JuzaPhoto uses technical cookies and third-part cookies to provide the service and to make possible login, choice of background color and other settings (click here for more info).

By continuing to browse the site you confirm that you have read your options regarding cookies and that you have read and accepted the Terms of service and Privacy.

OK, I confirm

You can change in every moment your cookies preferences from the page Cookie Preferences, that can be reached from every page of the website with the link that you find at the bottom of the page; you can also set your preferences directly here

Accept Cookies

Customize

Refuse Cookies

Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM : Specifications and Opinions

Reviews

The opinions of JuzaPhoto members who use this lens.. (Click here to come back to the main page of the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM)

What do you think about this lens?

Do you want add your opinion? You do it by joining JuzaPhoto, it is easy and free!

There is more: by registering you can create your personal page, publish photos, receive comments, join discussions and you can use all the features of JuzaPhoto. With more than 247000 members, there is space for everyone, from the beginner to the professional.

The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.

Karl8

sent on August 08, 2022

Pros: Small and lightweight, but with excellent optical quality already from the maximum aperture, in a good compact construction, which also includes an aspherical lens. Up to 50 mm, bright enough for almost any use. Beyond it is still fine in most situations. 0.34 m to 105 mm, allow you to make excellent close-ups. Great lens to take pictures (less to do tests ...) and to have a really compact and inconspicuous FF, without compromising on quality.

Cons: For the use for which it is intended, I would say none. I read that others complain about sharpness, but I have absolutely not found this defect. Perhaps, as the previous speaker pointed out, there will be less performing copies in circulation, since the construction is certainly not from the L series.

Opinion: In order not to repeat what has already been written in the pros / cons, I only add a consideration on the maximum aperture at 105 mm. On paper f/7.1 it really looks like crap, but then on the field you realize that: 1) it is only 2/3 stop less bright than its poor brother EF; 2) For landscape photos it is not necessary to have a greater aperture, on the contrary; 3) For portraits, the difference in blurred compared to an f / 4 of the rich brother, is seen only in some situations and is not dramatic (if I want a beautiful blurred f / 4 is not enough anyway). If you want to make a significant leap in brightness (and therefore not to a modest f/ 4), just combine it with a small canvas (eg EF 100 f / 2, but also RF 85 1.8). In short, a modern lens, which does not chase the latest exotic fashions and that cares about the hard. N.B. I have had this lens for about a year and it remains my favorite choice for light travel with my EOS-R, as well as for mountain excursions, motorcycles or bicycles. The only alternative when I need even more lightness and agility, is the 50 F 1.8.

Peppe Cancellieri

sent on March 21, 2022

Pros: Very comfortable, lightweight and compact, sharp enough to be a 24-105

Cons: none, to be a cheap 24-105

Opinion: I would like to say immediately to those who wrote the review before this one that, indeed, could have a copy that came out badly. This very small zoom is really surprising and can disappoint only those who expected performance from RF 24-70/2.8 which costs 6 times as much, I paid this copy 300 euros and, in my opinion, it is worth more than I paid for it. The sharpness is good already at TA (since TA means at least 4 up to 7.1), the colors are good and the optical quality in general also. But what makes this lens fabulous is the extreme comfort in terms of weight and size, you can take it anytime and anywhere, together with the RF16 and RF50 stm constitutes an excellent travel kit that will not massacre your back. The vote is 10 relative to the segment of interest where it is to be placed. With these non-L RFs Canon tries to repeat the excellent performance of many non-L EFs and I believe it will succeed. L-series RF optics are truly unattainable for many.

Roberto Nalini

sent on March 17, 2022

Pros: only lightness

Cons: all inclusive price for what it does.

Opinion: Taken in kit on the second body R6. Possessing that L series inevitable was to make the comparison. I understand the difference in price, but from Canon I did not expect it to make a bad lens like that. I'm not talking about the brightness that you know at the beginning that at that price it can not be otherwise, but the sharpness especially at 24 and then at the edges is really bad, indeed the edges are a disaster. I took it as mentioned in the kit that the difference in price is quite a lot and finds the only justification of the purchase thinking only of keeping it as a forklift in the bag of a professional who in the event of breakage of the L series can save him a service. But nothing more! I do not understand why in the previous comments they put on the pros the sharpness, or they have only that and having no comparisons to them it seems good or mine is defective .....

Simone Simonetti

sent on October 25, 2021

Pros: Cost, sharpness, lightness, macro quality, stabilizer

Cons: Lack of af mf switch

Opinion: I waited 1 year x review this lens, taken at 250 euros new, I was immediately impressed by the stabilizer, its 4 stops are all heard, the images it returns are sharp and contrasted, slightly tending to cold, the vignetting at 24mm to many from annoyance, just put the correction in the room and the problem is solved, the brightness is a compromise x have a light, stabilized and compact lens x ff. The real gem that perhaps many do not care about is its macro quality, 1:2 x an inexpensive zoom, which allows you to get closer to the subject up to a few cm is a lot of stuff, also having the 35 rf macro, this 24 105 is superior, you can focus in manual using the programmable ring, along with the focus peaking of the rp you focus easily with very close distances. Going around paired with the RP is unrivaled. Fully satisfied. I have several photos in the gallery, even macro ;-)

Ferronsnicola

sent on October 19, 2021

Pros: compactness, lightness, af, sharpness, construction

Cons: vignetting, distortion, tele side diaphragm

Opinion: let's start from the defects: the brightness is known a priori, and in any case the difference is not transcendental compared to the classic 5.6, 2/3 stop ... if for the use you intend to make of them are so essential it is clearly not the right optics, but in that case I would say that an f4 is better, where the difference is 1.67 stops. As far as I am concerned, the use I make of it is a battle, I have no pretensions and for now it has never been a problem; vignetting and distortion are there, slightly more marked than in the L series, compromise still acceptable (and easily coregible), especially if you are looking for the pros: record size and weight! The images you get are sharp, contrasted at the right point, I did not find optical defects such as flare, reflections etc. I was just looking for a compact and light all-rounder to take me on excursions, trips or quiet use, before this I used the EF 3.5-5.6, quite more voluminous and a little heavier. Combined with R6 and 5D respectively, the difference in size and weight becomes remarkable... and the quality of the shots? I would say very similar, in some things the EF is better (detachment of the planes, or in any case brightness), in others the RF is better (contrast, af, stabilization ...). The sharpness I would say is comparable, I have not had the opportunity to make "scientific" comparisons since it makes very little sense on such a perspective! The construction, even if it is cheap, is of quality: there are no games in the as in the EF, the rings are very precise and the problem of zoom creep is not even remotely present, a frequent problem in this type of zoom that is often remedied through a lock button, not always comfortable

Mattia Sali

sent on October 19, 2021

Pros: Lightness, overall image quality, effective stabilization.

Cons: Vignetting at the minimum focal length.

Opinion: Traveling with this lens in combination with the Eos RP is a real pleasure as the whole is light, compact and versatile. The images are really good quality, engraving and not at all inferior to those obtained with the EF 24-105 F/4 L that I used previously. As usual, the hood is optional: I bought a third-party one paying it "well" 17 euros. The stabilization is absolutely effective: I managed to take photographs (of static objects) at 1/8 of a second at maximum focal length: not bad really. At 24 mm the vignetting is really noticeable but the electronic correction offered by the Canon DPP software is effective to solve the problem. The product, as far as I am concerned, is globally very valid and the construction has nothing to do with the plastic lenses ef type 18-55 0 18-135.

Zeval

sent on July 29, 2021

Pros: Cheap Lightweight Sharp Af Fast Boken

Cons: At night not usable - raw with vignetting lack of the AF MF button . RF optical footprint. Optional hood .

Opinion: I took this lens to have in the Canon kit at least one RF lens, it is the only one at an economical price. I have tried this lens on 2 occasions and yes the sharpness there is to carry around is light . Shooting in jpg and raw the latter at 24-28mm presents a strong vignetting . To make Macro photos better use it with an extension tube and the results are really very good . I also like the blurry Boken he does in the portraits. Overall a good handyman.......... Maa..... second exit at night and unfortunately in the dark can not focus even in manual .... UNUSABLE . Tip : at the same price better take a Canon 24-105mm L first series or a Sigma 24-70 f2.8 the latter is also more stocky and with R6 more balanced ... ve well any handyman zoom but brighter. Beyond the price of rf lenses "a bit overpriced" they are also too bulky.... They should be more stocky....see size 50mm f1.2L with current 50mm RF .

Rossellina81

sent on March 04, 2021

Pros: Lightweight and versatile

Cons: 24mm vignetting

Opinion: I recently bought this lens after confronting myself here in the forum. Of course, there are differing views, particularly on diaphragm values. I convinced myself for the cost (bought second hand at 230€) and also because very sharp. Tried both to make portraits, for landscape and so for play and I have to say that it is really a great goal, considering the cost. Fast, light, quiet, easy to handle and the customizable ring is great. I'm very glad I convinced myself to buy it. I have learned to manage the iso dela Rp and with this lens I can manage the high iris values. No problem. I recommend it for the low budget and photo quality.

Giuly.mos

sent on December 26, 2020

Pros: I'm going to do it, compact, precise

Cons: Sometimes remarkable distortion, vignetting on 24mm

Opinion: I've been using it for months now. Because I'm a beginner, I'm still a little disappointed. I would almost call it an entry-level optics. Of course the older brother of the House Canon, L series, costs almost three times as much, and there will surely be a reason. As an advantage, however, it is practically 200 gr less than the other, which for those who have arms, like me is a nice advantage. Vignetting on 24 mm is annoying and distortion often needs to be corrected in Lightroom. Of course it's very comfortable, you have a lot of focal points without constantly changing your goal. But the difference in brightness from a fixed focal point is huge. There are so many pictures of me on the board below. What to say, I'm going to save a little bit to take the same zoom as the top series.

Reviews » Lenses » Lenses Canon » Canon RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 IS STM » All Opinions