Does the new R5 change your roadmap?

Started 4 days ago | Discussions thread
MyM3 Senior Member • Posts: 1,150
Re: Forget the R5, look at the 24-105mm f/4.0-7.1
5

nnowak wrote:

MyM3 wrote:

nnowak wrote:

MyM3 wrote:

nnowak wrote:

MyM3 wrote:

Rock and Rollei wrote:

rick9814911 wrote:

nnowak wrote:

The new RF 24-105mm f/4.0-7.1 is the same length as the EF-M 18-150mm and only marginally fatter and heavier. The new 24-105mm f/4.0-7.1 lens sounds slow, but if this was a crop lens, it would be equivalent to a 15-65mm f/2.5-4.5. Who here wouldn't love a 15-65mm f/2.5-4.5 lens for the M system?

Now, consider that the EOS RP is only marginally bigger and heavier than the M50. Most of the size difference comes from the larger grip on the RP Add this new $400 zoom lens to the RP and you have a pretty compact package with potential image quality better than any zoom lens in the M system. In a kit, this lens will be even cheaper. This would likely put a kit with the RP and new 24-105mm within $100 of the M6 II, 15-45mm and EVF.

I would not be so worried about the specific health of the M system. I would be worried about the future of all crop sensors cameras from Canon. I am starting to think that Canon has a long term plan to leverage their internal sensor production to push full frame cameras to all levels of the market. Instead of going head to head with crop sensor cameras like the Sony A6400 or Fuji X-T30, Canon is going to push small, stripped down full frame cameras and lenses to those price points. 7D users will likely be out of luck too. The new R5 appears to be the spiritual successor to the 5D series. When shooting in a crop mode, the R5 could produce images with at least 15MP. The only real advantage a 7D would have over the R5 is price. The R5 could replace both the 5D and 7D series. The R6 could replace both the 6D and 90D series. The RP, or future smaller version, could replace the 8Ti Rebel and M5 series. The only camera I don't see getting a direct full frame replacement is the M100/M200, but how long will those models last with the progress of smartphones?

I disagree with most of these points. The EF-M 18-150 weighs 300 grams, the RF 24-105 weighs 700 grams. That is not even close to marginal. I agree that when you factor in the 1.6x crop on the aperture, the 24-105 is a far better lens for low light and getting stronger bokeh. But in terms of weight and size, the difference is massive, regardless of body size. It is not possible to build a full frame kit and have the weight be even close to APS-C.

He's talking about the newly-announced RF 24-105 IS STM - that's 395g, so it certainly is marginal.

I also feel smartphones are very far from matching APS-C. Only time will tell, maybe you're right. But I can't get pictures anywhere close quality wise from a smartphone when compared with a crop sensor camera. If you want professional looking images, there are very few situations where a smartphone is going to come close.

The RF 24-105 STM should be compared to to the EF-M 15-45 (24-72mm ff equiv).

That 15-45mm has a full frame aperture equivalence of f/5.6-10.

That aperture equivalence is only for DOF. Not for exposure.

You're right. The smartphone can use lower ISO's and/or faster shutter speed due to the much brighter lenses.

So you think it is fine to compare the new RF lens to the 18-150, but not to the 15-45 ?

I compared the RF lens to the 18-150mm because most people are familiar with the size of the 18-150mm.

I think most people are even more familiar with the size of the 15-45. 😉

The common complaint of the RF system is the lenses are too big and too expensive. This new RF lens is neither of those things.

Well. I don’t think everyone would agree with you on that. The RF is about 33% heavier than the heaviest Canon EF-M lens. The new RF lens is the smallest kit lens for the R system but still 3 times heavier than the smallest kit lens for the M system. It is ca. as long as the Sigma 16mm but even fatter. Add that to the size and weight of the camera and a couple of other RF lenses, ... not very compact in my book.

They have almost the same aperture range and the 18-150 has more than double the reach of the RF lens ???

I think it is better to compare the smallest kitlenses from each system to get a feeling about the size difference.

I don’t know much about the technical aspects of the phone cameras. But I have never seen any phone that can take better photos (viewed on a large screen) than my 15-45 on my M cameras.

Just because you have personally not witnessed something does not mean it does not exist.

That puts is squarely into smartphone territory. Especially when you take into account all of the optical problems with the 15-45mm.

My 3 copies have no problems.

You're in the minority, or just oblivious to the problems.

Far from it. Post some evidence with numbers of lenses with problems versus how many lenses sold worldwide. Then we can talk.

Post some samples from you supposedly perfect lenses and we can talk.

“No problems” is not the same as perfect, But I will post some after you have posted the evidence. You was the one who made the claim. You go first.😉

And we don’t know what problems the RF lens will have.

I would be shocked if Canon somehow produced a lens with even worse quality control than the 15-45mm. The simple fact that it is not a collapsible design should make quality control better.

Still no evidence for your claims.

but what has this to do with the size/weight comparisons we are discussing??

I don't know. Your the one who brought it up.

No you were. Can’t you remember ? Look at your very first sentence at the top of this post.

Much closer (equiv) focal lengths. (The smallest kit lenses for each system.) The RF lens is 3x as heavy and MUCH bigger.

The EF-M 18-150mm (29-240mm equiv) should be compared to the RF 24-240mm.

The RF 24-240mm f/4.0-6.3 is equivalent to a crop sensor 15-150mm f/2.5-4.0. Focal lengths might be similar to the EF-M lens, but apertures are not even close.

Again only for DOF. f/6.3 is f/6.3 for both systems.

No, it isn't. Calculated exposure will be the same, but the final image will not. If all exposure settings are identical, the full frame image will have shallower depth of field

Not everyone wants shallow dof.

I am pretty sure most Canon lenses have adjustable apertures.

Right.

AND lower noise levels AND more dynamic range.

No. That is properties of the sensor, NOT the lens.

You can't take a photo with just a camera or just a lens.

But we can compare compactness and weight. 😉 ( And sensors does not have equivalent apertures.)

 MyM3's gear list:MyM3's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
MAC
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow