Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM 24-240mm

Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM 24-240mm

Canon
54 Overall Score
vs
Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

Sigma
98 Overall Score

Scores

Macro
Canon
29
Sigma
100
Landscape
Canon
47
Sigma
100
Budget
Canon
60
Sigma
99
Travel
Canon
67
Sigma
93
Video Cinema
Canon
58
Sigma
90
Wildlife Sports
Canon
62
Sigma
87
Portrait
Canon
50
Sigma
85
Professional
Canon
49
Sigma
84
Street
Canon
67
Sigma
80

Specifications

Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM 24-240mmSigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS
Optics
Typezoomzoom
Focal Length Min24 mm16 mm
Focal Length Max240 mm300 mm
Elements—20
Groups—14
Aspherical Elements—4★
ED Elements—5★
Coating—water- and oil-repellent coating
Aperture
Max Aperturef/6.3f/3.5
Min Aperturef/43.5-6.7
Constant✗✗
Diaphragm Blades—9★
Build
MountCanon RFSony E
Formatfull-frame★APS-C
Weather Sealed—✓★
Weight0.08 kg★0.61 kg
Filter Thread72 mm67 mm
AF & Stabilization
AF TypeNano USM★HLA
Stabilization✓✓
Stabilization Stops5 stops6 stops★
Focus
Min Focus Distance—170 mm★
Max Magnification—1:2★

Pros & Cons

Canon RF 24-240mm f/4-6.3 IS USM 24-240mm

  • Strong build (98th percentile)98th %ile
  • Strong versatility (97th percentile)97th %ile
  • Strong stabilization (97th percentile)97th %ile
  • Strong af (94th percentile)94th %ile
  • Below average macro (14th percentile)14th %ile
  • Below average social proof (20th percentile)20th %ile
  • Below average optical (20th percentile)20th %ile

Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

  • Strong versatility (100th percentile)100th %ile
  • Strong optical (99th percentile)99th %ile
  • Strong stabilization (99th percentile)99th %ile
  • Strong macro (88th percentile)88th %ile

Verdict

★ Winner: Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS

Scores 98 overall, wins 9 of 9 usage categories and 7 of 22 specs.

Sigma Contemporary 16-300mm f/3.5-6.7 DC OS Better at:

MacroBudgetStreetTravelPortraitLandscapeProfessionalVideo CinemaWildlife Sports