Canon RF 24-105/F4 versus RF 24-240/F4-6.3?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Karl_Guttag Regular Member • Posts: 360
Re: RF Lenses Seem to be Designed Requiring Digital Correction

ProDude wrote:

I was so intrigued with the 24-240 I just had to try one. I have a RF24-70 f2.8L IS USM for serious stuff where I don't need the reach the other provides. I have a RF100-500 on the way but longed for the concept of a lighter walk around lens that would take care of moderate tele. So I went down to the river to try out some ducks and geese and such with it. Also some landscapes.

What I found was the central 1/3rd of the frame is about as sharp as anything from 24mm to at least 150mm. At 240mm it's a tad less sharp but is decent when sharpened up in post. I'm talking however at 100% on screen. If you take it down to 75% or 50% on screen it's dang sharp all over the place due of course to interpellation and if one were to print a shot well up to at least 13x19 it would be near flawless. So you have to determine first what your plans of it's use are. If you're going to crop way outside the center forget about it. If you're planning on 22x17 prints, stick to the center. Otherwise it's a fine performer. Focus is rather instant and the build is fine. I find myself shooting a lot more Jpeg as the Jpegs out of camera on the R5 are so darned sweet to begin with. My new DXO 4 does a fine job of the needed instant profile corrections from RAW so likewise it's NO big deal.

Sounds to me like an accurate assessment of the 24-240 and agrees with my findings. I'm moving back to full-frame having shot APS-C since 2000 (Canon D30, using film before that). The 24-240 is very sharp in the center and loses resolution in the corners at either end of the zoom range. One thing a little different is that you can't get the resolution back by stopping down at the wide end because the resolution loss is caused by scaling.

I'm curious if you have compared DXO software versus Canon's DPP4 for correction? I have compared Photoshop RAW and DPP4 and DPP4 is obviously much better both in terms of distortion and particularly chroma aberration correction.

I find DPP4 does an amazing job with chroma aberrations. It seems to totally eliminated them without hurting colors/saturation. DPP4 is much slower than Photoshop but does a much better job. I'm curious if DXO is worth gettting.

 Karl_Guttag's gear list:Karl_Guttag's gear list
Canon EOS 70D Canon EOS RP Olympus E-M5 III Canon EF 50mm F1.8 II Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM +15 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow