dpreviewTV: EF-M 22mm F2 not "ideal" for the M6 Mk II?

nnowak wrote:

RLight wrote:

nnowak wrote:

Every camera manufacturer produces very high quality lenses. The notion that every single Canon lens is better than the equivalent lenses from all other manufacturers has no basis in reality.

The latest RF 50mm, 85mm f/1.2L's have no peer (f/1.2 lens with that high of performance). Or for that matter, how many other mfgs have f/1.2 primes? Not many. They often stop at f/1.4.

You seem to be forgetting that Nikon even exists. Their Z roadmap lists 35mm f/1.2, 50mm f/1.2 and 85mm f/1.2

I'll be (very) happy if Nikon does this, or even survives to be blunt. Competition is good, but, IMO, Nikon's future is very uncertain. The Nikon Z mount has my attention. It may be some day, if it makes sense, I switch. Probably not now that I'm invested in the RF mount, but, never say never.

Nor does the RF 28-70 f/2L in operational specs (f/2 zoom with that focal range, or performance)

And Nikon has a 58mm f/0.95. Do you seriously think that no other manufacturer is even capable of building a high quality f/2.0 zoom? It is not an engineering constraint that prevents others from building such a lens, but a marketing constraint. Just like the EF 50mm f/1.0, the 28-70mm f/2.0 is a marketing stunt. The RF 24-70mm f/2.8 IS will outsell the 28-70mm f/2.0 by very, very large margin.

You're trying to downplay my statement, which is still valid. Btw, 58mm @ f/0.95 in Manual focus, is not very practical. And, where is it? How long has it been announced and it still isn't even slated for a launch date? It lends (more) credit to my former statement about the future of Nikon.

Nobody, has a 11-24 f/4L.

Sony has the FE 12-24mm f/4.0 G and Fuji has an equivalent XF 8-16mm f/2.8. If you are bragging about the lens being 1mm wider than the competition, you had better take a look at the image quality at 11mm first.

They do. It's not 11mm. EF mount is going to be less than stellar on the wide end in the corners due to the flange benefit the FE has... I'm willing to bet dollars to donuts if DXO does a benchmark on both the 11-24 and the Sony 12-24, the Canon will be center-sharper, and the Sony 12-24 will be corner sharper. I'm also willing to bet dollars to donuts the RF 15-35 f/2.8L won't have a peer when tested which will have the flange benefit of RF mount.

Canon's great whites?

Have you seen the Nikon PF Telephotos? In case you weren't aware, PF is Nikon's version of Canon's DO. And how many years did it take before Canon finally built some wide angle lenses that weren't garbage? For a very long time, Nikon ruled the wide angles and Canon ruled the telephotos, but that was years ago. There will be plenty of professionals on the sidelines of the upcoming summer Olympics shooting with Nikon and Sony telephoto lenses.

I'm well aware. Now Canon rules both.

Beg to differ, ahem.

I am not trying to disparage Canon glass, but you seem to be completely unaware of the fantastic lenses being produced by other manufacturers.

Sigma makes some fine glass, if you ask me. As does Sony and Nikon. But, you've failed to demonstrate how, today, they have more breadth, and depth in offerings. Not yesterday, not tomorrow, today. You have to gather although Nikon and Sony will continue to "catch up", Canon won't be standing still. In the same way as Canon "catches up" with sensors, neither will Sony stand still in that same period.

Don't kid yourself. Canon isn't king of the hill without reason. Now could that king be upset in the future? Sure. But that's a sizable advantage in the here and now.

USM AF is what got Canon to the level of pro adoption they enjoy today, not shear optical quality.