@@Psyclonus7 I guess it depends what you mean by value. Value for dollar, value for specs etc.. I was just impressed with the f4 lens that i got for $900 which I think is what it's actually worth imo. Cheers
I have this and the 50 rf 1.2 for my R6. The only 2 lenses I bring with me on my travels. The 50 is for portraits and for people in existing low light. For static shots in existing low light, aperture is irrelevant. I’ve shot twilight photos at 5.6 and even f8, at 200 ISO. I have an ingenious device that allows me to do this - a tripod. When I don’t bring a tripod, I always can find something to prop my camera against to take a low shutter speed photo. Growing up in the era of film, I’m used to this. I’d take low light photos of dark church interiors on my Nikon FTn with Kodachrome 64 (yes, 64 ISO). So don’t be scared by this lens because it’s only f4, unless you want to take photos of indoor concerts, then forget it. I have traveled to Europe with only my previous EF 24-105 f4 on a 5D Mark III and it was all I needed. With the more capable RF version on an R6, I’m confident I can tackle any situation. If you can have only 1 lens on your Canon, this is it. If you can have a bunch, you should take this with you anyway. Finally, the new 2.8 version looks good, but it is too loooong. It looks like a 20mm antiaircraft gun hanging from your shoulder. I’ll pass on it and spend the difference in price saved over the f4 on upgrading to business class.
I love the advice about propping up against the wall and using lower shutter speeds. And with the new camera’s IBIS you can get pretty sharp long shutters. Thanks for sharing!
With my R6 Mark 2, I have this RF 24-105 F4 L usm lens and a RF 50mm F1.8 lens. Even for indoors the RF 24-105mm is not bad just have your indoors well lit, even the low light performance is not that bad.
Totally. I really have found it to be great, and that is partially cause the R6 mark ii has great high ISO performance. This combo is still my favorite for travel.
@@BrunoPozo4RealDas Kit Objektiv ist die EF Variante gewesen als Mark I und II die zusammen mit einer EOS 5D Mark I bis IV verkauft wurden. Diese Objektive wurden dann im weissen Karton wieder angeboten! Der Grund war, das dieses Objektiv immer ein Schärfeproblem hatte. Die L Einstufung war schon damals nicht gerechtfertigt! Die aktuelle RF Variante ist nur geringfügig schärfer und das wird in vielen unabhängigen Tests beschrieben! Das Objektiv ist einfach zu weich in der Abbildungsleistung und baut zum Rand extrem ab.
Isn't annoying so many call this lens a kit lens. It's not! The non-L version is the kit lens. Not many can afford this lens. I love mine! Great walk around lens.
Agree with most of your comments, although it's not really a kit lens as such on Canon's lower end models (in Europe anyway) and I purchased it separately from my own 'R'. I don't think f/8 is an optimum aperture at 24mm for sharpness, although when zoomed in halfway you're right. I've been completely satisfied with my copy of the lens, although to be honest EF 24-70mm f/4 has better contrast and gives the impression of being more rugged.
I use this lenses since a year now, it is a great lense, sure the that it is not a fast lens but with all the available Ai denoising solutions and the new focus blur in Lightroom, I could make great pictures in lowlight conditions and get almost similar results of my Samyang RF f1.4 85mm at f1.8.
@@BrunoPozo4Real I understand but kit lens mostly don’t have a fixed aperture, don’t have weather-seal and certainly aren’t “L” lenses. Anyway, I liked the video anyway 👍
@@BrunoPozo4RealDas EF 24-105 L IS USM Mark I und Version Mark II war immer ein Kit Objektiv. Es wurde zusammen mit den Spiegelreflexkameras EOS 5D Mark I bis Mark IV im Paket verkauft. Wer behauptet ein L Objektiv wäre noch ein Kit Objektiv gewesen hat keine Ahnung. Hier werden falsche Informationen verbreitet das man nur den Kopf schütteln kann. Man sollte sich vorher informieren bevor man einen Kommentar abgibt. Gruß aus Bavaria
@@headbang3r519Eine feste Blende gibt es nicht, sonst könnte man diese ja nicht öffnen und schließen! Es muss heißen das Objektiv hat eine Offenblende von 4 bzw. die größte Blende bleibt über den gesamten Brennweitenbereich konstant! Also eine Lichtstärke von Blende 4...
As someone who has no knowledge about camera lenses, i recently bought a used EF 24-105MM f4L , I later found that there's a newer version which is RF mount. I feel i made a mistake looking at the prices i bought it, which is 380 dollars. I can get a refund, so i want you guys to help me, is it normal to buy the Ef 24-105mm f4L at 380 US dollars in 2024? Lens works perfect and in good condition but I want to know if the price is ok .
The RF 24-105mm F4, is my all-around do almost anything lens and on my R6, it's even pretty good in lowlight. Unfortunately for me, last summer I bought the RF 24-70 f/2.8L for a few lowlight events and now I wish that I would have known about the upcoming RF 24-105mm F/2.8 so that I could have used my EF24-70 f2.8 version and saved that $2100 to buy the new RF 24-105mm F/2.8 instead. The RF 24-105mm F4, would still be my workhorse, but the focal range RF 24-105mm F/2.8 in lowlight would have been perfect last year. But I will be shooting those same lowlight events this year, so maayyyybeeee....
I feel u man. The new 24-105 f2.8 is seriously the dream lens. I bought this about a month before the new 2.8 version was announced so im a little sad too haha.
@BrunoPozo4Real I have The old EF 24-105mm f4, and since I use canon m50, I have to use Adapter, when I use the viltrox m2 speed booster Adapter , I get f2.8. Now I want to ask. Is the speedbososter's f2.8 anywhere closer to an inbuilt f2.8 lens? I mean, if someone can't afford the new 24-105mm f2.8, can he get a speedbooster that will make the f4 becomes f2.8?
@@goodtimezproductionz Absolutely it’s fantastic lens, especially if you take one lens with you. But you have to know that it’s f4 and background blur is not good as 2.8 or below.
I have tried EF 24-70 F2.8 II on R5 on a trip and very satisfied. This 24-105 will give me extra length, IS and more contrast but i am not sure. Should i replace EF 24-70 F2.8 II with this one?
I wouldn’t necessarily trade it. Altho this lens gives you extra reach, you do lose the extra stop of light that the 2.8 lens has. I will say that I do use the f4 lens mostly for travel/hikes since it is such a small lens when compared to my rf 28-70. If you’re already satisfied I would stick with the EF. If you are really curious, try renting the RF 24-105 f4 first too see if it is worth it to you. Cheers!
It is true but the price of this lens should be minimized a little and can be offered as a combo with R6 mark 2. With R6 M2 Canon offer only 24-105 F4-7.1, not others. It should be 999 USD.
It's always nice to see a small channel that literally makes better contents than a 1 million subscribers channel. (gosh where does the Saxon genitive stands here?) anyway ahah No useless talking, no retarded flashy loud intro, straight to the point. Yes, I think the old L series from Canon is definitely still worth buying, ESPECIALLY now that we can find it for less. Having a fixed aperture is always a win. This video was short and very informative.
Thank you so much for the kind words. I try my best, and I totally love the EF lenses still. I use my friend’s 85 f1.2 ef and it works great! That’s definitely been the benefit of the new RF glass- it made EF glass more affordable! Cheers
It would work for family photography, but it might not be wide enough for landscape. Just because of the 1.6x crop you would have on this lens (effectively a 38-168mm)
Saying this was a kit lens to be upgraded was a shame. Depending on what form of photography you shoot, all you may need as a pro is a 24-105, wide angle, and telephoto. For me as a landscape photographer, a 24-105 is a very sought after lens. Just depends on the f4 vs f4-7.1. Definitely go for the f4 as a pro lens. It its a PRO L lens lmao
That’s fair. I know a few professionals who use this lens primarily. It truly is a great lens despite it being an f4 variant. But honestly that isn’t the only thing that matters, I just know a lot of people are drawn to the 2.8 and faster apertures. Thanks for sharing.
@@BrunoPozo4Real yeah I mean a lot of portrait photographers will love the telephoto/mid zoom 2.8 but for me, im always shooting at f11-f16 haha. Thats why I do have the 15-35 f2.8 for astro photography. Hoping to really use it for astro this year too.
By garenteed to upgrade from, ( 0:06 ) do you mean guarenteed to replace it, or guarenteed to buy other lenses eventually? If anything i’m considering buying one…. soo.. :3
I don't think this lense serve the purpose. My 3 lenses with R6 mark ii which I always carry: Sigma 18-35 , f/1.8 DC Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2. I think that these three lenses are the way to go in any condition with larger aparture.
I have The old EF 24-105mm f4, and since I use canon m50, I have to use Adapter, when I use the viltrox m2 speed booster Adapter , I get f2.8. Now I want to ask. Is the speedbososter's f2.8 anywhere closer to an inbuilt f2.8 lens? I mean, if someone can't afford the new 24-105mm f2.8, can he get a speedbooster that will make the f4 becomes f2.8? Can anybody help me on this?
That’s not exactly how it works. You do get an extra stop of light but the depth of field wont be like 2.8. Here’s a great video that explains it better than I ever could. th-cam.com/video/EAM6jHBqnAI/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Kue9q5qMMK0mkgaj
I think it truly depends on the user’s needs. But the 24-105 will give you a good trial of focal lengths that you might like. Upgrade to any of the f1.2 primes (35,50,85mm). If you need more range then you know you’ll want those 200mm+ lenses
@@EPXPhotography It depends. The 2.8 version is much heavier, so it isn't an easy to grab lens like the F4 version. But as a professional, the jump in quality is awesome. And having that extra stop of light is amazing in that range.
It's all good information. Something left out is that it is a great lens to do all kinds of infrared full conversion cameras (mostly has no hot IR spots at any focal length and aperture combination). Now Canon has a new lens out in the same focal range but one stop faster, but its not an equivalent lens I terms of price, size, weight or uses so I do think its a must have in a Canon Camera bag.
Ive never done infrared conversion Thats really cool tho. Im SUPER excited for the new 24-105 f2.8. But it is sooo different and i think is more for professionals or ppl who can spend the money for fun haha
I’m not a fan of zoom lenses. Especially, big fat ones that are getting more common. I bought a Canon direct refurbished one for $799 the other day to try out. It gets nice results, but the lens is 1.5 lbs and my R8 body is only 1 lb. So, it’s sort of a ridiculous setup.
I hear you man. Canon has been making really large and heavy lenses in the RF system. It is a problem that Ive noticed people have and why they might go with Sony cause they do have lighter bodies and lens setups.
i regret buying my r7 seeing the extreme limit about lenses , sits at home and got replaced by a sony a7iii who made me even more wary of aps-c , my 24 mp sony full has much better images than the 33mp aps-c dualpixel ,not to mention lowlight noise. and yes i have ef lenses with adapter , works but is not always reliable when it comes to af and also most non L lenses are meh ,especially when i got my 400 € 50mm macro sony lens who has an incredible sharp rendering even for portrait ,have tested all under 1000 € rf and this one spoken about here and they are not close by a margin. p.s. : also that bokeh cult should calm down a bit , first and foremost a lens has to be sharp ,you can always make it look a bit more dreamy with mf if necessary and out of focus happens with all lenses and really no one cares about bokeh except those talking about ,simply show people a sharp cell phone image and a camera image with bokeh , usual response ,why is a camera so expensive with such a bad picture .
Yeah Im not a fan of aps-c cameras, but thats coming from a video background and honestly my bias for full frame cameras haha. That’s awesome tho, the sony is a great camera. I remember when I didn’t have L lenses, it really is a huge jump when you make that purchase but man is it expensive. Appreciate the comment, cheers!
That lens has a variable aperture of 4-6.3, meaning the exposure can change as you zoom. That’s not the end of the world though. The range is incredibly useful, but that high aperture makes less blurry backgrounds and perform worse in low light. But as a budget travel option outdoors it can be great!
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 82 วันนี้!! คู่เอก | ยอดไอคิว vs อับดัลลาห์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hSsyTl_9bqs/mqdefault.jpg)
I don't consider a $1300 lens a "value lens". It's my go to and man, I love it
I love this lens too! It shouldn’t cost $1300 tho 😭
Considering that most other RF L lenses are 3 to 10k, umm, yeah, it is a Value L lens!
True lmao @@-WhizzBang-
@@-WhizzBang- and other cameras are more expensive than the R6 Mark 2. So does that make a it a "value camera"?
@@Psyclonus7 I guess it depends what you mean by value. Value for dollar, value for specs etc.. I was just impressed with the f4 lens that i got for $900 which I think is what it's actually worth imo. Cheers
I have this and the 50 rf 1.2 for my R6. The only 2 lenses I bring with me on my travels. The 50 is for portraits and for people in existing low light. For static shots in existing low light, aperture is irrelevant. I’ve shot twilight photos at 5.6 and even f8, at 200 ISO. I have an ingenious device that allows me to do this - a tripod. When I don’t bring a tripod, I always can find something to prop my camera against to take a low shutter speed photo. Growing up in the era of film, I’m used to this. I’d take low light photos of dark church interiors on my Nikon FTn with Kodachrome 64 (yes, 64 ISO). So don’t be scared by this lens because it’s only f4, unless you want to take photos of indoor concerts, then forget it. I have traveled to Europe with only my previous EF 24-105 f4 on a 5D Mark III and it was all I needed. With the more capable RF version on an R6, I’m confident I can tackle any situation. If you can have only 1 lens on your Canon, this is it. If you can have a bunch, you should take this with you anyway. Finally, the new 2.8 version looks good, but it is too loooong. It looks like a 20mm antiaircraft gun hanging from your shoulder. I’ll pass on it and spend the difference in price saved over the f4 on upgrading to business class.
I love the advice about propping up against the wall and using lower shutter speeds. And with the new camera’s IBIS you can get pretty sharp long shutters.
Thanks for sharing!
With my R6 Mark 2, I have this RF 24-105 F4 L usm lens and a RF 50mm F1.8 lens. Even for indoors the RF 24-105mm is not bad just have your indoors well lit, even the low light performance is not that bad.
Totally. I really have found it to be great, and that is partially cause the R6 mark ii has great high ISO performance.
This combo is still my favorite for travel.
I don’t consider L lenses kit lenses. Just because you can technically buy them packaged with a Canon body, I still wouldn’t call it a kit lens
That’s fair. I debated calling a kit lens but it felt like a lot of ppl called it that (online at least haha)
@@BrunoPozo4Real haha I gotcha, I know I keep hearing people online refer to it as a kit lens when it’s $1300 and a L lens at that 😂
@@rmmm329 Seriously! And it's a damn good lens haha
@@BrunoPozo4RealDas Kit Objektiv ist die EF Variante gewesen als Mark I und II die zusammen mit einer EOS 5D Mark I bis IV verkauft wurden. Diese Objektive wurden dann im weissen Karton wieder angeboten! Der Grund war, das dieses Objektiv immer ein Schärfeproblem hatte. Die L Einstufung war schon damals nicht gerechtfertigt! Die aktuelle RF Variante ist nur geringfügig schärfer und das wird in vielen unabhängigen Tests beschrieben! Das Objektiv ist einfach zu weich in der Abbildungsleistung und baut zum Rand extrem ab.
Isn't annoying so many call this lens a kit lens. It's not! The non-L version is the kit lens. Not many can afford this lens. I love mine! Great walk around lens.
It’s my goto travel/hiking lens
I love it :)
Cool video Bruno! Thx u
You’re very welcome :)
Agree with most of your comments, although it's not really a kit lens as such on Canon's lower end models (in Europe anyway) and I purchased it separately from my own 'R'. I don't think f/8 is an optimum aperture at 24mm for sharpness, although when zoomed in halfway you're right. I've been completely satisfied with my copy of the lens, although to be honest EF 24-70mm f/4 has better contrast and gives the impression of being more rugged.
I havent tried the ef 24-70 but it would be a fun comparison!
Great review of this lens, I appreciate the detail and all of the information!
Thank you for that. I try my best :)
Thanks for the video !! I will definitely buy this lens , as my first one with my brand new Canon R6ii (coming from Sony)
Nice.
I love this lens. I still use it for travel and home videos and it’s just such a versatile range in a small form factor.
Have fun shooting!
Thanks a lot 🙏🏽
@@garelbidi you're welcome :)
I use this lenses since a year now, it is a great lense, sure the that it is not a fast lens but with all the available Ai denoising solutions and the new focus blur in Lightroom, I could make great pictures in lowlight conditions and get almost similar results of my Samyang RF f1.4 85mm at f1.8.
That’s awesome. I do love Lightroom’s denoise feature. It seriously makes the cleanest images
No 'L' lens of Canon is ever a kit lens.
I agree. I just see people call this one a kit lens cause I guess its an F4? Or because it was part of many camera kits like the R6 w/24-105 F4
@@BrunoPozo4Real I understand but kit lens mostly don’t have a fixed aperture, don’t have weather-seal and certainly aren’t “L” lenses. Anyway, I liked the video anyway 👍
Yeah I hear you on that. Thank you :) @@headbang3r519
@@BrunoPozo4RealDas EF 24-105 L IS USM Mark I und Version Mark II war immer ein Kit Objektiv. Es wurde zusammen mit den Spiegelreflexkameras EOS 5D Mark I bis Mark IV im Paket verkauft. Wer behauptet ein L Objektiv wäre noch ein Kit Objektiv gewesen hat keine Ahnung. Hier werden falsche Informationen verbreitet das man nur den Kopf schütteln kann. Man sollte sich vorher informieren bevor man einen Kommentar abgibt. Gruß aus Bavaria
@@headbang3r519Eine feste Blende gibt es nicht, sonst könnte man diese ja nicht öffnen und schließen! Es muss heißen das Objektiv hat eine Offenblende von 4 bzw. die größte Blende bleibt über den gesamten Brennweitenbereich konstant! Also eine Lichtstärke von Blende 4...
As someone who has no knowledge about camera lenses, i recently bought a used EF 24-105MM f4L , I later found that there's a newer version which is RF mount. I feel i made a mistake looking at the prices i bought it, which is 380 dollars. I can get a refund, so i want you guys to help me, is it normal to buy the Ef 24-105mm f4L at 380 US dollars in 2024?
Lens works perfect and in good condition but I want to know if the price is ok .
That actually is about an average price for an EF 24-105 f4
@@BrunoPozo4Real Oh Okay thanks for this. Then I will keep it.
The RF 24-105mm F4, is my all-around do almost anything lens and on my R6, it's even pretty good in lowlight.
Unfortunately for me, last summer I bought the RF 24-70 f/2.8L for a few lowlight events and now I wish that I would have known about the upcoming RF 24-105mm F/2.8 so that I could have used my EF24-70 f2.8 version and saved that $2100 to buy the new RF 24-105mm F/2.8 instead. The RF 24-105mm F4, would still be my workhorse, but the focal range RF 24-105mm F/2.8 in lowlight would have been perfect last year. But I will be shooting those same lowlight events this year, so maayyyybeeee....
I feel u man. The new 24-105 f2.8 is seriously the dream lens. I bought this about a month before the new 2.8 version was announced so im a little sad too haha.
@BrunoPozo4Real I have The old EF 24-105mm f4, and since I use canon m50, I have to use Adapter, when I use the viltrox m2 speed booster Adapter , I get f2.8. Now I want to ask. Is the speedbososter's f2.8 anywhere closer to an inbuilt f2.8 lens? I mean, if someone can't afford the new 24-105mm f2.8, can he get a speedbooster that will make the f4 becomes f2.8?
Good work. Keep it up.
Thanks Jared
@@BrunoPozo4Realhow about 24-105 f2.8 ?
@@impopio4987 I requested to rent the lens from Canon and won't be receiving it until summer. Stay tuned!
I have R6 mark II with this lens. I am very happy. Thanks Canon…🎉
Canon is fantastic!
Satisfied with video and photo? I’m on the fence about this lens
@@goodtimezproductionz Absolutely it’s fantastic lens, especially if you take one lens with you. But you have to know that it’s f4 and background blur is not good as 2.8 or below.
I have tried EF 24-70 F2.8 II on R5 on a trip and very satisfied. This 24-105 will give me extra length, IS and more contrast but i am not sure. Should i replace EF 24-70 F2.8 II with this one?
I wouldn’t necessarily trade it. Altho this lens gives you extra reach, you do lose the extra stop of light that the 2.8 lens has.
I will say that I do use the f4 lens mostly for travel/hikes since it is such a small lens when compared to my rf 28-70.
If you’re already satisfied I would stick with the EF. If you are really curious, try renting the RF 24-105 f4 first too see if it is worth it to you.
Cheers!
It is true but the price of this lens should be minimized a little and can be offered as a combo with R6 mark 2. With R6 M2 Canon offer only 24-105 F4-7.1, not others. It should be 999 USD.
It really should. I don’t think it’s worth any more than that.
Nice and thorough review, Bruno! Great insights 👏
Thank you for the kind words
Very useful lens. Picked mine up used for $500. Lucky find.
That’s what I’m talking about.
Man... That's a steal. Congrats.
Not trying to brag but not too long ago found a eos r with this lense for 400 bucks insane find
That is a crazy amazing deal omg! congrats on that one @@ChrisOn240
@@BrunoPozo4Real Thank You
Hi! Is it a professional lens?
Yes!
Thank you
I wondered because i see everywhere its à kit lens
@@dje7917 It can be bought with the camera as a kit lens, but it's professional grade for sure. Cheers
@@BrunoPozo4Real Cheers
It's always nice to see a small channel that literally makes better contents than a 1 million subscribers channel. (gosh where does the Saxon genitive stands here?) anyway ahah
No useless talking, no retarded flashy loud intro, straight to the point.
Yes, I think the old L series from Canon is definitely still worth buying, ESPECIALLY now that we can find it for less.
Having a fixed aperture is always a win.
This video was short and very informative.
Thank you so much for the kind words. I try my best, and I totally love the EF lenses still.
I use my friend’s 85 f1.2 ef and it works great! That’s definitely been the benefit of the new RF glass- it made EF glass more affordable!
Cheers
if u have L Series lens it doesn't matter the Aperture is... still great u can get always..
Yeah love the L series lenses for the RF system
do you think this lens would be good on a eos r7? I do landscape and family photography
It would work for family photography, but it might not be wide enough for landscape. Just because of the 1.6x crop you would have on this lens (effectively a 38-168mm)
Saying this was a kit lens to be upgraded was a shame. Depending on what form of photography you shoot, all you may need as a pro is a 24-105, wide angle, and telephoto. For me as a landscape photographer, a 24-105 is a very sought after lens. Just depends on the f4 vs f4-7.1. Definitely go for the f4 as a pro lens. It its a PRO L lens lmao
That’s fair. I know a few professionals who use this lens primarily. It truly is a great lens despite it being an f4 variant. But honestly that isn’t the only thing that matters, I just know a lot of people are drawn to the 2.8 and faster apertures.
Thanks for sharing.
@@BrunoPozo4Real yeah I mean a lot of portrait photographers will love the telephoto/mid zoom 2.8 but for me, im always shooting at f11-f16 haha. Thats why I do have the 15-35 f2.8 for astro photography. Hoping to really use it for astro this year too.
@@cringecrew101asmr8 nice that’s awesome man. I have used the 15-35 a fee times for nightlapses, it’s honestly amazing
By garenteed to upgrade from, ( 0:06 ) do you mean guarenteed to replace it, or guarenteed to buy other lenses eventually?
If anything i’m considering buying one…. soo.. :3
Guaranteed to buy other lenses (in my opinion).
But ik a few photographers who just use this lens because it really is so versatile!
I don't think this lense serve the purpose. My 3 lenses with R6 mark ii which I always carry:
Sigma 18-35 , f/1.8 DC
Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 USM
Tamron SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2.
I think that these three lenses are the way to go in any condition with larger aparture.
Thats a nice range you have. You don’t mind the crop when you use the sigma 18-35 f1.8 then?
I have The old EF 24-105mm f4, and since I use canon m50, I have to use Adapter, when I use the viltrox m2 speed booster Adapter , I get f2.8. Now I want to ask. Is the speedbososter's f2.8 anywhere closer to an inbuilt f2.8 lens? I mean, if someone can't afford the new 24-105mm f2.8, can he get a speedbooster that will make the f4 becomes f2.8? Can anybody help me on this?
That’s not exactly how it works. You do get an extra stop of light but the depth of field wont be like 2.8.
Here’s a great video that explains it better than I ever could.
th-cam.com/video/EAM6jHBqnAI/w-d-xo.htmlsi=Kue9q5qMMK0mkgaj
@@BrunoPozo4Real thank you so much.
@@SanaaTek Happy to help :) good luck!
Kit lens? Upgrade from it? To what?
I think it truly depends on the user’s needs. But the 24-105 will give you a good trial of focal lengths that you might like.
Upgrade to any of the f1.2 primes (35,50,85mm). If you need more range then you know you’ll want those 200mm+ lenses
It's an L-series lens. What do you "upgrade to" from L-series???
Well in this case I would upgrade from the F4 variant to the F2.8. Both are L-series lenses though so it’s not an upgrade in that way.
Do you think the 2.8 version is worth the price and upgrade @@BrunoPozo4Real?
@@EPXPhotography It depends.
The 2.8 version is much heavier, so it isn't an easy to grab lens like the F4 version.
But as a professional, the jump in quality is awesome. And having that extra stop of light is amazing in that range.
isn't it blurry at the corners?
I haven’t noticed but I often am not looking at the corners.
It's all good information. Something left out is that it is a great lens to do all kinds of infrared full conversion cameras (mostly has no hot IR spots at any focal length and aperture combination). Now Canon has a new lens out in the same focal range but one stop faster, but its not an equivalent lens I terms of price, size, weight or uses so I do think its a must have in a Canon Camera bag.
Ive never done infrared conversion
Thats really cool tho. Im SUPER excited for the new 24-105 f2.8. But it is sooo different and i think is more for professionals or ppl who can spend the money for fun haha
I’m not a fan of zoom lenses. Especially, big fat ones that are getting more common. I bought a Canon direct refurbished one for $799 the other day to try out. It gets nice results, but the lens is 1.5 lbs and my R8 body is only 1 lb. So, it’s sort of a ridiculous setup.
I hear you man.
Canon has been making really large and heavy lenses in the RF system. It is a problem that Ive noticed people have and why they might go with Sony cause they do have lighter bodies and lens setups.
I also talk about this objective, you must record faces...
Faces are great on this lens
@@BrunoPozo4Real gracias
Why wouldn't a lens be good enough in 2023or 2024or 2030???
New tech and stuff comes out. Changes the landscape of what is best and such. Although I would say this lens is timeless, just a simple classic.
This is a kit lense?
Only in definition that it comes in a kit with some bodies. It is definitely a much better glass than what most people tmean by a kit lens.
A bit more than a kit lens
I definitely think so too
i regret buying my r7 seeing the extreme limit about lenses , sits at home and got replaced by a sony a7iii who made me even more wary of aps-c , my 24 mp sony full has much better images than the 33mp aps-c dualpixel ,not to mention lowlight noise.
and yes i have ef lenses with adapter , works but is not always reliable when it comes to af and also most non L lenses are meh ,especially when i got my 400 € 50mm macro sony lens who has an incredible sharp rendering even for portrait ,have tested all under 1000 € rf and this one spoken about here and they are not close by a margin.
p.s. : also that bokeh cult should calm down a bit , first and foremost a lens has to be sharp ,you can always make it look a bit more dreamy with mf if necessary and out of focus happens with all lenses and really no one cares about bokeh except those talking about ,simply show people a sharp cell phone image and a camera image with bokeh , usual response ,why is a camera so expensive with such a bad picture .
Yeah Im not a fan of aps-c cameras, but thats coming from a video background and honestly my bias for full frame cameras haha.
That’s awesome tho, the sony is a great camera. I remember when I didn’t have L lenses, it really is a huge jump when you make that purchase but man is it expensive.
Appreciate the comment, cheers!
👍👍👍
Gratzi
I found one for 200 nearby
Debating
I would make sure you wont get scammed (it works and doesnt have issues)
Why not get a 24 to 240 ? U never ever have to change anything
That lens has a variable aperture of 4-6.3, meaning the exposure can change as you zoom.
That’s not the end of the world though. The range is incredibly useful, but that high aperture makes less blurry backgrounds and perform worse in low light.
But as a budget travel option outdoors it can be great!