RF 35mm samples

Hoka Hey wrote:

Back2M wrote:

Rawpaul wrote:

Back2M wrote:

Rawpaul wrote:

Nice images man , thanks for sharing.

I own the RF 35 too, and I enjoy the hell out off it

Likewise.

I have a nasty confession; I'm mulling keeping the R (that is going back to the M50). The R+RF 35 is awesome, but, mount anything else adapted and alot of the allure of the R vanishes.

The RF35mm by itself though mounted on an R, is sheer awesomesomeness.

I don't think mounting other lenses even adapted is a problem.

Maybe size wise , but i find that my older EF lenses perform better on The R.

So an added bonus there I think

I quite like the adapter with the control ring btw. I do find that mounting EF lenses to the adapter is far more wonky than mounting lenses to say my old 5DIII or EOS M50; something about mounting and unmounting lenses from the adapter, just harder to do.

Once muscle memory starts kicking in, you'll automatically change the lenses regardless of adapter or native RF, but you have to give it time.

I had that thought. I'm going to give the R a little more time. Even though my instincts say drop this like a hot rock and jump back to the R, I think I'll give it a bit more time. My return window is still there so why not? (I do have a thread going on possibly going back to the M, on the M forum).

For me, I'm reconsidering due to sheer bulk vs performance and maturity of the mount. Vs say the M system, the M system is fun with it's lightweight footprint and mature system; it has a native lens offering for most things. The R on the other hand, is an infant. No RF 50mm f/1.4, no RF 16-35 f/4 IS USM, no RF 70-300 DO IS USM. And these lenses may be some ways away.

It's got me seriously thinking as I'm swapping lenses less often, taking the camera out less often. It's like going back to a 5D, it gets left behind...

It's only when I have the R+RF 35 at home, that it truly gets used-used easily and frequently. Mounting even the 70-300 DO is a pain. Easier than a 100-400, but it's still a pain.

That's interesting. I use the 100-400 L ii on the R all the time, and have not had any trouble mounting it. It is one of my favorite lenses with the R along with the RF 35 and the EF 24-70 2.8 ii.

Thanks for sharing your photos.

Joe

Some of it is probably due to the lens hood. That 70-300 DO needs the hood in many situations; I mount the lens with the hood in the stored position and then remove or flip the hood into shooting position afterwards but the RF adapter requires more torque than say a traditional EF mount does to mount it making twisting from the hood in-advisable which means I have to lock it from the bottom of the lens; it's more difficult. The 100-400L doesn't need the hood though so it'll be a different experience.