I tested the RF 24-240 against four different L lenses. The center sharpness is just as good
I wanted to see how the center sharpness of the RF 24-240 f4-6.3 superzoom would stack up against the following L lenses:
- 14-35 f4
- 24-70 f2.8
- 24-105 f4
- 70-200 f4
TL;DR: The 24-240's center sharpness is basically just as good in real-world conditions.
Disclaimer: this was just a quick at-home test, so take these results with a grain of salt. I handheld on an EOS R5 with IS enabled. Aperture priority, auto ISO, and TTL flash (Godox IT30). I used the max available aperture on the 24-240 at each zoom level. I estimated the zoom levels using the barrel markings, and was sometimes slightly off. I used manual focus with focus magnification and tried my best to focus on the "Minolta" logo.
Here are the image samples (zoomed 200%). The RF 24-240 is always the one on the left.
At 24mm f4, I can't tell a difference between the RF 24-240 and the RF 14-35.
Processing img kwi1v5llqvkg1...
Next up, at ~70mm at f5, the RF 24-240 is a tiny bit softer vs. the legendary RF 24-70.
At ~105mm at f5.6, I think the RF 24-240 even looks a little better than the highly rated RF 70-200 f4.
Still at ~105mm, the RF 24-240 is roughly on par with the RF 24-105 f4.
At ~200mm, the 24-240 looks a bit softer than the RF 70-200 f4.
I'm extremely impressed. For practical purposes, the RF 24-240, a compact superzoom weighing 765 grams, keeps up in terms of center sharpness with heavier and more expensive L lenses that have just a fraction of its zoom range.
Obviously, the RF 24-240 has a slower aperture (and unfortunately, no weather sealing). Of course, I have not compared other aspects of optical performance beyond center sharpness.
Still, for many use cases, I think the RF 24-240 is a surprisingly strong contender against some of Canon's best.
Posted Feb 21, 2026, 5:31 PM UTC