Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM soft?

Thank you everyone! Thanks for the answers and images.

I've got my answer!

Gearacquisitionsyndrom wrote:

My 24-105 rf f4 seem soft too. I have to test it more, but it's almost as the lot cheaper rf 35 1.8 is sharper!! Again: have to test further but so far a little disappointed. I'm using the R5

I would expect the RF 35 to be sharper - mine is definitely sharper than my borrowed 24-105L at 35mm - it’s a lot less sharp at every other focal length though and it doesn’t have weather sealing as far as I’m aware.  The 24-105 felt faster focussing too to me.

different tools for different jobs

Again, don't use it at MFD.

It's very simple. Most lenses are not optimised to be sharp at MFD.

bigshledge wrote:

Again, don't use it at MFD.

It's very simple. Most lenses are not optimised to be sharp at MFD.

Where’s that come from??  I was highlighting that I would expect a prime to be sharper at its focal length than a zoom (thy is twice the price) and in my experience that was born out here too.

There’s no criticism of the 24-105 and no mention of mfd or any other info from my side, I didn’t ever user the 24-105 at MFD when I borrowed it from Canon… so I don’t think that explains the difference I am seeing but hey - feel free to correct what I haven’t written again 😅

JamieTux wrote:

bigshledge wrote:

Again, don't use it at MFD.

It's very simple. Most lenses are not optimised to be sharp at MFD.

Where’s that come from?? I was highlighting that I would expect a prime to be sharper at its focal length than a zoom (thy is twice the price) and in my experience that was born out here too.

There’s no criticism of the 24-105 and no mention of mfd or any other info from my side, I didn’t ever user the 24-105 at MFD when I borrowed it from Canon… so I don’t think that explains the difference I am seeing but hey - feel free to correct what I haven’t written again 😅

It's from the topic itself, not you specifically - people complaining about sharpness on here when they're showing examples that are close to MFD.

Also yeah, primes are generally going to be sharper than most zooms, so no surprise there.

Gearacquisitionsyndrom wrote:

bigshledge wrote:

JamieTux wrote:

bigshledge wrote:

Again, don't use it at MFD.

It's very simple. Most lenses are not optimised to be sharp at MFD.

Where’s that come from?? I was highlighting that I would expect a prime to be sharper at its focal length than a zoom (thy is twice the price) and in my experience that was born out here too.

There’s no criticism of the 24-105 and no mention of mfd or any other info from my side, I didn’t ever user the 24-105 at MFD when I borrowed it from Canon… so I don’t think that explains the difference I am seeing but hey - feel free to correct what I haven’t written again 😅

It's from the topic itself, not you specifically - people complaining about sharpness on here when they're showing examples that are close to MFD.

Also yeah, primes are generally going to be sharper than most zooms, so no surprise there.

Yes primes are usually sharper but the 35 1.8 is a lot less expensive plus it's not an L lens. That should factor in too 😀

Not really. There are plenty of cheap primes out there that are better than L zoom lenses, like the EF 100mm f2.

L doesn't even mean the lens will be razor sharp to begin with. Plenty of soft L lenses out there, like the 17-40mm f4L. L just means better build quality and things like nicer image rendering, but not necessarily sharper.

The 24-105mm L lenses were always known to be "upmarket kit zooms" rather than meant to be very good rivals to prime lenses. The RF version isn't even that much better than the EF version either - good, but not going to be outstanding in any way. You need to look towards the likes of the RF 24-70mm for that.

Gearacquisitionsyndrom wrote:

bigshledge wrote:

JamieTux wrote:

bigshledge wrote:

Again, don't use it at MFD.

It's very simple. Most lenses are not optimised to be sharp at MFD.

Where’s that come from?? I was highlighting that I would expect a prime to be sharper at its focal length than a zoom (thy is twice the price) and in my experience that was born out here too.

There’s no criticism of the 24-105 and no mention of mfd or any other info from my side, I didn’t ever user the 24-105 at MFD when I borrowed it from Canon… so I don’t think that explains the difference I am seeing but hey - feel free to correct what I haven’t written again 😅

It's from the topic itself, not you specifically - people complaining about sharpness on here when they're showing examples that are close to MFD.

Also yeah, primes are generally going to be sharper than most zooms, so no surprise there.

Yes primes are usually sharper but the 35 1.8 is a lot less expensive plus it's not an L lens. That should factor in too 😀

L or not, a f/1.8 will always beat f/4 lens, why do you think I have 35 and 50 and 24-105 stm instead of 24-105L?