RF24-105/4 performance

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
OP Peak freak Contributing Member • Posts: 931
Re: Maybe it's your copy

gimp_dad wrote:

Peak freak wrote:

gimp_dad wrote:

I think the RF24-105/4LIS is a great travel lens with just the right compromises for its use. Your examples made me take a look through some of my shots with the lens in the FL range you are seeing problems. I couldn't find any shots in 31-38 mm range where I noted blobs of softness like your first example.

Here's just one example from my Europe trip a little over 2 years ago. This was sometime after the incident where I fell off an electric scooter and landed directly on the lens body which was over my shoulder. The lens was pointing down and took the brunt of the fall. It got a big gouge on it but still worked great after re-seating it to the body.

So, 1) I do think you can expect more from your copy, 2) I disagree with those who think the newer L lenses are less robust than the old ones. That is not my experience.

I also have the RF28-70/2L which is fantastic but is not something I would casually carry on a trip like the one where I took this. You can clearly tell that this shot was not a pro shot (look at all the people in the way!). But you can also readily see that it is plenty sharp (focus on the building). I just chose this shot because it is relatively easy to see the sharpness across much of the frame.

I hope this helps. Good luck in your search!

Thank you very much for posting this. This is the type of performance I was hoping for - it is very good, and similar to review examples I canvased before buying the lens.

I have been over a lot of my examples now, they are not even close, exhibiting consistent softness and in some cases ghosting on the left hand side (My lens doesn't really come good until over 50mm, when it is surprisingly good)

Based on past experience I doubt Canon (New Zealand) would care at the differences, but I might try shooting 35mm wide open and see if it really falls apart.

I'm going to guess this was OOC or Canon DPP because it is so good.

This was processed through LR. Color fidelity V2 Landscape defaults. Highlights reduced. Standard lens correction and default sharpening (which I believe is +40 in LR with the R).

Here is a (deliberately messed up) example of the sort of problems I am getting. Focused on the left hand forest and recomposed - about 200m so infinity focus at 37mm. Processed in Canon DPP with DLO and sharpening for best case result (Adobe RGB so colors might be off). To be honest I find it pretty disappointing (the center quality is good) and don't really understand how some people seem OK with this type of result.

Thanks again.

It's a lot easier to debug the equipment part of this issue with more constrained depth of field (maybe harder to find in such a naturally beautiful country like yours :-)).

Thanks again for your responses. Clearly this lens is capable of delivering very good results. Your example is better than I would demand from such a lens.

I might have a chat to Canon. Part of the reason I don't buy grey market is to retain local warranties so will see how receptive they are.

On a different note, I have been impressed with Adobes sharpening algorithms. I'm not seeing the advantage I thought I would using DPP and DLO, which is good because it is painful to use!

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