Talk up (or down) the RF 24–240mm F4-6.3

atolk wrote:

This lens came up in the thread when I was asking whether the move to R6 from 6D was a good idea (it was) and whether I can get by with my EF lenses or need to start moving over to RF.

Speed notwithstanding, this seems like a good street and travel lens. Street -- maybe iffy because of size if you are conscious of what you appear like with your camera; I love strolling with my tiny Sony a6500 in a leather case with the logo blacked out and with a toy 35mm lens, I look so innocent and old school.

For street the RF 35mm f/1.8 IS stm and 50mm stm are perfect. Use fast shutter speeds & stop down and let the the very good high ISO noise performance of the R6 do it's job.

At $899 (and no L designation), it seems one the cheapest way to build up one's RF lineup.

You own the 70-200mm f/2.8 mkII. That lens will be sharper, especially from 150-200mm.

Do you get what you pay for or do you get more? Sample images greatly appreciated, especially street and travel.

When you want great IQ between 24-35mm in your standard zoom you might look elsewhere. If you're expecting performance at EF 70-200mm f/2.8 mkII like levels you might be disappointed.  The 24-105mm stm is less heavy, and for a standard zoom that might matter, as those lenses tend to be 80% of the time on your camera, also with longer walks etc.

Other than that I think you can't go wrong with this lens.

(God, when did $899 for a lens become cheap?)