RF24-105/4 performance

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Peak freak Contributing Member • Posts: 931
Re: RF24-105/4 performance

tkbslc wrote:

Peak freak wrote:

Cotswolds wrote:

Not having a go at the OP but is this a case of getting hooked on pixel peeping and looking for issues rather than looking at the image ?

I understand if it's holding you back in making sales or the quality is so bad you don't want to print and hang on the wall but isn't it a case of trying to achieve "perfection" of an image rather than perfecting an image.

Just my view and others may well disagree

Thanks, you raise fair points.

I think the thing that is bugging me is that I didn't go looking for the problem, it just became apparent when processing my images. Some weren't as sharp as others, and they were all around the 35mmF/L.

The images I post are just snapshots. My 'critical' images are of misty forest reflections in early morning light - detailed with good, but not too much, contrast. Shot from a kayak with techniques I have been perfecting for years (kayaks are not stable platforms!) I even bought my EOS R and this lens with the expectation that It was the best available for the work I do. That may still be the case, but the IQ drop-off at 35mm is not really good enough for the work that I am doing. It is unique, limited edition. I needs to be good. [Primes might be the answer but have other limitations under the circumstances].

I don't expect a 4x zoom to be perfect, but it is pretty big and heavy for what it is. I think it has the potential to do the job, maybe just not my copy.

I think it should be close to perfect. It’s not cheap and has L branding. It’s the latest version of the lens.

it’s funny, everyone says they wouldn’t shoot the STM version because it is not good enough. Then someone gets soft pictures with an L lens and they are saying stick with it because softness doesn’t matter. Seems like a weird bias there.

besed on my experience with the lens, it is not normal and I’d prob send it into canon to check alignment. Shouldn’t have an L lens you are afraid to use for pictures that matter.

Thanks for your feedback. I have mixed feelings. The lens produces perfectly acceptable results outside of this problem area of 35mm. I might just have to be careful how I use it. My EF 16-35/4 is still my goto for 'critical' work. At 35mm it blitzes the RF 24-105.

As I indicated I didn't go looking for this problem so have had to dig up random, unplanned comparisons. Here is one from my 16-35, and one from my 24-105. I think LHS of the 24-105 is crap compared to the 16-35. [The 16-35 was also saved at lower quality]

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