Does the new RF 50mm make the (heavy and expensive) RF 35mm redundant?

Started 3 months ago | Discussions thread
Eddie Rizk Contributing Member • Posts: 776
Re: Does the new RF 50mm make the (heavy and expensive) RF 35mm redundant?

DaveyA wrote:

As the new 50mm so much lighter and smaller than the 35mm, my question is whether this compact lens is likely to be the one most often attached to the RF.

Not mine.  50 mm is the most common focal length, so I don't own one.  It is also the focal length that creates the most realistic size relationships between objects at different distances.  That's another reason not to get it.  There is enough reality in this world without me adding to it.

I appreciate your comment that the 50mm might often prove impractical, good advice and thank you.

Some people, actually a lot of people, love the 50 mm length and use it all the time.  I wouldn't choose between those two based on the weight, though.

-- hide signature --

That's my opinion, and it's worth what you paid for it.
Eddie Rizk
The race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.
Formerly "Ed Rizk"
My email was hacked and unrecoverable along with all associated accounts, so I got permission to create a new one.

 Eddie Rizk's gear list:Eddie Rizk's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS R Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow