[Klaus]

Pretty nice actually

http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1056-canonrf24105f4is

[toni-a]

Let me take Rover role: there' a typo: resolution at 30 megapixel not 50

[Rover]

And I spotted a "dffraction" somewhere.

[Klaus]

Seems as if I created my personal torture gang here ;-)

[JJ_SO]

A really nice standard zoom. The three rings are just genial, and making them with different surfaces also extra genial. I'm afraid the 24-70 is not as good. Btw., did you shoot against the sun at around 27 mm? Any isotropic spots?

[you2]

I'm mixed. The resolution at the long end drops off a bit as well as relatively high vignetting and the bokeh/chromatic issue seem bad/high. For a zoom it has decent to very good resolution but on the other hand it is not excessively expensive (probably priced to sell).
-
I do wish the bokeh was nicer and the vignetting a bit less at the long end.

[Rover]

Seems as if I created my personal torture gang here ;-)

You'd better put it this way: you're saving on proofreader services - and don't think you're "sloppy" with writing or anything, everyone makes mistakes and you make fewer than most people - and at the same time keep the readers engaged and believing that they're somehow "contributing" to the process.

[Klaus]

@JJ - No, I didn't. Yes, I know I should have.

@you2 - I think there's no standard (and ultra-wide) zoom lens with a really good bokeh

@Rover - I do appreciate all feedback from the community, of course! :-) Other than the odd copy&paste errors I tend to introduce weirdness by re-editing the text (but without re-reading it again).

[Rover]

Well, there's not much else we can do to help. Wish I could send you some lenses to test but given where you and I are it's going to be more trouble than it's worth.