# First impressions of the RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM



## PCM-madison (Sep 4, 2019)

My preordered RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM arrived today. It did not work at all on my EOS RP until I updated the camera firmware. Once updated, it worked nicely. I find the size, weight, and balance to be a good fit for the EOS RP. Zoom action is smooth and requires similar effort throughout the range. No lens creep with the camera pointed up with the lens extended or pointed down and retracted. Focusing was fast and accurate in both one shot and servo. I will mainly use this combo for travel and static/slow subjects, but I did test for birds in flight. I had no problem picking up and tracking gulls and waterfowl against the sky with almost all photos in focus. My impression was that servo tracking was much better with this lens than when I tried the RP with similar subjects and adapted EF lenses. It will take some time for me to have an opinion on image quality, but the zoom range is impressive (example attached).


----------



## Quirkz (Sep 4, 2019)

Thanks for the impression! Anyone else have one they can comment on?
How was the AF speed at 240? I found the 18-150 ef-m pretty slow on the long end, for comparison. So curious what this ‘equivalent’ lens is like.

To me it’s a really tough call between the fantastic image quality of the rf25-105 vs the flexibility of this lens.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Sep 4, 2019)

Thanks for the shots PCM. Would you be able to show a shot of the lens on the camera? I'm interested to see how the combo looks.
Thanks
Stoical


----------



## PCM-madison (Sep 5, 2019)

Quirkz said:


> Thanks for the impression! Anyone else have one they can comment on?
> How was the AF speed at 240? I found the 18-150 ef-m pretty slow on the long end, for comparison. So curious what this ‘equivalent’ lens is like.
> 
> To me it’s a really tough call between the fantastic image quality of the rf25-105 vs the flexibility of this lens.


Autofocus speed at 240mm was very fast and accurate in both one shot and servo, tested outside in the final hour before sunset. I did not test side-by-side with adapted EF telephoto lenses, but previous experience with such lenses suggests the RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM was significantly faster than with adapted lenses.


----------



## PCM-madison (Sep 5, 2019)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Thanks for the shots PCM. Would you be able to show a shot of the lens on the camera? I'm interested to see how the combo looks.
> Thanks
> Stoical


Here is a shot of the RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM mounted on my EOS RP shown next to my 5Ds R with EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM mounted for size comparison.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Sep 5, 2019)

PCM-madison said:


> Here is a shot of the RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM mounted on my EOS RP shown next to my 5Ds R with EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6L IS USM mounted for size comparison.
> View attachment 186341


That's great. Many thanks for taking the time, and for the added value of a comparison too!
Cheers.


----------



## JPAZ (Sep 5, 2019)

Thanks for the info and opinions. So my "walk around" on the RP is the RF 24-105 and it is a nice combo but the ability to get that range / reach in a single lens for travel is appealing. Just curious, what are the camera setting on these photos and did you do any post processing? Really good to hear about your experiences with focus.

Thanks!


----------



## PCM-madison (Sep 5, 2019)

JPAZ said:


> Thanks for the info and opinions. So my "walk around" on the RP is the RF 24-105 and it is a nice combo but the ability to get that range / reach in a single lens for travel is appealing. Just curious, what are the camera setting on these photos and did you do any post processing? Really good to hear about your experiences with focus.
> 
> Thanks!


Both photos were taken at F8, 1/500 sec, ISO 1000. They were RAW images processed in Adobe software. Final composite was downsized. I don't know the upload rules for this site, but I take it that there is both a file size and pixel dimension limit based on not being able to upload full sized RP or 5Ds R images in the past.


----------



## Act444 (Sep 6, 2019)

Thanks for sharing! I'd be curious to see the IQ difference between this combo and the M5 or M6 with the EF-M 18-150...I like my M6/18-150 as the convenience factor is high, but IQ at the longer half is just meh. 

At what focal length does the lens slow all the way down to f6.3?


----------



## PCM-madison (Sep 6, 2019)

Act444 said:


> Thanks for sharing! I'd be curious to see the IQ difference between this combo and the M5 or M6 with the EF-M 18-150...I like my M6/18-150 as the convenience factor is high, but IQ at the longer half is just meh.
> 
> At what focal length does the lens slow all the way down to f6.3?


I will get back to you on the F6.3 focal length tomorrow. I have an M5 but not the EF-M 18-150 so I can't address your question about the relative IQ. However, for me the RP is a much more satisfying and useful camera than the M5. I own an original EOS M which I found lacking as an all around camera. I converted it to IR, and have found it perfect for that niche. I own an M5 which I find lacking in several respects. I still own it and have used it as a travel camera for trips where photography was not the primary goal, but all before I had an EOS RP. Going forward, my RP+RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM will likely be my travel kit for most trips.


----------



## Quirkz (Sep 6, 2019)

Act444 said:


> Thanks for sharing! I'd be curious to see the IQ difference between this combo and the M5 or M6 with the EF-M 18-150...I like my M6/18-150 as the convenience factor is high, but IQ at the longer half is just meh.



I sold my 18-150 because of that ‘meh’. I’m starting to think from early images that the 24-240 is much the same. In which case I’ll just stick with the RF 25-105, which I’m finding excellent, and continue to lug around either the 70-300L, or perhaps the compact Fuji x-e3 + 55-200 combo... But I find the RP just a much better camera in every respect, soooo..... I wish there were an Rf replacement for the 28-300L, with just moderately improved quality to match modern sensors and lenses. 

I’m hoping the early images I’ve seen are just bad examples, because it’s looking like the M + 18-150 is better at the moment.


----------



## koenkooi (Sep 6, 2019)

Act444 said:


> Thanks for sharing! I'd be curious to see the IQ difference between this combo and the M5 or M6 with the EF-M 18-150...I like my M6/18-150 as the convenience factor is high, but IQ at the longer half is just meh.
> 
> At what focal length does the lens slow all the way down to f6.3?



A post on the DPReview forum says it slows down to f/6.3 at 105mm.


----------



## AlanF (Sep 6, 2019)

PCM-madison said:


> My preordered RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM arrived today. It did not work at all on my EOS RP until I updated the camera firmware. Once updated, it worked nicely. I find the size, weight, and balance to be a good fit for the EOS RP. Zoom action is smooth and requires similar effort throughout the range. No lens creep with the camera pointed up with the lens extended or pointed down and retracted. Focusing was fast and accurate in both one shot and servo. I will mainly use this combo for travel and static/slow subjects, but I did test for birds in flight. I had no problem picking up and tracking gulls and waterfowl against the sky with almost all photos in focus. My impression was that servo tracking was much better with this lens than when I tried the RP with similar subjects and adapted EF lenses. It will take some time for me to have an opinion on image quality, but the zoom range is impressive (example attached).


Thanks for this. Could you please show some of the birds in flight.


----------



## PCM-madison (Sep 6, 2019)

AlanF said:


> Thanks for this. Could you please show some of the birds in flight.


Hi Alan, I was not particularly close to the birds for a 240mm lens and full frame camera so no great photos were taken. I was just testing the ability to pick up and track birds in flight. Here is a series of the same gull being tracked quite nicely over several seconds

by the camera/lens combo.


----------



## Don Haines (Sep 7, 2019)

PCM-madison said:


> Hi Alan, I was not particularly close to the birds for a 240mm lens and full frame camera so no great photos were taken. I was just testing the ability to pick up and track birds in flight. Here is a series of the same gull being tracked quite nicely over several seconds by the camera/lens combo.



To track a small target is a very good rest!


----------



## Act444 (Sep 7, 2019)

PCM-madison said:


> I will get back to you on the F6.3 focal length tomorrow. I have an M5 but not the EF-M 18-150 so I can't address your question about the relative IQ. However, for me the RP is a much more satisfying and useful camera than the M5. I own an original EOS M which I found lacking as an all around camera. I converted it to IR, and have found it perfect for that niche. I own an M5 which I find lacking in several respects. I still own it and have used it as a travel camera for trips where photography was not the primary goal, but all before I had an EOS RP. Going forward, my RP+RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM will likely be my travel kit for most trips.



Thanks for your reply. I'm willing to accept the compromises of the M6/18-150 combo mainly because of the incredibly compact size. I can still squeeze it into a small belt bag which would be impossible to do with a FF setup. That, coupled with the convenience of a wide zoom range and relatively good IQ on the wide half make it a great bridge camera (between phone and FF DSLR). Still, for _serious_ travel I find I want something better. The 5D4/24-70 f4 I like for local/regional sightseeing.




koenkooi said:


> A post on the DPReview forum says it slows down to f/6.3 at 105mm.



Thanks for sharing. Yikes, f5.6 already by 70mm. I have to say the RF 24-105 is looking like the better of the two kits at this point. Yes, one gives up some reach but at least you have decent IQ and a constant f4 throughout a wide range. That 1.3 stop brightness difference at 105mm can make a huge difference...


----------

