Canon RF 24-105mm f/4 L IS Lens Review: The BEST kit lens?

LAST DAY to win a Canon EOS R:
Canon 24-105mm f/4R ($1,099):
Canon EOS R ($2,300):

We’ve now taken over 1,600 photos with the Canon EOS R and the 24-105 f/4 lens… and it’s a pretty fantastic combination for general, do-it-all consumer photography. The RF 24-105 f4 L IS is sharper than other kit lenses we’ve tested, including the Sigma 24-105 f4 and the Canon EF 24-105 f4 L IS. It’s almost as sharp as the Canon 24-70 f/2.8, but not quite (and of course, it’s a stop slower). While it’s not a professional-grade lens, it’s well-built, fairly compact, and extremely versatile.


Andrew Wells says:

Can the control ring be set to exposure compensation?

Juliano Guerra says:

I’m using this lens 95% of the time. Light, sharp, versatile and beautiful.
I have a lot of expensive lens, and heavy too. After buying this little beast, I rarely use another lens.

Daudh Rai says:

Absolutely fantastic video thank you

maxloverU says:


Mik Ban says:

As usual… great info… yup noticed the mistake on Histogram.. If I win the EOS R, I am getting this lens for sure..

skrewler says:

Can you do a review on the 35mm RF? How does it compare to the Sigma 35mm Art? How sharp is it compared to the 35mm range on the 24-105mm RF and the 28-70mm RF?

It’s relatively cheap, don’t know if it’s totally worthless or if Canon was able to work some magic with it. Seems they wouldn’t want to shoot themselves in the foot by making it a better lens than their EF counterparts, but they seemingly did that by making the 24-105 sharper than the EF 24-70 II (altho, 1 stop slower..)

That would be awesome. Thanks.

Craig Ryan says:

Curious how heavy this combo is for vlogging? I’ve yet to see anything close to it if it’s not too heavy.

Scott Williams Photography says:

Very nice review. It does look like a really good “kit” lens 🙂

Tony & Chelsea Northrup says:

Update: I malfunctioned while discussing contrast. The bunched up histogram is worse, not better. My developers have been notified of the problem.

livervid says:

Not sure where to post this, but can anyone help?

I own Canon L series lens, when turning the lens vertical the lens came off the camera. I noticed that there is no clicking sound when I attach the lens, what could the problem be?

jtron84 says:

Not sure if the URL refers to failure of an SD card, but it’s more fun to think that it stands for “Stunning Digital FAIL” 😀

Gabril Avramov says:

Great review! I’m just not sure, did you compare the Sigma to the first or second version of the EF 24-105? I own the second one and I’m interested to know how it compares.

Traian Constantin says:

3:44 But, but, i like flaring.
That’s one aspect of modern lens’s perfection that i dont like.
Flares are one of those imperfections that gives a certain something to a photo.

Carlos Milan says:

Is the Grandma’s house in PR?

Anthony Hall says:

Great video. Thank you for also giving us results for the Sigma 24-105 f/4, as I previously bought that lens on your recommendation. Curious about the Sigma 50-150 f/1.8…I know it originally had focusing problems with a DSLR, but with a mirrorless it should focus more consistently, correct?

gaurav kumar says:


Chrono Trigger says:

Nah, everyone knows the fuji 18-55mm is the best kit lens of all time. So many pro reviewers (not paid) go as far to say they don’t even call it a kit lens b/c its such an insult to the lens. Wouldn’t buy it full price (be better off buying one of the legendary fuji primes, better than Canon L glass, or the 16-55 2.8 zoom) but its also a steal if you buy at as an add on to say buying a camera, either the xt3 or xt2 both great options.

Taylor Gilmore says:

Haha a 24-105mm 1.4 would be amazing, but also a tank

Егор Владимирович says:

I bought one. I prefer prime lenses, not sure about quality of pictures, but build quality is great. For me, f4 pretty dark, sharpness ok, not unbelievable, stabilizer really good, etc. And my favorite part – zooming, incredibly smooth, much smoother than my 24-70 2.8 II.

Tarek Ahmad says:

Can you compare it to the Sony FE 24-105 F4

Paz Tailor says:

Is it really a consumer body though? EOS R Kit: £3,269.99 and the M50 Kit: £699.99
Not quite sure what sort of consumers you’re talking about, but the average joe isn’t spending upwards of 3k on a camera.

Bobby Beaman says:

The EOS R is NOT a “consumer” body and I immediately turned off your bias when you said that. Just because you choose to call it such because it doesn’t have two cards slots is on you, and goes to your bias. Many “professional” bodies have had one slot over the years, and there is no reason to say what you said other than that since it literally stomps almost every other Canon ever built in real-world comparisons to date.

Juston Brazda says:

How does it compare to the Sony 24-105 g lens?

drutgat2 says:

I would not call the focus of the shot of Chelsea, her grandmother and the other young woman (3.34) “fine”. I would call the whole shot “out of focus”.

aceflibble says:

“The only other two lenses currently available for this camera”
Aww, everyone keeps forgetting about the 35mm f/1.8 Macro IS, poor thing. It’s trying its best!

Michael Reif says:

My favorite useful lens and favorite useful camera.

Tim Lucas says:

There is also a 35mm Macro.

Mark Shirley says:

5:23 look at the banding on the rear wheel.

james cook says:

I’m on the fence on which camera to buy. Which one would you get for video? The eos r or the 5d mark iv?

Jon Pais says:

@Tony if the body, sensor and features are such garbage, what difference does it make if the lens is the best in the world? 1.8X crop means it’s absolute garbage and the 24-105 doesn’t kick butt at all. what are you talking about? it can only be used on one camera, and it’s no longer 24-105 – it’s more like micro four thirds in 4K. And soft at that. not trolling, but in your first look video, you spoke the truth about the eos r. now, just like every other youtuber, you’re changing your tune.

kaimelis says:

is sigma better than the canon 24 105 mark 2?

Visible Tour says:

Tony, if you were me and you own the first generation 24-105 and the Canon EOSR, would you (A) Sell it and pick up the new RF 24-105 or (B) Sell it and get the 24-70 2.8 II EF and use it with the adapter? I like the idea of having the larger aperture for faster speed and lower ISO, but would I miss the IS? I know this is subjective, but I would love to hear your thoughts. Thank you!

James Ryan says:

The real story is that the Sony 24-105 f4 is just as good. So Sony has caught up in lens design, that’s a big deal.

Rangnath Wagh says:


Suyash Kulkarni says:

The lens is sharper at Africa and as we go to Japan sharpness seem to decrease

Ziggi Mon says:

Tony is the only one who is not afraid to say about the new Canon system that it’s just fine.

SwitchRich says:

I’m dubious about that histogram analysis, but the lens does indeed look sharp.

geremi carl bernardino says:

Hello Mr tony and Ms. Chelsea i wish im the lucky to win the cam

mcl40000 says:

ok…i really like the x-t3 but the lack of in body stabilisation turns me off…how important do you guys thing IBIS is in a modern camera? every input helps! thx!

Mike Sydney says:

Pro priced but not for pro’s……

bpelectric says:

You’ve now reviewed both of the lenses for the new Canon mirrorless system and neither of the ones for the new Nikon mirrorless system. For those of us who want to make decisions based on the lenses for the new systems, please review the Nikon Z series lenses!

AllinAll Tv says:

Great information thank you guys

Alex Lancashire Photography says:

Have you seen this vid Tony?

Asad Ullah says:

nyc job

First Name says:

Fujifilm X-T3 review. I’m still waiting patiently for that 🙂

Lee Rothman says:

Sorry, I’m a pro and I am using the EOS-R as my primary camera. I do landscapes and portrait work for which I get paid (so I guess you might consider that professional. The focusing on the R is unreal and quite frankly for many if not most general usage the 24-105 RF lens is not a particular compromise in build quality (let alone it’s high quality hood). Not sure you’re being completely fair but then I understand you prefer the highest level of performing products in general.

phynx2006 says:

That review Tony, it wasn’t the best and it wasn’t the worst it was FINE hahaha

 Write a comment


Do you like our videos?
Do you want to see more like that?

Please click below to support us on Facebook!