OP
Steve W
•
Veteran Member
•
Posts: 6,998
Re: JCC Hood for 85/2.0 STM In stock and fits for $13
Karl_Guttag wrote:
Steve W wrote:
Karl_Guttag wrote:
Steve W wrote:
Karl_Guttag wrote:
I already had a JCC hood for my RF24-240 that seemed to work well.
I just received the JCC hood for the RF85F2 and it seems to fit well. It behaves just like the hood of my RF L lenses complete with the little release pin. It cost about $13 on Amazon vs. $49 for the Canon ET-77. (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08TW99PDF/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1).
Had not seen any good ones for the 50/1.8 or 35/1.8. Will look again since its been three months since I last checked them out.
How do you like your 85mm f/2 ?
I would say the RF85F2 is just OK. It has fairly good image quality, but I agree with others that say the focus can be slow even fails at times, at least on my RP. I have not tried it on my R5. I had some "ill-gotten gains in the stock market" and decided to get the RF24-70f2.8 and then the R5. I suspect I am not going to use the RF85f2 much except maybe for the occasional portrait and probably would not have bought it if I knew I was going to get the RF24-70f2.8 so soon.
Very interested in your RF 24-70 f/2.8L IS experience for sure. Keep claiming I am going to get one. Used to own the original EF and the EF II for my DSLRs.
I ran a series of sharpness tests with my RP with the RF24-70F2.8L (see: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64875609). The 24-70 had a slight dip in sharpness in the corners at about 35mm and f2.8 but otherwise seemed very good. At least in my limited testing, the RF15-35f2.8L was better at any focal length they shared.
Compared to the 85F2, my RF24-70f2.8 at 70mm is better in both sharpness and contrast in the corners at f2.8 and f4 (all RF lenses are very sharp and contrasty in the center).
The main advantage of the RF85f2 is that it can go to f2 and can magnify by 0.5x versus the RF24-70f2.8L's 0.3x. Thus, I don't think the RF85f2 makes much sense now that I have the RF24-70f2.8L. If the 24-70f2.8 is on the camera, I am unlikely to switch it for the RF85f2 to get about 20% more focal length for just one stop more light.
The RF24-70f2.8L has an even bigger advantage over the RF50f2.8 in the corners. Or put another way, the RF50f1.8 is significantly worse in the corners than the RF85f2. The 50f1.8 is softer and seriously loses contrast in the corners at f2.8 and below. The only advantage of the RF50F1.8 is the 1 and 1/3 stop lower f-number.
BTW, the RF24-240f4-6.3 puts up a pretty good showing. It is clearly not as good in the corners as the RF24-70f2.8L below 50mm, but it still has good contrast in the far corners. But out to about 2/3rds of the way out the field of view, it looks about as good as the RF24-70f2.8 at the same f-numbers. I'm not sure I would take the RF24-240mm off the camera unless it was for a very important shot or I needed the lower f-number.
All the above is based on my limited testing of one copy of each lens based on a 42-inch wide 3x2 test pattern using a Canon RP.
Karl, thank you. I do already own the RF 15-35/2.8L IS and RF 70-200/2.8L IS but in the midrange I have the RF 24-105/4L IS I got in my EOS R kit when I bought it. I had been thinking of getting the RF 50/1.2L with it but have now thought about just completing the f/2.8L IS set and calling it a day for a while.
I also currently use an EF 85/1.4L IS so covered for portraits between it and the 70-200.
Have often owned both a 24-70/2.8 and 24-105/4 since I use them differently so have really wondered how people like their RF 24-70/2.8L IS. Thank you for your feedback.
-- hide signature --
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe! - Words to live by. Albert Einstein