Is the RF 24-50mm a serious threat for crop RF camera's?

drsnoopy wrote:

RobertoHUN wrote:

Judging by the dpreview samples, the RF 24-50 is absolutely worthless, I'd rather buy a cheaper body and some better lenses. What's the point of using a fullframe body with a cr@p lens?

Not everyone needs - or can afford - a large aperture or L-level construction. The low cost 24-105 STM shows that Canon can make very good budget zooms.

That is right, not everyone does need, or could afford a "L"uxury Lens. But the mentioned 24-105/4-7.1 RF STM is really being underdesigned, and way slow from lens speed, too. It's less good, than even the RF 24-105/3.5-5.6 STM predecessor.

The truth is out here

It's a cheapskate Zoom, which goes 2nd hand for like 200 bucks, this clearly shows. The distortions speak also it's very own language - which is being digitally corrected via Body Firmware.

"In absolute terms, it's clearly a sub-standard lens. Its native characteristics range from good to downright terrible. The miserable vignetting and distortions have to be seen to be believed. Conversely, the resolution is actually pretty decent - which is a bit of a pity because you just won't use this lens without auto-correction."

"Of course, everything in life is a compromise, and the RF 24-105mm f/4-7.1 STM IS is all about making it possible to a budget. However, if you can stretch it, you'd really be better off with the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4 USM L IS. While more expensive, it's just a better investment."

Good light.