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

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
MikeJ9116 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,786
Re: Canon RF 24-105/F4 versus RF 24-240/F4-6.3?

ProDude wrote:

Swerky wrote:

But also when hiking, an L lens will be more resistant to dust and the different natural elements. A non L lens will require more care. Specially a superzoom like the 24-240.

Here's where it get's dicey. If you are going to subject the 24-240 to moisture and salt by a ocean, banging around hiking, extreme heat like Arizona in the summer and such, then I'd have to say that is where the L's come into their own with resistance to those conditions and better longevity. But if you are cautious the 24-240 should survive as long as you are on this planet.

One advantage of the 24-240mm is no, or minimal, lens changes. Less chance of dust getting into lenses and camera bodies. I would say that for 99% of photographers the 24-240mm is durable enough. Few of us here are trudging through jungles, rock climbing, enduring desert storms etc. Also, there are options to add weather sealing to lens mounts to give a little more weather sealing to lenses without mount seals. This won't completely protect the lens but it should protect the camera body.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow