Canon RF 24-240 vs EF 24-105 f/4 L i and EF 70-300ii or EF24-105 F/4 Li and RF 100-400

I just got my R6 and am reviewing my lenses, I do admit I have too many and have duplication.

The question I have is in regards to the 24-240. I have heard good things about it and the RF glass even in the average lenses, such as my RF100-400 seems very good.

I am thinking of walkabout lenses, say I go to the zoo or even the park, there is a lot to be said for having one lens and not having to lug extra gear in a bag when walking around. Also if I am walking around with my bad knees I don't want to lug my EF100-400Lii, too heavy.

What do people think of the 24-240?

How does the IQ compare between the EF 24-105 L mk I and that range on the RF 24-240, same with the upper range of the 70-300, I think the RF 100-400 to me is nice and sharp and wonder how it compares to the 24-240 in the upper range in the real world. Of course you get another 160mm with the RF 100-400 but have to carry it also.

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19488699
I just got my R6 and am reviewing my lenses, I do admit I have too many and have duplication.

The question I have is in regards to the 24-240. I have heard good things about it and the RF glass even in the average lenses, such as my RF100-400 seems very good.

I am thinking of walkabout lenses, say I go to the zoo or even the park, there is a lot to be said for having one lens and not having to lug extra gear in a bag when walking around. Also if I am walking around with my bad knees I don't want to lug my EF100-400Lii, too heavy.

What do people think of the 24-240?

How does the IQ compare between the EF 24-105 L mk I and that range on the RF 24-240, same with the upper range of the 70-300, I think the RF 100-400 to me is nice and sharp and wonder how it compares to the 24-240 in the upper range in the real world. Of course you get another 160mm with the RF 100-400 but have to carry it also.

I too have a similar question but between RF 24-240 and RF 24-105 f/4. I know the major difference is constant aperture vs variable and one being superzoom category.
I have heard good things about RF 24-240 and that would be a great one lens solution for travel.

rndman wrote in post #19491888
I too have a similar question but between RF 24-240 and RF 24-105 f/4. I know the major difference is constant aperture vs variable and one being superzoom category.
I have heard good things about RF 24-240 and that would be a great one lens solution for travel.

I just pulled the trigger on refurb 24-240 from Canon store..

I bought a used RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 from B&H for $200 and it is super clean and good glass. I took it to my son's yesterday to shoot our new grandson and it was great in a normal sized room, 12x16, the 24 was good for width and the 105 was good for close ups as I was about 8 feet away. If I go somewhere where I need more reach I will take either my 70-300 or RF 100-400.
Case closed

I have both the RF 24-240 and the EF 70-300II NanoUSM. Both are really good. The 24-240 is maybe a bit more versatile due to the wide end but not quite the reach. I think the size and weight is really quite similar.

I would get the 24-240 but I have the 24-105 f4-7.1 now and am happy with it and I just bought a Boston Police Pistol Team pistol

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19493868
I would get the 24-240 but I have the 24-105 f4-7.1 now and am happy with it and I just bought a Boston Police Pistol Team pistol

What is the Boston Police pistol team's choice of firearm?

duckster wrote in post #19493971
What is the Boston Police pistol team's choice of firearm?

I don't even know if they still have one, I collect BPD guns specializing in the Pistol team from the 30's and 40's

I have the following

3 Colt Officers Model Target revolvers .38 Special, from 1932 all sequentially serial numbered, only 11 ever made for the BPD.

3 Colt Woodsman Bulleye Target .22 LR, semi-auto, 2 sequential serial numbers and 2 sequential BPD numbers, ONLY 6 EVER MADE FOR BPD

1 Colt Officers Model Target revolver in .22 LR

I see. Nice collection of classic firearms

Jeff USN Photog 72-76 wrote in post #19493976
...
3 Colt Officers Model Target revolvers .38 Special, from 1932 all sequentially serial numbered, only 11 ever made for the BPD.

3 Colt Woodsman Bulleye Target .22 LR, semi-auto, 2 sequential serial numbers and 2 sequential BPD numbers, ONLY 6 EVER MADE FOR BPD

1 Colt Officers Model Target revolver in .22 LR

These are NICE !!! haves.

I have an R6 and a bunch of nice EF L zooms. My first RF lens was the 24-105 f/4-7.1. It is a nice light walkaround lens and plenty sharp. The only problem is that when I need more reach (or think I'll need more reach) that means carrying the EF 70-200 2.8 II or EF 100-400 II, both of which are relatively big and heavy. Enter the RF 24-240. It fits the bill perfectly when I want more reach than the 24-105 but don't want to lug around an additional 3 lb lens. The 24-240 has become my go-to lens when fast apertures are not necessary, which is actually most of the time. The slow aperture on the long end isn't a problem if it enables proper framing since the bokeh is similar to cropping a 70mm f/2.8 image down to match the angle of view.

I have had the 24-240 since it first came out and I love it. The image quality is quite good, it is versatile, and it is easy to carry around all day. The only thing I really miss is that it is not weather sealed. There are also a few functions, like focus stacking and I can't remember what else, that are unavailable with this lens.

Just to try it, I used the 24-240 for a cross country meet and it worked great. Actually a good range for that type of event where you can get pretty close to the action

judyg wrote in post #19495519
I have had the 24-240 since it first came out and I love it. The image quality is quite good, it is versatile, and it is easy to carry around all day. The only thing I really miss is that it is not weather sealed. There are also a few functions, like focus stacking and I can't remember what else, that are unavailable with this lens.

Sounds a bit strange as to why focus stacking not be available with this lens. Need to check.