
Review: Canon RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z
Friday 12 April 2024, 16:32 by Nando Harmsen | 5,429 views | 9 commentsThis article was translated from Dutch with the help of AI. Read the original.
Wouldn't it be great if there were a 24-105mm zoom lens with an aperture of f/2.8? You get a little more zoom range than with a 24-70mm, while still having that desirable wide aperture. Canon now has the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM. It is a very different lens from what you might expect.
A 24-105mm offers the most versatile focal range. You get wide angle and a little telephoto in a single lens. It is not without reason that this is almost always the standard zoom lens. The top models of this type of lens have a maximum aperture of 'only' f/4.

Canon has now changed that with the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z. This lens lets in twice as much light as the standard versions we know so well. However, it is no longer a compact lens. Let me give you some specifications.
- Aperture of f/2.8 throughout the zoom range
- Length of 199mm and diameter of 88.5mm
- Weight of 1.43 kilograms
- 23 lens elements in 18 groups, including 4 US, 2 GMo aspherical and 1 replica aspherical lens
- Aperture ring for video with lock in A position
- Two programmable lens buttons
- Minimum focusing distance of 45cm, with 0.08x magnification and 0.29x magnification at focal lengths of 24mm and 105mm respectively
- Up to 5.5 stops of image stabilisation, and 8 stops in combination with IBIS
- Dual Nano USM autofocus motor
- Removable tripod foot
- Connections for Power Zoom adaptors and lens holder
First impression
It is already clear that this is not a small lens. It is larger and heavier than an RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens. In terms of size and weight, you can compare it more closely with an RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM.

Compared to the f/4 version, this f/2.8 lens is simply twice as large and heavy. This means it is not a lens you can leave on your camera for convenience. It is too large and heavy for that.
The RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z has a very smooth zoom mechanism that rotates through 90 degrees. The focus ring turns evenly and is perfect for precise focusing. Of course, there is the control ring, but it is the aperture ring that stands out. You can change the aperture continuously.

There are also the familiar switches for focusing and image stabilisation. The lens also has two programmable lens buttons. Because of its size and weight, there is a tripod collar, whose foot can be removed.

Image quality
Of course, f/2.8 is not only useful for letting in more light. It also allows you to achieve a shallow depth of field. This is less spectacular at 24mm, but at a focal length of 105mm, f/2.8 can separate the subject nicely from the background.

There is an extreme amount of distortion at 24mm. The image has pincushion distortion with black corners. At 105mm, this changes to barrel distortion, but it is less extreme. Lens correction is essential for this lens.

The lens shows a small amount of focus breathing, where the subject changes size when it comes into or out of focus. On the other hand, the focus does not change while zooming with this lens.

In use
The lens is large and heavy, but if you are used to the old EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM II, this is not much of a problem. The zoom mechanism works wonderfully smoothly. The fact that the lens does not change size while zooming naturally gives it perfect balance.

Unfortunately, the aperture ring does not work for photography. At least, not with the cameras I have. From what I hear, the EOS-R models from 2024 onwards will be able to use the aperture ring. It only works for video on pre-2024 models.
The extreme image distortion at 24mm causes no problems thanks to image correction. There is still some light fall-off at f/2.8, but it is hardly distracting. Especially for video, when a 16:9 aspect ratio is used, the weak points of every lens fall outside the image. The same applies to the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z.

It is obvious that this lens is aimed at video. This is clear not only from the aperture ring, but also from the smooth zoom mechanism and the precise manual focus ring. Its parfocal behaviour, where the focus does not change while zooming, is perfect for video.

The Power Zoom adaptors
Another sign that this lens is aimed at video is the connection options for the Power Zoom adaptors. Hence the letter Z in the name of the lens.

These adaptors, the PZ-E2 and PZ-E2B, provide a smooth zoom at an adjustable speed. These adaptors are powered via USB-PD or through the camera. They can be operated remotely with the EOS Utility app.
The lens also has an LH-E1 lens holder connection that provides extra support when using a video rig setup. Given the weight and size of the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z, that is no unnecessary luxury.
Conclusion
Anyone who thinks that an f/2.8 aperture is ideal for a 24-105mm zoom lens should think about the consequences. You no longer have a compact lens, but a large and heavy one.

Despite that, it is pleasant to work with, including for photography. The zoom ring in particular is a joy to use. Still, this lens offers little extra for photographers apart from the wide aperture. It also relies heavily on in-camera lens correction for a good image.
Videographers get more benefits, such as a continuous aperture ring and the option to use Power Zoom adaptors. Focus breathing is minimal, and focus does not change while zooming.

With the RF 24-105mm f/2.8L IS USM Z, videographers get a lens that comes close to a real Cine lens in terms of usability, at a somewhat lower cost. The lens is clearly aimed at the professional market.
For photography only, the high cost of this lens is harder to justify. Although f/2.8 is attractive, I think the f/4 version of the 24-105mm zoom lens is the most sensible choice for most photographers.
Pros
- f/2.8 throughout the zoom range
- Smooth zoom ring
- Focus ring works very precisely
- Focus does not change while zooming
- Nice bokeh at f/2.8 and 105mm
- Lens buttons included
- Aperture ring
- Image sharpness is good
- Power Zoom adaptors can be used
- Image stabilisation of 5.5 stops and 8 stops in combination with IBIS
- Removable tripod foot
Cons
- Large and heavy
- Aperture ring does not work for photography
- There is a small amount of focus breathing
- Image distortion is extreme, although corrected with lens correction
- Strong chromatic aberration at 105mm
- Tripod foot has a completely different design
- Price is high if it is intended exclusively for photography
Many thanks to Canon Nederland for providing this lens.

About the author
Nando Harmsen has been photographing for more than 40 years. He specialises in wedding photography and landscape photography. Nando also gives talks, workshops, masterclasses and photo trips, and regularly reviews new and interesting equipment.
You might also like
-
Review: Sony FE 16-25mm and FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G lensesby Nando Harmsen
-
Review: Canon EOS R5 Mark IIby Nando Harmsen
-
Review: Canon EOS R50 V vlog cameraby Nando Harmsen
-
Canon launches the RF 16-28mm f/2.8 IS STM ultra-wide-angle zoomby Nando Harmsen
-
Review: Canon RF 24mm, 35mm and 50mm VCM lensesby Nando Harmsen
9 comments
-
Hochzeitsfotograf wrote on Sunday 14 April 2024 at 13:55 | replyDank je wel voor de recensie! Ik zou heel graag met deze lens willen werken. Ik ben een bruiloftsfotograaf uit München.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet. -
Donald Willemsen wrote on Tuesday 16 April 2024 at 10:55 | replyIk ben blij deze recensie gelezen te hebben. Omdat ik enkel fotografeer , zal deze lens voor mij geen toegevoegde waarde hebben. Daarnaast is 'm voor mij te zwaar en onbetaalbaar.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet.
Wat ik eigenlijk wel gemist heb in de recensie, is hoe de lens presteert op een cropcamera zoals de R7. Wat blijft er bijvoorbeeld dan over van de enorme vertekening waarover in de recensie gesproken wordt? -

Nando
wrote on Tuesday 16 April 2024 at 11:22
| reply
Aangezien een kleiner deel van de beeldcirkel wordt gebruikt merk je minder van lichtafval. Vertekening is hetzelfde, alleen mis je de delen buiten het beeldvlak dat je met een APS-C gebruikt.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet. -
Edwin wrote on Tuesday 16 April 2024 at 10:56 | replyLijkt mij een geweldige lens maar vanwege de beperkingen bij het fotograferen blijf ik nog even bij de 4.0 versie
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet. -
Donald Willemsen wrote on Tuesday 16 April 2024 at 11:52 | replyInderdaad Nando, door de cropfactor en kleinere sensor heb je een kleinere beeldhoek. Daarnaast had ik gedacht dat daardoor de vertekening minder zou opvallen.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet. -

Nando
wrote on Tuesday 16 April 2024 at 11:57
| reply
Niet de cropfactor EN kleinere sensor. De cropfactor is door de kleinere sensor.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet.
Je krijgt minder van de vertekening in beeld, dat klopt. Maar ik neem aan dat je de lenscorrectie gewoon aan hebt staan. Dan maakt het niets uit. -
Theo wrote on Tuesday 16 April 2024 at 12:06 | replyHeldere recensie. Dank daarvoor.
This comment was written in another language and has not been translated yet.
In eerste instantie dacht ik: misschien toch mijn EF 24-70 / 2.8 inruilen voor deze. Aan het eind duidelijke informatie die mij doet besluiten mijn oude lens niet voor deze in te ruilen, omdat ik enkel fotografeer. -

kpeters wrote on Wednesday 5 November 2025 at 19:50
| reply
Thank you for the honest review.
Translated from Dutch.
I am considering purchasing this lens instead of the RF24-70 F2.8. However, not so much for the range but for the bokeh. Because of the longer focal length, I suspect/expect/hope that the bokeh effect will be more pronounced and therefore lean more towards the 70-200 in terms of bokeh.
Do you have any experience with how these 3 lenses compare to each other in terms of bokeh? -

Nando
wrote on Thursday 6 November 2025 at 09:39
| reply
Well, the amount of blur you get depends not only on the aperture/focal length, but especially on the ratio between the distance to your subject and the distance to the background.
Translated from Dutch.
How the quality of the blur is (the bokeh), you can judge from the example I made.
If I may advise, I would choose both a 24-70 f/2.8 and a 70-200mm f/2.8. That gives you complete freedom. You could also fall back on the EF versions with an adapter.
Have your say
Please note: Articles older than a week can only be commented on by signed-in visitors.Would you still like to comment? sign in or create a free account.
Become a better photographer every week
A practical photography tip in your inbox every week.
39,219 photography enthusiasts already receive the tips! More about the weekly mail. Or keep up to date via
Facebook.

Elja Trum


