Canon Lens
Dec 7, 2021 07:30:19 #
David Martin wrote:
I have also found the 24-240 to be a very good, versatile walk-around lens.
David:
I suppose you are talking about this lens: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1490987-REG/canon_ca24240rf_rf_24_240mm_f_4_6_3_is.html
Smile,
JimmyT Sends
Dec 7, 2021 07:39:46 #
DRM
Loc: NC
bobbydvideo wrote:
What do you think about this lens as an all around lens?
To me, this is too wide on the long end to qualify as an "all purpose" lens. I lean toward the 24-105 f/4 for that category (I had both EF editions, now have the RF version). I would consider the 14-35 f/4 or the 15-35 f/2.8 (which I have) as a second lens acquisition for the R system (or perhaps third, behind a 70-200). Possibly relevant to my reply: I am primarily a landscape shooter.
Dec 7, 2021 07:57:28 #
bobbydvideo wrote:
What do you think about this lens as an all around lens?
I have the RF 15-35 f/2.8 L, a very comparable lens in many ways to the f/4. While it is an outstanding lens, which the f/4 seems to be also, I find it rather short for an all-around lens. My RF 24-105 f/4 L gets far more use. Still, as others have stated, it depends largely on your shooting habits.
Dec 7, 2021 08:09:42 #
LFingar wrote:
I have the RF 15-35 f/2.8 L, a very comparable lens in many ways to the f/4. While it is an outstanding lens, which the f/4 seems to be also, I find it rather short for an all-around lens. My RF 24-105 f/4 L gets far more use. Still, as others have stated, it depends largely on your shooting habits.
Dec 7, 2021 08:22:03 #
bobbydvideo wrote:
What do you think about this lens as an all around lens?
Please define "all around" and what are you currently using for that purpose?
The 14mm length is pretty specialized and does require discipline and restraint to use it correctly. The 35mm end might be a little too wide to qualify as an all-around lens - I would think the RF 24-70 might be a better choice.
Dec 7, 2021 09:03:31 #
David Martin
Loc: Cary, NC
Jimmy T wrote:
David:
I suppose you are talking about this lens: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1490987-REG/canon_ca24240rf_rf_24_240mm_f_4_6_3_is.html
Smile,
JimmyT Sends
I suppose you are talking about this lens: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1490987-REG/canon_ca24240rf_rf_24_240mm_f_4_6_3_is.html
Smile,
JimmyT Sends
Yes, that's it!
Dec 7, 2021 09:58:32 #
scubadoc
Loc: Sarasota, FL
I have found the 2.8, 24-70 to be a great walk-around lens. You can also attach a 1.4 T/C to it for extra reach. I am using it on my R5 with the RF adaptor. I also have the 16-35, but it is too wide-angle for my tastes as a walk-around lens.
Dec 7, 2021 10:53:37 #
mikegreenwald
Loc: Illinois
PHRubin wrote:
It depends on your needs. I would find it a little wide for general use.
Agreed. I chose and use the RF 24-105 F4L, and believe not to be a better general purpose lens.
Dec 7, 2021 11:02:01 #
I have this lens and use it to shoot landscapes in the “portrait” orientation. It is great for getting dynamic foregrounds with the full background.
However, it is not so good for overall use. For example, if you want to get a close up of a feature on a neighboring mountain ridge, it is too wide to bring the subject in close. So I use it as a secondary one, along with my mid-range zoom lens.
I don’t photograph birds or wildlife, so I carry a telephoto zoom, but it is used only for certain things.
Bottom line is that your choice depends on what you intend to be doing.
Hope this helps.
JimR
However, it is not so good for overall use. For example, if you want to get a close up of a feature on a neighboring mountain ridge, it is too wide to bring the subject in close. So I use it as a secondary one, along with my mid-range zoom lens.
I don’t photograph birds or wildlife, so I carry a telephoto zoom, but it is used only for certain things.
Bottom line is that your choice depends on what you intend to be doing.
Hope this helps.
JimR
Dec 7, 2021 12:08:30 #
I have the 24-105 RF lens but would really like that 14-35 mm too for those times you want really wide.
Dec 7, 2021 12:20:47 #
My 'solution' for the EF 16-35 f/4 as a walkaround is the EF 50 f/1.8 in a pocket for that added length, if needed. The RF model would fill the same small and relatively cheap need.
Dec 7, 2021 13:28:54 #
Dec 7, 2021 13:51:16 #
David Martin wrote:
Yes, that's it!
I have the same lens, Canon RF 24-105 F4 L IS, which I use on my Canon RP body and I love it.
Regarding the F4, I find that the necessity of using a higher ISO is not a concern.
If high ISO noise does rear its ugly head I have Topaz DeNoise AI to take care of that.
Besides, a lot of my photography is taken between F4 & F8.
This is the camera/lens combo (Canon RP W/24-105 F4 L IS) I grab for everyday shooting.
Every time I use it, it makes me . . .
Smile,
JimmyT Sends
Dec 7, 2021 14:02:54 #
Dec 7, 2021 14:25:48 #
bobbydvideo wrote:
What do you think about this lens as an all around lens?
I have the EF equivalent (16-35, f4) and it's an excellent lens. But to me, $1699 seems to be very steep for an f4 lens.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.