It requires a lot more investment to produce high-quality Art (with a capital A) prints, compared to generating for social media, digital display or smaller prints. This fulfils a definite niche in the market and does it well IMHO. As to the lack of lens hood, I agree that Canon are unnecessarily cheapening out on that one, but I got a compatible lens hood for about 1/4 of the native unit and it was delivered very quickly! Now, I just want a couple of things: the RF10-24 L f/4 lens, along with the 24-105 and 100-500, would give me a "holy trinity" of optics with a total range of 10-500mm. I would also like a R7 body that is a high-end crop sensor unit to replace my aging EOS 7DII body. As a long lens shooter I want the cropped FoV and the pixel density within that crop.

[@viperstinger77]

Now its 2021 we know more about this lens in the camera make sure to turn on lens correction done! no need to do it in lightroom

[@AgnostosGnostos]

For the same price range and similar focal length, prime lenses are always better than zoom lenses and zoom lenses are always better than super zoom lenses. Canon was one of the first lens manufacturers that introduced a full frame super zoom lens in 2004. The Canon EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM is still sold new. Nikon, Tamron, Sigma has introduced full frame 28-300mm lenses too. The 28-300mm was the common focal length range of full frame super zoom lenses until Sony introduced in 2015 the FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS full frame e-mount lens. Canon copied the 24-240mm focal range for the new RF mount but the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM is still by far better optically. However the EF 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM is more than two times more expensive, much larger and twice heavier than the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM. For those who prefer jpeg photos and don't want to bother or pay for Lightroom, the canon RF mount cameras correct digitally and internally the issues of geometric distortion, chromatic aberration and vignetting of the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM. Also they can digitally and internally enhance sharpness and contrast. At the end of the day the digital technology can delivery the same quality with cheaper, lighter, smaller and optically inferior lenses. According to various reviews the Sony FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS is better optically near the 24mm focal length than the Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM. Actually the Sony FE 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS is optically better at the wide focal length at 24mm instead of the focal lengths in the middle which is something very uncommon for zoom lenses.

[@trudymatthews3877]

I bought this lens and love it, it is sharp, quick to focus BUT if you ‘enable lens corrections’ there is a peculiar artefact that appears around the edge of the image, like a centimetre border when at 24mm. It looks like the software has overstretched the edge of the image. Have you noticed this, Scott? I read some questions on some Facebook threads about this and then found it in some of my images. Unticking the lens correction in Lightroom usually gets rid of it.

[@jamesshrouds4130]

I recently purchased the Canon R6 with the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4 lens. Would you still recommend the Canon 24-240mm for travel for the extra reach, or would the RF 24-105mm suffice. How would you rate the RF 24-105mm vs the 24-240mm lens? I also have the 70-200mm f/2.8 lens, but that lens is to heavy for me to take on long trips.

[@cooloox]

I'm wondering if that vignetting is actually a software/firmware issue. If you shoot a JPEG do you also get that vignetting? I sometimes use On1 Photo RAW 2019 and it doesn't handle .Cr3 files very well (and for some people, it doesn't even work at all). At one stage I was getting the vignetting you showed for EVERY lens (in On1 P.R. 2019). If I converted the files to a DNG and imported them, turning off lens CORRECTIONS, I had no vignetting and turning on lens corrections showed the vignetting (really weird). The issue was with how the software handled .Cr3 files and was common knowledge in On1 P.R. 2019 forums.

[@mkayyyo]

You don't get it in jpeg, the camera auto corrects. Huge oversight on this review.

[@wesfonc]

wow thank you Scott! I was not sure to buy this lens but now I know I have to buy it!

[@jasonmcintosh2632]

Has the distortion and CA that this guy is talking about been corrected with firmware updates since this video's been made??? On both the EOS RP and R or just the R???

[@TheChadColby]

Hey Erik, good to see you here! Switching from Sony, thinking I need to buy this one.

[@georgestiros4392]

Hi Scott great video. I got my NEW Canon R5 with the 24 to 105. LOVE both. I came from a Nikon and Sony!!! I miss my 24 to 240 Sony lens. Now you got me going with this one. Should I wait for maybe a new one or get this and enjoy?

[@mickmcgurk]

Great review. Is the vignetting evident in preview on the back of the camera?

[@zhouyou8551]

If you wanna take one zoom lens from 24-240mm and 24-105mm f4-7.1 with EOS RP for a general travel purpose, which one will you choose?

[@Moonkissed-t8y]

Definitely 24-240. If you don’t mind little weight…

[@arhodes]

So, the chromatic abbreviation and barrel distortion in-camera function doesn’t work?

[@ScottKelby]

It only works on JPEG images - not if you shoot in RAW

[@OmeJoyo]

@@ScottKelby It is corrected also in RAW on the R6 and the R5. On top of that, I have this lens and my results, even with all corrections off are not nearly as bad a you are showing. Could you have a bad copy? Did you try with a later version? Because if I check other reviews, no one is reporting it as bad as you are.

[@iorramgx2]

The EOS R has the lens correction in camera

[@Boleetus]

For jpegs

[@iorramgx2]

@@Boleetus thanks

[@christianbartholomew4019]

Hi, new R6 and Lightroom user here, love the review. Can you tell me where to download and install the "Canon 24-240 Lens Fix" shown in your video at 4:35? Thanks.

[@christianbartholomew4019]

I've figured out how to apply the profiles in the Develop module but can't make them appear/find them in the Import screen. Thanks.

[@4apca]

Hey Scott! This review is very timely. Like you I hate changing lenses and following your advice have used the Tamron 28-300 with both the Canon 6D and 5DMark3 happily for travel and walk around shots for years! Some 18 months ago in search of lighter equipment, I moved to Olympus OMD Mark5(ii) but miss the full frame experience and planning to come back to Canon. I love and want a sharp lens, shoot in RAW and use Lightroom so happy to have found this lens but can’t make up my mind between the Eos R and the Eos RP. Any suggestions?

[@BrookeOland]

First of all, thanks for this review. I have this lens and love it other than the vignetting that was happening. I noticed in your demonstration of correcting that issue in post processing that it didn't really get rid of the problem, it basically just cropped the photo in. So that's not really a full frame shot. You don't get what you were looking at through the viewfinder. It appears that Canon has corrected this with the most recent Firmware update Ver. 1.7.0 I'm wondering however if Canon just did the same thing; just cropped it out on the sensor in a similar way that 4K video is cropped. If so, does it do that with all the zoom settings all the way up to 240mm? How did they get rid of that vignetting with the firmware update? Did they just crop the sensor? I checked this video at the point where you demonstrate the before and after images of getting rid of the vignetting. The frame is cropped by about 5% all the way around. Thanks.

[@janwilson9485]

I think thr lens is wider than 24mm so after the profile crops it you get thr 24mm you expect.

[@kenbarnessalisheye546]

What you noticed was not a crop but a correction of distortion. It would have been more noticeable on buildings where the sides of tall buildings more clearly suffer from wide angle distortion.

[@BrookeOland]

@@kenbarnessalisheye546 If it was just a matter of distortion correction it wouldn't crop out the sides the way it does in this video. Check it out at 5:26 in the video. Watch the before and after carefully by seeing how much disappears with the mountaintops. you can see out how much is lost in composition at the sides. You can see it clearly by looking at the tops of the mountains on the left. It also does it on the right, but easier to see on the left. It crops the sides especially in the center of the side s of the frame. Those corner vignettes really just shouldn't be there. You can use distortion correction to get rid of them, but it still removes significant parts of the composition on the sides.

[@kenbarnessalisheye546]

@@BrookeOland You're right. Sorry. It does reduce barrel distortion though at the cost of real estate.

[@stevendomingue6033]

When you correct for the vignette, does it wipe out some of the wide wide of the zoom? What I mean, it certainly crops the image, does it make the fov basically the same as a 28mm?

[@YounanPhoto]

Nah, not necessarily how it works mate. What it does, it makes it softer in the corners so it "stretches" the image. Go watch Chris Frost's review of the lens he will actually show it to you.

[@rodgersasu]

What Camera were you using??

[@VISIONPROquito]

Hello Scott, after 4 years do you still think is goody am thinking of buying

[@truthseeker6804]

still a great lens

[@RobertoOrtizFalagan]

I would like too point out that JPEGs are automatically corrected in the camera. However, Lightroom does a better job on the distortion correction.

[@tackmack]

Thanks for the Honesty in your review! it is refreshing :D

[@lb7144]

How does this lens work with the R6 MKII? Just shooting jpeg. Does in camera correction fix the problems you described? Thanks

[@ronbyram3880]

Hey Scott now that its 2 years later, how does this lens hold up on a Canon R5 and R6? I am a NEW R6 owner addiding it to my Canon 7D2 Hardware. Being RF glass is $$$ should I get it or stick with the EF adapter?

[@mobelue]

what body? can you fix in DPP4? Thank you.

[@kenbarnessalisheye546]

Hi. Curious about your China trip and whether it was a dedicated photo tour. If so, please provide details. (Though Covid will be aberrating (sic) current tours.) Thanks!

[@andydalton5089]

Just rented one for a vacation. Looks like you need to create the lens profile for Lightroom. Is there a trick for that? (neweb question I'm sure)

[@Moonkissed-t8y]

Still can’t choose between rf 24-105 f4 and this one…. 🤔

[@joshrose3195]

Affinity photo also applies these corrections

[@MiKeTuScAnI]

Great review, helped me decide to buy one yesterday. My first RF lens to use with a EOS RP.

[@PharmDRxZ]

And I thought the vignette and barrel distortion were bad on the RF 24-105! Thankfully, Lightroom completely fixes it as well.

[@georgestiros4392]

Scott can ADOBE elements fix the distortion ?

[@vperalta]

I find that my last couple lens purchases, they don't send lens hoods.

[@DanielFazzari]

Canon only includes hoods with L lenses.

[@ChargedPulsar]

Post corrected, brightened areas have increased noise. There is no magic of fixing a dark patch.

[@billsgates3203]

Great review🔥🔥🔥

[@lurky5913]

Does this work on a aps c (r50) please I gotta know

[@truthseeker6804]

yes but get rfs 18-150 instead for apsc

[@tonymckeage1028]

Great Video, thanks Scott, Thanks for confirming my next lens choice! I use Camera Raw Lens correction all the time! new sub here!

[@1-jordan519]

Great Review. I have a sigma 35mm 1.4 which is ideal for the portrait shooting that I am serious shooting. So this 24-240 is the best lens I should buy for other shootings and the quality is good enough. I wasn't buying other zoom lenses cuz the quality wasn't satisfying or way too expensive. Thanks again for the review. It's very informative.

[@Morandis]

KILLER review! Super enjoyable. Watched up to 5 reviews of this lens and this one was really real, natural end inspiring. To grab lens :)

[@mbvglider]

Wow, Fender shirt over a PRS t-shirt. You should also put an Olympus strap on your Canon! :D

[@noname0858]

Great review, thanks. I had a good laugh seeing your expression as you delicately broached the subject of those corners. :)

[@raymer67]

If you just take jpegs you won't have any of those problems.

[@shieldaigbencher]

ok, so looking at this lens. I have rf 24-105? L series. I also have the 15-35 L series. Then I have the 100-400 Lens with 1.4x tc L with the rf adapter, I really dont think I need this lens.

[@dayeah765caoni3]

Sure. You also need a bigger bag and lens cleaning kit

[@shieldaigbencher]

@dayeah765caoni3 Hi, OK so I have moved on. the 24-105 stays. The 2.8 15-35 has gone because it is too big and heavy and the 100-400 ef has gone too. Replaced by the 14-35 f4L and the 100-500L. both lighter and better than the lenses they replace. So now I have a smaller bag!

[@fromthesidelines1453]

looking forward for your RF 15-35mm lens review!

[@diy-fixit9566]

Mostly correct, except jpegs come in corrected from camera kzbin.info/www/bejne/h2GsYnWGZr2Wn7c this is just a little example of what we might not realize since most of us shoot in Raw!

[@jn3750]

Scott is trying to get people to buy his books on Photoshop (**); I'm holding a copy in my hands). There is NO need to use anything software. Just turn on the Chrom/Distor/Vigneting controls in the EOS RF body and your problems are gone. Have used mine in the last 1 week and can confirm that.

[@ScottKelby]

I guess you don't shoot in RAW, because that does NOT work for RAW photos. Ugh.

[@jn3750]

@@ScottKelby Indeed, I do not shoot RAW (like Ken Rockwell - I do not have time to process huge RAW files). The JPEG files from the R are so good that we rarely need any post processing.

[@fredericdirosa5863]

Hey Scott, please turn lens correction ON in camera before you do the review. This will give a total different (and more realistic) picture !

[@donk66]

As usual, folks who are new to mirrorless are getting confused by the fact that the lens is designed to have corrections done in camera. These are not flaws or problems. It is the way complex mirrorless lenses are being designed by Olympus, Panasonic and Sony - and probably others. Some of the finest Olympus lenses I have ever owned have huge distortion and vignetting if the pics are non-corrected, but it doesn't matter because it is corrected automatically in camera. Presumably all lens profiles will do the same when using other (non-Canon) software. I've taken thousands of pics with similar mirrorless lenses and it has never been an issue and I would never even know that the un-corrected images have distortion and vignetting. So, total non-issue.

[@ScottKelby]

The in-camera correction DOES NOT WORK for images shot in RAW. It is an issue.

[@donk66]

@@ScottKelby I can't say for sure, but my guess is that as soon as the non-Canon softwares are updated with the lens profiles, it will no longer be an issue. Canon's DPP software does the corrections to RAW files automatically. You never know what the distorted image even looks like. Perhaps Olympus, Sony & Panasonic users can chime regarding Lightroom or other software. I use same brand software to convert my RAW files for both Canon & Olympus and the corrections are a non-issue.

[@iqueque]

is it not surprising that Canon need Adobe to correct lens flaws? Surely the designers and engineers can produce a $900 lens that does'nt have such extraordinary distortions? My Olympus 40-150 f2.8 self corrects.

[@donk66]

This is how complex mirrorless lenses are being designed and have been now for years. They are designed to be corrected in camera. Otherwise a lens with this much zoom range would be MUCH large and heavier. Welcome to mirrorless. It is a total non-issue as the corrections are automatic.

[@themjian]

Always fun to watch Scott talking about gears and experiences!

[@shaolin95]

the stupidity of canon not including lens hoods is insane. I love my Canon RF cameras but seriously Canon!

[@paullanoue5228]

I believe Canon only gives you a lens hood will L lens.

[@aussie2uGA]

I think there's another way to vastly eliminate vignetting and chromatic aberration on this lens. Wait for the version with the red ring around it 😉

[@edoo_ardogv]

This lens is co created whit lightroom. Thats why is his lens correction so needed

[@passionandcommonsense]

Thank you for your efforts. See the thing is that today phone cameras have 10x digital zoom and are able to offer many good images through AI processing. So why would anyone want to buy this lens to produce average images that could possibly be worse than those shot by say a top end Samsung / Pixel / iPhone? In this day and age the only differentiator that justifies a dedicated camera set up is the unarguably superior optical image quality offered by a large sensor in the camera paired with a well-made lens with at least an f4 constant aperture. Every other image can be produced and even bettered by phone cameras. Am I right? Or am I talking through the wrong end?

[@okaro6595]

You do understand the difference between optical and digital zoom? Digital zoom is essentially just a crop. Of you zoom digitally ten times you lose 99% of the pixels. Even if you have a periscope tele lens it is no match. Sure phones do digital processing. If you photograph the moon with a Samsung, it will fetch you an image of the moon from the net.

[@tomasknutsson7560]

Suppose these guys shoot raw. But they don't say, as it is a given. HaHa. And as people here pointed out, there is built in lens correction in the camera, so you can skip through most of this video.

[@cooperativ]

Who’s not using LR and PS??! 😂

[@raylander6329]

Stop interrupting Mr Kelby!!!!

[@chirag4]

1st view, like, and comment

[@chirag4]

that vignetting at 24mm is bad, ... dark corners as if an apsc lens was used, it doesn't even cover the image circle, why canon, why

[@MrRFasters]

I simply do NOT understand. For ages ALL reviews are about optical quality and then we test the ultimo's of the lens, always looking immediately into sharpness, vignetting, aberrations and barrel distortion. And when a lens scored bad in these areas - woooo the lens manufacturor. And now, with Canon trying to get all their DLSR EF(S) body and lens owners onto the R patform - now this isn't an issue any more - for software can easily correct this? WHAT a NONSENSE. A) You're dependent on the in-camera JPG generation and - let's face it - that's not ideal. B) you HAVE TO post-process EVERY raw image. Well: that works quite well when shooting 1.000 images on your wild life trip, holiday, football match or wedding shoot. Any idea how time that's going to cost you? Or how advanced your automatic correcting port-procesisng workflow must be? WTF. Generating a strong, decent, directly OK raw file REMAINS to be very very relevant and this lens SUCKs at this. I'm ranting for I beleieve these type of Hooray! video reviews are either bad reviews or we're looking at marketing sponsored rubbish. And I'm ranting for Canon will simply not UP their game when we - as photograpghers - buy into this BS of accepting very poor optical performance of their newest lenses. I'm sticking to my R system adaptor and the ES, ES-F, L series, Sigma Sports and Tamron high quality lenses and DO NOT buy into this poor quality trap.

[@ivedigga]

$900 is way to much

[@1-jordan519]

I can get it at 600USD at taobao.com in China now. And that's I believe is a great deal.

[@MrRFasters]

Let s be true guys. Optically the lens is rather hopeless. You can try to suger coat it but you loose you beliefs as reviewers. I think Canon wanted to lauch a flexible superzoom, but this must be able to improve. In the cropped sensor platform I do own the Tamron 18-400. And on this platform it s my Go to lens. And of course it also has some optical challenges. But not as much as this lens. On the R platform I do own the 24-105 STM (non L). I would love the 24-240 flex, but not at this Q level. If the corners are simply black it means that there is no optical light information. To compensate for that, images have to be stretched - either in camera for jpegs or in post. The lens simply is not a full frame lens. If you mount it on the R platform, maybe you should choose cropped mode. So you don t need that much digital compensation - ie distortion as well. Canon simply has to step up a little. Make it one bigwer glass size. Change the lens build setup. Grab a competitors lens that does the same thing better, crack it open and learn from it?

[@truthseeker6804]

this is way sharper than the tamron and this is a full frame lens. your tamron starts at about 28mm equivalent, this is wider at 24mm. this provides faster USM autofocus and has better stabilization. you cant just sit on the fence and make conclusions, until you get it you really dont know what youre saying. theres no competitor that does this better, sony has a 24-240 and its not very sharp.

[@MrRFasters]

@truthseeker6804 As you could learn from my review I do shoot both lenses alongside. And for sharpness there isn t a practical difference. I tried the Tamron on my fullframe R8, and when mounting the Tamron it switches automatically into cropped mode. Giveing me a 28-600 mm 16 MP equivalent. AF and Sharpness fine. For day2day click&shoot pics it s become my GoTo. Until the RP platform will get a serious full frame superzoom I guess. The 24-104 is on the Sale list ...

[@truthseeker6804]

@@MrRFasters the tamron on full frame is only providing you about 10megapixel. vs this is a full frame lens that provides the full megapixel of the camera. this has faster USM autofocus and is sharper. this is simple facts.

[@scorpionx211]

I am not even in second 20 and I would like to stop watching just because the maximum resolution is 720P!! the minimum should be 1080 these days, it is 2019 you are holding a 4K camera in your hands and reviewing it! Want subscribers? switch to 4K! now I will continue and react on the content