Jump to content

Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM for underwater photography - the overlooked flex lens in the RF system

Featured Replies

Posted

Hi everybody,

while well served at the super wide end with the Canon EF 8-15mm fisheye + Teleconverters (FCP at a more compact size and reasonable price) and having the currently best full frame Macro in the industry with the Canon RF100 USM; I was looking into a mid-range flex lens in the middle for that little kick of flexibility.

I was even looking into buying an old SIGMA 17-70mm for EF mount, which had this amazing close focus an Macro ability in the DSLR era and was used by many shooters behind a dome.

While researching options I stumbled across Canon‘s very own RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM that was launched + bundled together with the RF mount R6 cameras a while ago. Compared to it‘s much more expensive sister the RF 24-105mm USM which is not really attractive for underwater use it features dent sharpness and much less travel weight on land.

So I bought myself one and also tested it heavily against the widely for UW shooters recommended RF 24-50mm STM shard by Canon.

The winner is certainly the RF 24-105 STM which offers very decent close focusing distance and even some macro capability.

You can use this behind very large 9 and 8 inch domes, but also it is a very interesting candidate for water contact optics.

Behind my Ivanov Optic I can use it from 24-75mm or 32-85mm depending how I set up the extension rings. This might not be useful information for others,… as this underwater lens is simply not available for sale anymore,… but,…

I think it has high potential for Canon RF underwater contact optics use, when you are willing to ditch the 24-27 zoom range and start using it at the 28mm focal length. With water contact optics, I am referring to the Nauticam lineup and the shortly available Marelux Aquista 100 and Marlux Aquista 120.

The sharpness Sweet spot of that lens in land tests is at F8.

I wonder why this baby has not made it into many manufacturers port charts.

Hopefully we can bring this up on the radar of gear makers.

PS: zoom gear of the RF15-30 STM fits also this lens 🫶

But to avoid people using the 24-27mm range or extruding the lens too far out, housing makers might want to produce a gear with Zoom-limiter to perfectly match their water contact optics best results.

Edited by Adventurer

I had both the L series and the f4-7.1 versions for a brief time when I was contemplating switching back to Canon from Sony and Olympus. I liked the portability of the less heralded lens, despite being slow on the long end. It was also sharp enough. I never used it underwater, though.

I think if shooting with strobe(s) which I do and don't do depending on my mood many shooters dismiss slower and less "PRO" labeled lenses without trying them.

At f8 being a sweet spot and modern cameras being so much better at ISO400 and above lightweight mid-zoom or "kit lenses" should be given serious consideration IMHO.

Lighter weight and lower cost make many a good choice and I've used many successfully over decades.

If you're a full frame shooter the mentioned Canon 24-105mm slower lens might be worth picking up!

David Haas

Here's a couple over 20 year old shots. I used a Canon Digital Rebel XT or XTi, Canon 18-55mm IS lens in an Ikelite housing with 6" dome port and a single Ikelite DS125 strobe.

First pic might have been with a Canon 10-22mm EF-S lens....That shark had likely been hooked via a long line and broke free. Bite marks might have made it prey to other sharks (just guessing???)

IMG_0522.jpeg

IMG_5560.jpegSnapseed.jpeg

Edited by dhaas

On 9/10/2025 at 11:43 PM, Adventurer said:

You can use this behind very large 9 and 8 inch domes, but also it is a very interesting candidate for water contact optics.

I'm interested :) Have you used the 24-70? If so, how would you compare the two. And how is the 24-105 autofocus performance underwater? What extension(s) did you use?

1 hour ago, JayceeB said:

I'm interested :) Have you used the 24-70? If so, how would you compare the two. And how is the 24-105 autofocus performance underwater? What extension(s) did you use?

If memory serves, both extend when changing focal lengths, so that’s a consideration. Above water I really did like the slower Canon 24-105, mostly for its portability, handling and close focusing. Sigma just came out with a 20-200, which has 1:2 close-focusing ability, but again, an extending lens barrel when zooming (L and E mount).

Here are specs on the old 24-105mm f/4-7.1:

https://www.dpreview.com/products/canon/lenses/canon_rf_24-105_4p0-7p1_is_stm

Important Information

Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.