Honest Review Of The Canon RF 24-105mm F4 L IS USM

[@raulgolfs]

Im definitely looking to get this one for my new EOS R camera for my Golf Vlogs. Thanks for the breakdown!

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

Great video lens for sure👌

[@sonicvboom]

Are the new RF L-series lenses prone to scratches due to the laminate texture/ plastic material?

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

Never had a scratch on mine and I was doing hikes and stuff with it.

[@p_adam19]

Video should not be overlooked, it is perfect for that: the silent AF with the absence of focus breathing makes it pretty much a must buy for that purpose unless of course one pays significantly more for the other RF zooms, are also heavier and less balanced for gimbal use. I have the RF 35mm f/1.8 and I don't consider it as a replacement (I recommend both as starter lenses), they each have their uses. I have sold the RF 85mm f/2 because I thought the AF was a bit slow and very noisy, but on this lens, it is very fast.

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

A very good point Padam19 the lower Fstop of other lenses doesn’t make for a better video lenses. Video with to much blur can be disorientating and difficult to watch.

[@p_adam19]

​@@DanielWhiteWithCanon I love vintage primes for video and they do look better even if stepped down to the same aperture. But as soon as I want to point it somewhere else I might need a different focal length, the 35/1.8 is probably the best compromise regarding this (especially with the video crop option in the camera). I had the 28-70/2 lens for the EOS R which pretty much did everything except stabilisation (it is not optimised for video the same way as other lenses but it's not a problem) now I have the R5 but I don't have the budget for it anymore, maybe after cleared up everything else. The only real problem with it was that even though it functions perfectly as a "variable prime" lens, one will always use it like a zoom, which is very different.

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

@@p_adam19 using the 28-70 f2 and that thing is a beast. Yea video and photos are very very different. I am still trying to figure out if I think the 28-70 is a turkey of a lens or if it is the magic one that so many say it is.

[@p_adam19]

@@DanielWhiteWithCanon Yesterday we looked back to some old videos I made with that lens I don't think anyone else cares other than me, but yeah, the look is really magic and I need primes to somewhat match it - which is of course still played a part in me selling it I can't simply sell those, as they are getting close to being unobtainable now in mint conditions. One thing I was surprised about the R5 is that I might be able to hand-hold heavier lenses better even if they don't have IS in them. While the 35/1.8 is rated for 7 stops, it is just too light to be really stable and the 24-105/4 rated 8 stops is also just on the lighter side on things, so even though with dual IS getting down to 1 sec is difficult. On the other hand I got an adapted Tamron 35 1.4 SP as part of a trade and after updating the firmware it is very stable I could get down to 1 sec hand-held without much trying, which was amazing. Static video almost looks like shot on a monopod with this lens, I have not compared it with the 35/1.8 just yet but I guess the dual IS compensates somewhat. So I would imagine the 28-70 would give that feeling of a bigger heavier camera and maybe more stable than either of these two lenses and could be used as a single lens to replace all of these in one go.

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

@@p_adam19 the extra weight really does help with IS

[@toreaasland8085]

I am getting my new Canon RF 24-105 F4 tomorrow. :) I'm looking forward to used it in the studio, landscape,cityscape,and general travel.

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

It’s a great all around lens.

[@chaos2kProductions]

For landscape photography the 24-105 is such a great range. I will add a 85mm at some point

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

Hi Brian it really is I did a bunch of hikes with it and enjoyed it other than the weight factor.

[@chaos2kProductions]

@@DanielWhiteWithCanon does it weigh more than ef version. I have 5DMkII and ef version 1. My R5 and rf version are under the Xmas tree for a few more days

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

Oh you are in for a treat Brian. But yea that lens is heavy as hell until you pick up a rf 28-70 then it feels light lol 😅

[@jinpingyang6015]

What's the background music? I like it very much.

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

It was just some stuff of artlist. If you put in classical and epic it should pop up.

[@drewkylie7377]

Hey there. Did you notice any wobble in the lens barrel? My copy has some play and I notice it when I actually move the lens around (general handing). It’s only a TAD amount of movement, but you feel it during use.

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

Hey Drew there really isn’t that much play in the lenses I have used so it might just be a special lens you have there. :)

[@АлександрЛапин-о8ш]

Thanks for review 🤍 How close can this lens focusing? I want to change my ef collection (50 stm , 35 2 is and 100l) for ef 40, rf 24-105 , sigma non art 85mm and sigma 150mm macro if rf 24-105 is have not macro available Want to see 40 2.8 for rf It would be awesome pancake lens

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

A 40mm rf pancake would be awesome. I sold my EF 40mm a long time ago because of quality issues. And the 24-105 is great for video and product photography and cooperate events and things like that but really depends on what you shoot.

[@АлександрЛапин-о8ш]

@@DanielWhiteWithCanonhow long will we wait for this lens?))

[@sonicvboom]

How is the dust sealing on this particular RF lens? I've heard photographers having a nightmare with Tamron and Sigma's current 24-70 due to dust getting sucked in to the lens due to poor sealing on the extending lens barrel. To your knowledge, does the RF F4 24-105mm L have a filter between the extending barrel and the main barrel to prevent dust from getting sucked into the lens? Or in your extensive use of the lens, have you detected any issues with dust [long term use]?

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

I haven’t had any dust issues. There is a “weather” seal around the edge so unless you are sand blasting it You should be good. That or rolling around in a sand storm.

[@ZgNavigator]

Thanks👍 Nice useful video but music is to loud and totally off

[@traumaturgist]

There are reviews which disagree rather significanty with your dismissal of the 24-105mm kit lens's image quality. Depending on whether or not you mainly shoot in low light, the kit lens may be just as good for one's needs. Here's a review with side-by-side comparisons to prove it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/r4Tdfp6HZbidn80

[@jeffj3creative]

Changing lenses during events got old quick. You'll see haha. Have two or three bodies if you're doing primes. Also you need to kill the music (too loud especially at the end). Instead of having you in the video while reviewing pics, just cut back to you talking. Good channel overall :)

[@DJBastor]

what about the old standard ef 24-105 f4 is usm mark 1. is the IQ superior?

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

The old EFs are by no means bad lenses but the RF has much better glass and the fact that the RF glass is so much closer to the sensor helps with everything from sharpness to chromatic aberration.

[@Shuttermemory]

Sheldon grew up fast

[@DJBastor]

great review :)

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

Why thank you Marc I think it was my most used lens before I got the EF 100mm 2.8

[@libation14221]

Why are the so called "pros" so obsessed with calling lenses "kits". I guess all photographers are only to use $5000.00 dollar "pro" lenses to get good results. An archers metaphor: It's not the arrows , it's the archer.

[@AlmaRockeraOficial]

All the bad things you said about the lens. might as well just use an iPhone 12 for pictures?

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

It is a perfectly fine lens, my real point is many people would be happier with results from other lenses. :)

[@3qgc]

@@DanielWhiteWithCanon Maybe I missed the suggestions, but did you mention those alternatives?

[@oo0Spyder0oo]

Jesus why the music drowning out your narration?

[@phill5917]

Rented this lens and I'll just say that The IQ and sharpness it renders is okay but I won't add it to my bag.... It's more for those people who just want a simple zoom lens and don't care much about IQ and sharpness. I think its better to buy this lens used than to spend 1400$ new.... Not worth it IMO.

[@Soul_Visuals_Photography]

Hated that lens. Don’t miss it.

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

It has its purpose but is very limiting that’s for sure.

[@popopo1976]

@@DanielWhiteWithCanon hi, in what way it is limiting?

[@Space1833]

😊

[@vipersrt30]

i got this lens for 800 usd used lol

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

Hey myownsoul. Thats pretty good! What do you think if it thus far?

[@vipersrt30]

​@@DanielWhiteWithCanon i've been using it on the eos R6 for food photography though i think close ups might be somewhat a little weak wide open, it definitely can resolve details really well when stopped down using flash for product photography. it serves the purpose really well but i really need a second lens for low light situations when i don't have a flash light. oh and since i used it with the r6 i managed to shoot 2 second exposure shots with this lens + r6 ibis on at around 50% success rate handheld. pretty cool!

[@DanielWhiteWithCanon]

@@vipersrt30 right that ibis and the is on the lens is crazy!