Bought this one for environmental close-ups of small animals like frogs, reptiles, insects and spiders. Haven’t had much chances to use it (released at the end of the macro season), but so far I am pleasantly surprised. For this work 16mm is too wide (on full frame), and 35mm too narrow. The sharpness is very ‘macro-lens-like’ and the colours are very correct. I don’t need much corrections in post processing. The only real disadvantage is the lack of weather and dust sealing in combination with extending while focusing. I hope it will survive the harsh conditions. I will be extra careful. 😅
I was just thinking, "Gosh, I haven't seen any reviews of that new RF 24mm lens" and went to TH-cam, and hey, look at that, Gordon's got a fresh review up.
Thanks, Gordon! That was exactly what I was looking for. I've already own the RF 24-105 STM and find it very reasonable for its price. I specially started to enjoy the 24mm focal length but I think I'll better go with some wide angle zoom instead (maybe the RF 15-30mm STM or even an older EF wide angle L option in the same price range)
I really like the canon bodies. Once they open the mount I’m in. All these STM lenses are sub par with that STM motor compared to all the competitors when it comes to Primes.
Anther great review! Thanks! I got the 24mm when it came out for mainly video work as its small and light . It does what need from it. For other stuff I'll use my L series lenses.
Thanks for the detailed review, Gordon. Won't buy this lens - imho 'solid option' is not enough for the price point, especially on a mount that is supposed to be technical superior to the previous EF or the competition's E-mount, and which doesn't allow any 3rd party AF lenses. 5 years ago Canon equipped all better EF non-L lenses with USM motors already. This line of 'affordable' STM primes is a big step back in technology, while the RF-L line of primes still has huge gaps, and customers are left without 3rd party options. I'm R6 user and heavily invested in RF-L glass, but stopped any further investments in the RF system for now - until Canon wakes up, or I switch to Sony.
I decided myself it would be "better value" and quality with one RF 15-35 f2.8 zoom than a bundle of RF16+RF24+RF35. Yes, it still cost a bit more - but exchanging lenses are boring AF and the 16mm was really too bad for my use. So if anyone thinks about getting all these primes, rather check if you can spend more for a better and more versatile lens.
thats what i did. had a rf35, but returned it and bought a used rf15-35 and i think it was the smartest thing i did. i use it for everything and optics, af and IS is extremely good
The RF 15-35 is a great lens, I love it. But this lens can't take over the jobs I love to do with the RF 16, RF 24 & RF 35 - going close in tight shooting conditions, using max aperture & walking ultra light and "stealth". All are offering lot of fun and versatility. I use the zoom for serious landscape work.
@@cameralabs I sure hope Canon changes their mind soon. Them pulling back 3rd party support makes me regret getting a RP. I thought a nice budget solution to get into full frame,.. But the lenses are just too expensive, even the non-L's. Should have just bought an old 5DII and some nice EF lenses, now everyone is dumping those at discount prices.
Another great informative video...After using the ef24 for years..We finally found a great deal on the RF24/1.8...I mostly do "out and about" street in Bangkok so often just pack the 24 and 85 in my vest pocket....My current working bodies are a pair of RP's (cheap and comfortable to use)...I have some M43 gear when I want to be super light...
The more digital doctoring of the image the lower the resolution. For the really wide stuff I'll stick with my older and slower Canon EF 11-24 ebay special. Thank you for another excellent unbiased review!
Dammit, Gordon! TH-cam keeps doing this! I've been subscribed to your channel WITH NOTIFICATION ON and I didn't see notification of this video. The bell icon was off, again. I'm now convinced that YT turns it off, for some reason...
There's a bit of a duplication here as both RF lenses have the same 24 mm advantage, and the optical differences are too insignificant to debate. However, the versatility of the 24-105 mm f/4 outweighs a fixed 24 mm for all-around shooting, except for the bokeh lovers to choose the f/1.8 when the target is somewhat close, though bokeh is very acceptable as the 24-105 mm is zoomed to the max 105 mm. The 24 mm 1.8 is not weather resistant while the 24-105 mm f/4 is. The one real difference will play in your wallet in what you can shell out. Personally, I did have the EF 24-105 f/4 and used an RF adapter on my Canon R3. While the RF 24-105 mm has a tad faster AF response, the image qualities were identical. Personally, I choose the RF 35 mm for street photography-less bulky and lighter to carry.
I'm pretty happy with my 1990s Quantaray (Sigma rebrand) 24mm EF mount autofocus, goes to macro-ish as well distances, very sharp, like $50 on ebay. Seems the same as this but 1/10th the price. Minus IS, but my IBIS is already stabilizing it and... it's 24mm...
I really wish they had gone for a 28mm instead, still wide but less distorted for street photography. I also question the need for a stabilized 24mm as this increase the bulk and the price of a budget lens. I'd understand if they had included IS on the 50mm, but in a budget 24mm is frankly overkill, especially when it brings the "budget" to 600$/€/£ plus VAT!they are probably meant to "milk" the vlogging community.
Yes, I think the IS on this lens is aimed more at the needs of handheld filming, especially for their bodies without IBIS. I bet there will be a 28 in the future, they're just filling in the gaps and it will take time.
I’ve got the 50 and 85mm versions so I think I’ll get the 35 next and work down. I don’t have any RF zooms yet. The 100mm intrigued me so that’ll probably be my first L lens in the RF next year.
I do hope Canon brings a higher MP camera equivalent to a7r4/a7r5(future)... Than this lens can be used as a 24mm or 38.xmm(at crop 2xMP) for daily walkaround
I have money burning a hole in my pocket for something L quality in either 24mm 28mm or 35mm otherwise I might just buy a used A7III to use a 24GM a friend of mine willing to offload at a great price.
Thanks for the review Gordon, I was waiting for your review, but I wanted to take this lens on the cruise that I just went on. I bought the lens a about at the beginning of September. I have the 35mm, 24mm , and 24-105mm L, all RF. Now I have to figure out what is next!😅 Thanks!
OK, so it can barely beat the most garbage zoom available in RF fullframe! When you compare the optics and build quality with the Sigma 24mm f2 dg dn( same price!), you'll find out why the mount is closed to the 3rd parties! I'm a bit disappointed by this comparison Gordon, Canon RF 24-105 F4 L was a better option which I bet is much sharper than this lens.
Actually I compared the 24-105 f4L against the 24-105 STM in my review of the latter and what you describe as a 'garbage' zoom did very well. Have a look and see what you think. Also the 24-105 f4L is about twice the price of the 24 1.8.
Hi Gordon, I really enjoy the quality of your tests and reviews. I have a question for you. Comparing 500mm on the canon RF 100-500 vs the canon EF 500mm, what is the size diffencence for a bird taken at 500mm with both lenses. Is the 500mm from the zoom really smaller ? Thanks for your help !
Good question. In theory the 100-500 at 500 should deliver the same field of view as a 500 prime, but sometimes there are variances, especially when focused closer. Some zooms in particular exhibit more breathing where the image either shrinks or magnifies at closer focusing. I can't give you the answer though, you'd need to use both side by side at the desired subject distance and compare in person. Maybe try a big shop that has both, or rent both?
@@cameralabs Hi Gordon, I found a very intersting video on that topic that was really surprising. I would like to have your opinion on it. The title is : I was wrong, primes and zooms have different reach at the same focal lenght. Please let me know your opinion. Have a great day!
@@steveparent8788 yep, i mentioned this in my last reply! It's not uncommon. None of these lenses have exactly XX mm of focal length, they all vary a bit, and can vary a LOT as you adjust the focusing.
There's very little that's changed on it versus the EM5 III - basically a newer image processor which gives it some enhanced shooting modes and slightly improved IBIS, plus slightly improved sealing. I'm not sure it justifies the time I'd have to spend on making a review as it's roughly a week's work. If enough people ask though I'll look into it, as I do like their cameras and lenses.
@@cameralabs Would you recommend it for casual filming? I was thinking about E-M5 III in the past however I was not happy it didn't have AutoISO in manual film mode. OM-5 has this function, and also they added OM-LOG400. I know the camera still has its quirks but I think other options (Canon, Nikon, Sony) are not better, either. Thanks!
@@cameralabs thats true, even if i could afford lets say 100-500 i guess it would live too much time just on my shelf at home due to being bulky and heavy enough that is inconvinient for me to take it out every time hehe 😉
Not at that price. It’s 2/3 the price of the L series 24-105 which I think I’d rather have on my camera. Cool review as always, I’m enjoying the 16 & 50 RF ‘no brainers’ not least due to your recommendation.
I like the idea to share the cases (50=16, and now 35=24), but it should comes with a better price I think... The RF prices are quite high, and they even start to raise more... All that also because no 3rd-Party-Lenses... not a good decision in the long, but understandable for economic reasons...
overpriced! when this lens was announced I had pre-ordered R7 and after I saw what "affordable" lens Canon offered, I canceled my pre-ordered R7. For the same price I can have Sigma or Tamron 2.8 zoom for Sony.
@@cameralabs ? I mean that there’s 1 more L lens than the ones you mentioned, I really enjoy your videos but replying a comment just to promote a video mmmm 🤔
@@RodrigoAReyes95 sorry I misunderstood. My quote was about counting lenses UNDER 100mm, so I meant up to 99mm. I agree it could be understood either way though, so sorry about that.
Neat lens. I would have almost certainly bought it for astro and video, but I sold my EOS camera due to Canon's idiotic policy against 3rd party lens manufacturers. I'd rather give my business to Nikon. They're a better value IMO at this point.
Short sighted. Nikon Z mount lacks so much more than just a few Tamron Viltrox lenses. They are not even in the same league with Sony and Canon. Other than Z9, no z body in Nikon range is compelling in its own segment.
@@dmitry.sh.8946 These are more facts than opinion. Anybody this day still thinks Nikon is a group of "top three", is not sensible. The game is top 2 and a bunch of fringe players.
It is the worst prime lense I've ever seen. The giant barrel distortion and 4 Ev vignetting rivals even cheap kit zoom lenses. Viltrox 24 f1.8 for 400$ has much better quality. Nice review though.
Nice! Thanks for the review Gordon! As usual Canon turns turns on cheap mode by not giving you a lens hood! I would have loved to see Tamron or Sigma lenses on the RF mount, so sad that Canon decided to enable stupid mode and risk loosing buyers when it comes to their RF cameras and lenses!
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 82 วันนี้!! คู่เอก | ยอดไอคิว vs อับดัลลาห์](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hSsyTl_9bqs/mqdefault.jpg)
![[ TEASER ] เงาะป่า - วงL.กฮ. | TMG RECORD](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/M4ObdFfcPww/mqdefault.jpg)
My Canon RF 24mm f1.8 Macro IS STM review!
Check MPB to buy and sell used gear: bit.ly/3ULU9yL
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Canon RF 24mm at B&H: bhpho.to/3uSuTvM // WEX UK: tidd.ly/3yJfxdW
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Gordon’s retro gear channel: th-cam.com/users/dinobytes
Lost photos? I recover mine with: www.dpbolvw.net/click-100568658-13808570?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.stellarinfo.com%2Fphoto-recovery-software.php
Equipment used for producing my videos
Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE
Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF
MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV
00:00 - Introduction
00:52 - MPB Sponsorship
02:13 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 design and controls
04:44 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 focusing
07:13 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 lens corrections
08:45 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 sharpness at infinity
10:53 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 portrait quality
11:52 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 product presentation demo
12:44 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 bokeh balls
14:25 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 macro quality
15:47 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 sunstars spikes
16:21 - Canon RF 24mm f1.8 verdict and sample images
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
The RF 24-105STM can also do near 1:2 at 24mm, you just have to use manual focus past about 1:4. It can do near 1:2 with AF at the 105mm end.
One of my favorites lenses. Love the size, 1.8, weight and image quality. It's a must have.
Bought this one for environmental close-ups of small animals like frogs, reptiles, insects and spiders. Haven’t had much chances to use it (released at the end of the macro season), but so far I am pleasantly surprised. For this work 16mm is too wide (on full frame), and 35mm too narrow.
The sharpness is very ‘macro-lens-like’ and the colours are very correct. I don’t need much corrections in post processing.
The only real disadvantage is the lack of weather and dust sealing in combination with extending while focusing. I hope it will survive the harsh conditions. I will be extra careful. 😅
I was just thinking, "Gosh, I haven't seen any reviews of that new RF 24mm lens" and went to TH-cam, and hey, look at that, Gordon's got a fresh review up.
You're welcome!
Thanks, Gordon! That was exactly what I was looking for. I've already own the RF 24-105 STM and find it very reasonable for its price. I specially started to enjoy the 24mm focal length but I think I'll better go with some wide angle zoom instead (maybe the RF 15-30mm STM or even an older EF wide angle L option in the same price range)
I really like the canon bodies. Once they open the mount I’m in. All these STM lenses are sub par with that STM motor compared to all the competitors when it comes to Primes.
Anther great review! Thanks! I got the 24mm when it came out for mainly video work as its small and light . It does what need from it. For other stuff I'll use my L series lenses.
Well, I like my RF 24mm F1.8, even though I own a copy of the RF 24-105mm F4L, too.
Thanks for the detailed review, Gordon. Won't buy this lens - imho 'solid option' is not enough for the price point, especially on a mount that is supposed to be technical superior to the previous EF or the competition's E-mount, and which doesn't allow any 3rd party AF lenses. 5 years ago Canon equipped all better EF non-L lenses with USM motors already. This line of 'affordable' STM primes is a big step back in technology, while the RF-L line of primes still has huge gaps, and customers are left without 3rd party options. I'm R6 user and heavily invested in RF-L glass, but stopped any further investments in the RF system for now - until Canon wakes up, or I switch to Sony.
Many friend of mine move to Sony because RF system, very huge gap between normal and L lens but quallity not go along, I've been thinking too 🤔
Same here tired of waiting.. I love my r5 but I’m over the lenses, price, lack of choices, and poor designs
I decided myself it would be "better value" and quality with one RF 15-35 f2.8 zoom than a bundle of RF16+RF24+RF35. Yes, it still cost a bit more - but exchanging lenses are boring AF and the 16mm was really too bad for my use. So if anyone thinks about getting all these primes, rather check if you can spend more for a better and more versatile lens.
That;'s a good point and the 15-35 is a great lens.
thats what i did. had a rf35, but returned it and bought a used rf15-35 and i think it was the smartest thing i did. i use it for everything and optics, af and IS is extremely good
Agree, that's probably the best option Canon shooters have right now for 'wide angle'.
The RF 15-35 is a great lens, I love it.
But this lens can't take over the jobs I love to do with the RF 16, RF 24 & RF 35 - going close in tight shooting conditions, using max aperture & walking ultra light and "stealth".
All are offering lot of fun and versatility.
I use the zoom for serious landscape work.
That zoom lens can’t do what the 24/35mm primes do. The primes focus closer and let in more than than twice the light.
I have this lens, and I love it for video. I also used to have the Sony F717. It was my last Sony before I moved to DSLRs (Canon 20D).
Have you had a chance to check out my Dino Bytes vintage channel?
@@cameralabs - Not yet, I'll check it out.
Great review - and although I love primes, I am content with the 16, 35 and 50. Bring on Sigma art lenses for the Canon RF system!
I really hope so...
Canon made sure to kill that.
@@Aureas133 I think it will come at some point, just not yet!
@@cameralabs I sure hope Canon changes their mind soon. Them pulling back 3rd party support makes me regret getting a RP. I thought a nice budget solution to get into full frame,.. But the lenses are just too expensive, even the non-L's. Should have just bought an old 5DII and some nice EF lenses, now everyone is dumping those at discount prices.
@@Aureas133 you can still adapt EF lenses, but yes, I know it's not an ideal scenario right now.
Another great informative video...After using the ef24 for years..We finally found a great deal on the RF24/1.8...I mostly do "out and about" street in Bangkok so often just pack the 24 and 85 in my vest pocket....My current working bodies are a pair of RP's (cheap and comfortable to use)...I have some M43 gear when I want to be super light...
Nice setup! Enjoy Bangkok, I love it there.
Superb photos. Many thanks!
Regarding the missing AF/MF button:
Since I switched to use BBAF (back button AF) I never need a lens to MF any more!
Try it, you will love it!
Why would Canon not use a quieter AF motor? Even the budget Nikon Z lenses like the 28 f/2.8 and the 40 f/2 have near whisper silent AF motors.
The more digital doctoring of the image the lower the resolution. For the really wide stuff I'll stick with my older and slower Canon EF 11-24 ebay special. Thank you for another excellent unbiased review!
Yes, the geometry on some of those older lenses can be great...
So you are going to get a $2500 L lens instead of either of these cheapo entry-level lenses?
@@the_wiki9408 Read the comment again, I already have the EF 11-24.
would be handy to see up against the EF L 24mm as second hand about same price
Yes, I hadn't thought about it vs a second hand EF model. I may make another comparison.
Cheers mate I think would be def handy for me as I’m deciding about that option at moment
Dammit, Gordon! TH-cam keeps doing this! I've been subscribed to your channel WITH NOTIFICATION ON and I didn't see notification of this video. The bell icon was off, again. I'm now convinced that YT turns it off, for some reason...
That's so frustrating, for me too, as I'm sure I'm missing out on views because of it. Maybe try unsubbing, then resubbing with the bell?
@@cameralabs I had all of my bells turned off on every channel I followed. Still subscribed, but not notified. Not sure why.
@@derbagger22 that's really annoying - thanks for your continued support!
There's a bit of a duplication here as both RF lenses have the same 24 mm advantage, and the optical differences are too insignificant to debate. However, the versatility of the 24-105 mm f/4 outweighs a fixed 24 mm for all-around shooting, except for the bokeh lovers to choose the f/1.8 when the target is somewhat close, though bokeh is very acceptable as the 24-105 mm is zoomed to the max 105 mm. The 24 mm 1.8 is not weather resistant while the 24-105 mm f/4 is. The one real difference will play in your wallet in what you can shell out. Personally, I did have the EF 24-105 f/4 and used an RF adapter on my Canon R3. While the RF 24-105 mm has a tad faster AF response, the image qualities were identical. Personally, I choose the RF 35 mm for street photography-less bulky and lighter to carry.
I'm pretty happy with my 1990s Quantaray (Sigma rebrand) 24mm EF mount autofocus, goes to macro-ish as well distances, very sharp, like $50 on ebay. Seems the same as this but 1/10th the price. Minus IS, but my IBIS is already stabilizing it and... it's 24mm...
I really wish they had gone for a 28mm instead, still wide but less distorted for street photography.
I also question the need for a stabilized 24mm as this increase the bulk and the price of a budget lens. I'd understand if they had included IS on the 50mm, but in a budget 24mm is frankly overkill, especially when it brings the "budget" to 600$/€/£ plus VAT!they are probably meant to "milk" the vlogging community.
Yes, I think the IS on this lens is aimed more at the needs of handheld filming, especially for their bodies without IBIS. I bet there will be a 28 in the future, they're just filling in the gaps and it will take time.
I’ve got the 50 and 85mm versions so I think I’ll get the 35 next and work down. I don’t have any RF zooms yet. The 100mm intrigued me so that’ll probably be my first L lens in the RF next year.
I do hope Canon brings a higher MP camera equivalent to a7r4/a7r5(future)... Than this lens can be used as a 24mm or 38.xmm(at crop 2xMP) for daily walkaround
A comparison with the EF 24 L and sigma 24 would be better.
There are literally hundreds of comparisons I could make, but it all depends on what I have access to when I'm making the review.
I have money burning a hole in my pocket for something L quality in either 24mm 28mm or 35mm otherwise I might just buy a used A7III to use a 24GM a friend of mine willing to offload at a great price.
Thanks for the review Gordon, I was waiting for your review, but I wanted to take this lens on the cruise that I just went on. I bought the lens a about at the beginning of September. I have the 35mm, 24mm , and 24-105mm L, all RF. Now I have to figure out what is next!😅 Thanks!
Are you happy with it?
@@cameralabs Yes, I still have taken as many special shots with it yet, but took some great shots at my niece’s wedding in Temecula, CA wine country!
Comprehensive review as always Gordon. Is that a cabbage tree in your garden, a reminder of your time in NZ?
Hah! Good spot, and no, it's purely coincidental - it was there when we moved in the house!
Hi Gordon. How does this lens stack up with sigma ef 24 f1.4 and ef 24 f1.4 ii L ?
You get what you pay for
Bad camera UI is not corrected by bad lens UI.
RF 20mm f1.2 please
OK, so it can barely beat the most garbage zoom available in RF fullframe! When you compare the optics and build quality with the Sigma 24mm f2 dg dn( same price!), you'll find out why the mount is closed to the 3rd parties! I'm a bit disappointed by this comparison Gordon, Canon RF 24-105 F4 L was a better option which I bet is much sharper than this lens.
Actually I compared the 24-105 f4L against the 24-105 STM in my review of the latter and what you describe as a 'garbage' zoom did very well. Have a look and see what you think. Also the 24-105 f4L is about twice the price of the 24 1.8.
tbh being closed to first party only is the reason why im gonna sell my r6 soon and get a7iv eventually
I think the 24-105 STM f4-7.1 is pretty good and it is not expensive. Love it.
@@DjimmyTrovy Same, I love that lens! Plus it's pretty lightweight, which my back appreciates.
Hi Gordon, I really enjoy the quality of your tests and reviews. I have a question for you. Comparing 500mm on the canon RF 100-500 vs the canon EF 500mm, what is the size diffencence for a bird taken at 500mm with both lenses. Is the 500mm from the zoom really smaller ? Thanks for your help !
Good question. In theory the 100-500 at 500 should deliver the same field of view as a 500 prime, but sometimes there are variances, especially when focused closer. Some zooms in particular exhibit more breathing where the image either shrinks or magnifies at closer focusing. I can't give you the answer though, you'd need to use both side by side at the desired subject distance and compare in person. Maybe try a big shop that has both, or rent both?
@@cameralabs Thanks Gordon
@@cameralabs Hi Gordon, I found a very intersting video on that topic that was really surprising. I would like to have your opinion on it. The title is : I was wrong, primes and zooms have different reach at the same focal lenght. Please let me know your opinion. Have a great day!
@@steveparent8788 yep, i mentioned this in my last reply! It's not uncommon. None of these lenses have exactly XX mm of focal length, they all vary a bit, and can vary a LOT as you adjust the focusing.
@@cameralabs Good!
So where is the comparison to 24-105 stm?
Have you watched the video? I compare it to the 24-105 throughout in my tests!
Will you be reviewing the 15-30, too?
I hope so
Gordon - will you review the OM-5 soon?
There's very little that's changed on it versus the EM5 III - basically a newer image processor which gives it some enhanced shooting modes and slightly improved IBIS, plus slightly improved sealing. I'm not sure it justifies the time I'd have to spend on making a review as it's roughly a week's work. If enough people ask though I'll look into it, as I do like their cameras and lenses.
@@cameralabs Would you recommend it for casual filming? I was thinking about E-M5 III in the past however I was not happy it didn't have AutoISO in manual film mode. OM-5 has this function, and also they added OM-LOG400. I know the camera still has its quirks but I think other options (Canon, Nikon, Sony) are not better, either. Thanks!
@@andyandy2731 good point, both features I missed on the Em5 III and well worth having. If the price is right for you, I'd go for it.
Thanks for review, that lens is something that is going to sell well among Herping groups.
Herping?
@@cameralabs guys taking pics of reptiles or amphibians 🦎🐊
@@villagranvicent oh!
Gordon, what about 24mm 1.8 vs 24-105 L f4 ? Wich one would You pick?
I'm actually not a fan of the 24-105 f4L
@@cameralabs and 70-200 f4L? (I know diffrent focal lenght hehe but im just curious what would You keep for yourself or not)
@@mike.k I do prefer the f4 lenses to the 2.8s for lightness
@@cameralabs thats true, even if i could afford lets say 100-500 i guess it would live too much time just on my shelf at home due to being bulky and heavy enough that is inconvinient for me to take it out every time hehe 😉
Not at that price. It’s 2/3 the price of the L series 24-105 which I think I’d rather have on my camera. Cool review as always, I’m enjoying the 16 & 50 RF ‘no brainers’ not least due to your recommendation.
I like the idea to share the cases (50=16, and now 35=24), but it should comes with a better price I think... The RF prices are quite high, and they even start to raise more... All that also because no 3rd-Party-Lenses... not a good decision in the long, but understandable for economic reasons...
Looking at this lens to use with my R7 for street photography do you think this would be suitable please ?
Sure, why not? I was actually shooting the R7 and RF 24 all day yesterday and liked it.
overpriced! when this lens was announced I had pre-ordered R7 and after I saw what "affordable" lens Canon offered, I canceled my pre-ordered R7. For the same price I can have Sigma or Tamron 2.8 zoom for Sony.
It's certainly not cheap.
I bought both.
Which both? The 24 and the 24-105?
@@cameralabs yes. I use 24105 for day light and 241.8 for low night, with R5.
I love Fever Tree...
But what do i film if I drink it!
@@cameralabs a bottle of Budweiser. Great looking packaging, disgusting taste...
@@derbagger22 hah!
2:30 what about the 100mm 2.8 Macro? 🤔
Here you go th-cam.com/video/m0cQWnOPIMI/w-d-xo.html
@@cameralabs ? I mean that there’s 1 more L lens than the ones you mentioned, I really enjoy your videos but replying a comment just to promote a video mmmm 🤔
@@RodrigoAReyes95 sorry I misunderstood. My quote was about counting lenses UNDER 100mm, so I meant up to 99mm. I agree it could be understood either way though, so sorry about that.
£719 ??
Neat lens. I would have almost certainly bought it for astro and video, but I sold my EOS camera due to Canon's idiotic policy against 3rd party lens manufacturers. I'd rather give my business to Nikon. They're a better value IMO at this point.
There's no doubt Canon would have greater appeal with a more open approach to third parties.
Short sighted. Nikon Z mount lacks so much more than just a few Tamron Viltrox lenses. They are not even in the same league with Sony and Canon. Other than Z9, no z body in Nikon range is compelling in its own segment.
@@frankluo230 Your opinion is erroneous) but still well done for writing.
@@dmitry.sh.8946 These are more facts than opinion. Anybody this day still thinks Nikon is a group of "top three", is not sensible. The game is top 2 and a bunch of fringe players.
@@frankluo230 Nikon did not come out of there)
Hi Gordon i just got this lens for canon r5
And the distortion correction in camera is greyed out, is that normal?
Yes it means you can't turn it off - it's always applied for that camera.
All right i was worried is off and cant turn it on
Thank you for quick reply
@@BashaCeramics you may also want to update the firmware on the R5 if it's not the latest.
Good One Sir..I like it 🙂
Muchas gracias
De nada!
@@cameralabs Gordon ,
Excuse me, did you get to try OM 1 and show the tests?
@@Manueldeva no, they never sent me one to test.
@@cameralabs
Gordon, can I ask privately?
@@Manueldeva if it's about the OM1, everything I know about it is in my preview video.
can we use extension tube with it? i have 13mm tube
Do you have an RF tube? I don't know how well it would work.
@@cameralabs yes its RF Meike
It is the worst prime lense I've ever seen. The giant barrel distortion and 4 Ev vignetting rivals even cheap kit zoom lenses. Viltrox 24 f1.8 for 400$ has much better quality.
Nice review though.
Viltrox 24mm has worse flare and CA....
Nice!
Thanks for the review Gordon!
As usual Canon turns turns on cheap mode by not giving you a lens hood!
I would have loved to see Tamron or Sigma lenses on the RF mount, so sad that Canon decided to enable stupid mode and risk loosing buyers when it comes to their RF cameras and lenses!
This is Canon taking their customers, loyalists and apologisers for a ride. Canon customers are prime targets for Confidence scams.
Resonate
Lol😂
What's funny?
👁👁