DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Not good

Started Nov 16, 2021 | User reviews thread
dmanthree
dmanthree Forum Pro • Posts: 10,302
Re: Not too bad at 14mm (sample photo)

Steve Balcombe wrote:

dmanthree wrote:

Steve Balcombe wrote:

I wish I could find the posts where I predicted this, ten years ago or more. On the whole I think it's a good thing if it means smaller, lighter lenses*. The only problem it creates is the absolute necessity to have a lens profile compatible with the software you want to use.

*Cheaper too, but the RF 14-35 is not a great example of that!

Maybe it actually is cheaper than an optically correct version would be?

Well, if you chart the progress from EF 17-40L to EF 16-35/4L IS to RF 14-35/4L IS, the first two are optically corrected and the third is much more expensive!

Honestly, correction is pretty common. I had the same experience in the nm4/3 world, as well. And my sony RX10 IV soft of bakes the corrections into the raw file so ACR can apply it. Honestly, no big deal for me, as long as the results are there.

I also have an RX10 IV so I'm with you there.

The EF 17-40 was a pretty weak lens. I had one, and the edges were simply awful on a FF sensor camera. And the extra 2mm on the new lens surely adds to the cost. Also, well, market pricing!

-- hide signature --

---on the cutting edge---

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