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

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 15,596
Re: Does the new RF 50mm make the (heavy and expensive) RF 35mm redundant?

thunder storm wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

In other words: it's so affordable it's not very useful as a portrait lens for rule of third compositions. In fact it's so affordable it's not useful as a portrait lens at all as the bokeh is really poor.

A bit over the top, wouldn't you say?

If the EF version could take portraits, then the RF surely can.

https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Canon%20EF%2050mm%201.8%20portrait&view_all=1

Chances are the bokeh of the RF lens is worse compared to the EF lens.

Based on what?

If you don't need bokeh, there's no need to use a prime at all, so..... that's what i call "not useful".

You are just full of absurd arguments today.

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow