Full Frame L Version of the 24-240? Would you?

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

The 24-240 as a walkabout/travel lens has been on my radar, but admittedly the 6.3 on the long end and lack of weather sealing has me hesitant. I normally don’t stop for the rain and I like having the option to shoot relatively wide open. Would an L version with a 4 or even a 4-5.6 maximum aperture fancy anyone? Seems that could be a rather useful range. I know 5.6 vs 6.3 is a bit of hair splitting.

 

[Archibald]

I would use my R7 and RFS 18-150mm for that.

I'm mistrustful of weather sealing. My old EF 100-400mm L was damaged by a slight film of dampness. There was black paper in the zoom barrel and it disintegrated slowly over subsequent weeks. So weather sealing is irrelevant to me because I don't know what any lens can tolerate. I will take any gear out and risk some moisture if it happens, and accept the consequences.

 

[Gnhntn]

I am actually very happy with my current 24-240. I bought it for a travel lens, as I travel 6 to 8 months out of the year for work and get out on weekend sight seeing. Most of the time this is the only lens I take with me since purchasing it. Depending on what I plan to see ahead of the trip I may take my RF 100-400 or the 14-35 with me.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

It’s a useful focal length range, for sure.

 

[Kamoshika]

It would certainly pique my interest, though would it cease to be a "walkabout" lens (current RF24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM is 750g)? I guess it wouldn't be anymore "beastier" than my RF100-500mm (1370g) w/1.4 (225g) extender, which I have no problem carrying for several hours while walking around; however, I never walk around the city with it. My RF70-200mm (695 g) F4 L IS USM is about the extent of what I would carry around for travel/street photography.

 

[JoeTheSnowPlowGuy]

Good points. It could be rather large.

 

[Ferenc MÓGOR]

I'm quite satisfied with my RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 IS USM lens which I had from day one with my R6 MK1 (since Nov. 2021), especially with the price I paid for this lens. A faster version of the L series would surely cost 2-3x more. Although in the beginning I was a bit worried about the F6.3 at the wide end, but my worries were not proved. This lens performs pretty well even in low light thanks to the low noise FF sensor of the R6 MK1. Occasionally I might use Photoshop Noise AI to improve signal/noise ratio.

 

[Grahamk]

The 24-240 as a walkabout/travel lens has been on my radar, but admittedly the 6.3 on the long end and lack of weather sealing has me hesitant. I normally don’t stop for the rain and I like having the option to shoot relatively wide open. Would an L version with a 4 or even a 4-5.6 maximum aperture fancy anyone? Seems that could be a rather useful range. I know 5.6 vs 6.3 is a bit of hair splitting.

I haven’t trusted weather sealing or water resistance claims since a previous iPhone, supposedly ip68 rated at 2m for 30 minutes, failed after being immersed at around 12 inches depth for only a few minutes. It mostly worked after a screen replacement but the face recognition never worked again. I’d prefer to use a rain cover, eg. OpTech, in inclement weather for my camera & lens.