Which 24-105mm lens? Finding the best zoom for Canon EOS R

@gordon Could you further describe "low light"? Is everything indoors low light? Is it a normal family meal or a dimmed romantic dinner? Or even a cozy tv evening?

Oh and the f/4 costs €1474 which is still more than the 24-105 f/4.0-7.1 + 50 f/1.8 + 85 f/2.0 combined (€1387) !!

You should have used the mrk ii version of the ef L lens.

don't have a full frame camera i have a crop sensor camera the canon 80d i guess when the prices goes down I'll buy me a full frame camera but for right now i only have the 80d and i want a good lens that can do everything with. I want a few pointers. I want to know how good this lens is and would it fits my canon 80d

none of them! Buy a Tamron EF 24-70 with stabilization at constant 2.8, preferably used as i did for 700 euros, at a Meike VND EF to RF adapter for 180 euros, mount it to your EOS R and go shoot in any condition, rain, snow (the camera, the vnd and the lens are now weathersealed) or go out in the sun use your now integrated ND filter with no xpatern due to ND being used behind the lens... that feature alone made me SELL my 35mm and 85mm prime RF lenses (non L obviously). yeah, go do exacty that... you re welcome

Лучший зум тот, что у тебя с собой

I’m hooked on a Contax Zeiss 24-85, converted to full EOS.

You forgot to talk about the macro capabilities of the kit zoom which is superior to the L version. I bought it just for that reason, I took many small jewelry product shots, so it is perfect for that.

Would you say the EF is totally unusable on an R-serien mount?.. Personally, i can afford a used EF version, but the RF version is quite out of my reach.

A thought; if you have been a long term Canon shooter, then, the EF L lens with a RF adapter could be the best choice provided the lens is already in your bag. I own a lot of EF L lens and they work extremely well on my R6 body. Selling the EF glass to purchase the newer RF seems wasteful unless money doesn't matter. I have an excellent Sony stereo condenser mic which I clip to my belt if I have a noisy focusing lens. It prevents the pickup of the noise and is easy to use. The cost of the adapter, once allocated over all your legacy glass is minimal and the extra length minor compared to the upgrade costs. Thanks for your review.

I just bought the EF version of the f/4L (but the mark II) for use with my M50. I am impressed.

You get build quality and weather sealing when you buy an L, and a heavier lens because of the extra glass required to get a larger maximum aperture. Weather sealing also means dust proofing - zooming an L lens doesn’t pull dust into it. You don’t necessarily buy an L lens to get better optical quality. Bounce the L and the STM on the ground a few times, roll them in the mud, then do your tests again. See which one still produces good photos.

You can get the EF 24-105 that's in a good condition for the same price you can an RF non L that's practically brand new on MPB. EF L wins for me hand down!

I chose the Sigma 24-105 f/4 Art when I compared it with the Canon EF 24-105 f/4 for my Canon 5D Mk3 a few years ago - worth a look although it's built (and weighs) like a tank.

very helpful review-thanks!

Canon EF 24-105 STM Is the best.

How about auto focus Is EF L series better than Kit RF ?

I got the kit lens, but I splurged on the RF 14-35 f4 and its a dream.

I got the non L 24 105 and I am quite happy with the decision after Gordon's video. I also use the 70 200 for long end so I don't mind having a darker aperture

Quick Timmy review: the affordable RF lens has an absolutely horrendous maximum aperture at most of its focal range, whereas the f4 RF lens is expensive. Get the EF lens used. 😜

I think the weather sealing is the answer ... especially as an architecture and landscape shooter. That's the ONLY one that matters that one has over the other. The other AF mode vs. not with switch is just a creature comfort. I go with the variable 24-105, vs. fixed f4. IQ is always the key .. IQ = IQ .. then next is weather sealing.

Always stop the lens down to 5.6 or “more” for comparisons like the brick

You can grab the EF 24-105 F4L used at same prices as a new RF 24-105 kit. I suggest the EF F4L all the way, it is simply better, and at the used price very good value. On top of that, the RF kit lens is one of the hardest lens to resell on the used market. No one is buying it, even at $100. I never recommend anyone to buy any gear that's hard to resell.

While every one is entitled to their own opinion, I have to dissagre that the EF version is a bad investment. The EF version has already deprciated and if you buy a mint S/H one it will serve you many more years to come and it will always be worth what you paid for it. The RF L version is massively overpriced and it's only going to drop in value S/H. The Value is with the EF version in my opinion.
I also think that the ability to use a Drop in CPL filter with a EF to RF adapter is astonishingly useful and something that the RF version can't offer.

hey rf24-105/4 is too expensive for me - so i should choise 24-105 is stm or ef24-105? i made photo inside and outside

Here's a bit different perspective: The "kit" lens is much lighter and cheaper - that is correct. BUT, eventually, you'll encounter less than optimal light conditions but would still like to take the shot with your "pro camera" rather than resorting to your iPhone. To match the shot you'd be able to take with the F/4 L, you'll need a flash. I'd rather get the heftier lens and be able to take a beautiful shot, than going cheap and being unable to do so. Or have to bother with lugging a flash around.
I am still on APS-C DSLR but moving from a F/3.5-4.5 zoom lens, to a fixed aperture 1.8 lens (although a bit bulkier, heavier and with less range) completely changed my experience. I'm now able to take shots that I could never take before and even at F/1.8 I'm often forced to go to 3000-4000 ISO which is more than I'd normally want to shoot at with the 7d2.

The F4 is a lovely walkabout lens, it covers all the bases and is rarely off my camera.

So the 24-105 f4L is a magic lens. well worth the money. I used it on my Canon R initially. I then sold the R and bought the R8. The R8 with this lens is magic.

I'm too lazy to look at prices, but I'm thinking if you buy the "kit lens", you'd have enough money left over, to, IN ADDITION to the kit lens, buy TWO fast primes - the 16/2.8 for very comfortable vlogging, and, the 85/2 for gorgeous portraits, and, STILL have about $150 (U.S.) left over. And, that's IF you paid retail for the 24-105 kit, which you shouldn't, as there are many used/refurbished options.

RF24-105mm f2.8L is usm Z is the best Zoom For eos r。

Guess it depends what kind of casual shooter you are. How picky you are......are they both "made in Japan"?

...Are all Canon lenses Made In Japan?

The RF L for $1795ca + tax
or
Used EF L for $450ca + $100 adapter
🤔

Very informative, clearly explained, good work guys.

I've had the EF Version and thr RF Kit-Version, but ended up with the SIGMA 24-105mm F4 DG OS HSM Art and never look back. The new RF-Version is too expensive in comparison and not enough advantages for the price and I don't support Canon's politics against third party glasses for the RF mount....

Pretty good review, sir. Pretty good. Liked and subbed.

Which one should I get for the canon M50 Mark ii??

I will still be here watching your videos, watching videos that you want to make 😊
Yes seeing a van project come together sounds interesting and fun.
See you for your next video 👍🙂

I bought the 24-105 RF F4 yesterday. Am hoping that I get great results with it. Was able to snap a bargain and get it $400 off In Australia. $1699. Enjoyed watching your video on it.

How about the EF 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 STM?🤔

2.8 too please

Can't wait for the newest video of this comparison

Great video, useful information!

I, too, still have the EF version - it's been my "walkaround" lens for more than 15 years. I was an early adopter for the EOS-R - my trusty old EOS1 DS-ii died, and I had to replace it. Getting a couple of RF lenses with it stretched my budget, so, I looked at the tests and reviews, and kept my EF. The kit lens didn't exist at that time.

So long as I don't mind the size and weight, there's still no reason to change out my EF. It still gets used at least once a week. :D

Now do it again with the 2.8 version

Dont buy them. Not worth it. Unless for documentary video where you have to walk around and film...
Other than that, but literaly ANY prime lens, and its gonna be better than these...

u don't recommend me buying the EF lens for my R10? it gives almost the same results as the RFs ...? even with the adopter it would normally still be perfect for what i need it (photography in pitboxes , pitlane ,... ?) plus doesn't cost me an arm and a leg

2 years and nobody picked up the Withnail & I reference ... you need a better class of subscribers 😆

I'd go for the Sigma 24-105 mm f4 OS ART

hi i have a canon eos 5d mark III camera and i have the ef 24-105mm zoom lens but when i use it to make videos it doesn't stay focused on the subject as i move the camera around forward back etc..is there something im doing wrong anything in the camera menu i need to adjust?

One question - lens for 4 days trip to London, heavy EF24-105L I or STM RF ;) 4-7,1 for my R8

And now they have another one of these 😂😂