Comparing a FF general purpose lens to a crop macro lens with wholly incompatible mounts makes zero sense to me. Your comment seems more about trying to spout on about the superiority of the M system over the R system more than anything else.
well, so far, I'm not impressed with R7/R10 + lenses
versus
the value proposition of M6II + lenses + DXO PL5
What do you expect Canon to do with RF-S lenses? The 18-45mm kit lens is better, or basically equivalent, than the EF-M 15-45mm
in all aspects but the wider range.
well, 15 mm (24 ff fov) is critical to me
when I had at two different times the 15-85, 15 mm was my most used FL
when I got my $899 RF 24-105 F4L a few years back, it is the best all arounder lens I've ever had - and my forever lens - coming from 28-135 and 15-85 lenses years ago
sometimes when you find a deal for $899 at the right time - jump on it - the L is now $400 more
The RF-S 18-150mm is a knockoff of the EF-M version. Are you really having major issues with them not releasing a full line of RF-S lenses this soon into introducing APS-C in the R system? If you do then you would have been trashing the M system for the first 4-5 years of its existence.
well, I didn't buy into M at first - I bought SL1, T4i, T7i instead
it took M6II + M32 F1.4 + M11-22 + PL5 to change all of that for me
Looking further, the RF 15-30mm is very likely a decent approximation of upgraded standard zoom that never appeared in the M system.
f4.5 - f6.3 is not what m owners want as a standard zoom
they want f2.8 - like the new siggy
The RF 16mm is a great APS-C prime.
your view of great is different than mine
The RF 35mm IS every bit as useful as the EF-M 32mm and is more so in many situations since it is stabilized.
here you don't understand - the m 32 f1.4 is GREAT
Where is the EF-M 50mm lens? Oh, that's right, you need to go third party for one.
and the siggy 56 is very good - I went with the RF 85 F2 IS instead
There is a native mount Canon made one available for R crop cameras. The RF 24mm IS arguably will be better than the EF-M 22mm in use since it has image stabilization. I own, and have used, the EF-M 22mm. It is a fine lens but is hobbled by lack of any stabilization in the camera body or the lens and the same goes for the 32mm.
M owners buy the 22 for small size. I don't own one. I own the 24 IS
Those that are criticizing Canon for not having a full plate of RF-S lenses are just looking to pick nits at this point.
not nit picks - M system is smaller and better for general shooting
Do you think Canon will not be releasing more RF-S lenses and affordable RF lenses that work equally well on a crop camera?
until they release an RF-s 32 f1.4 and RF-s 11-22, then many of us contend they are holding back to get you - you - you to buy more expensive FF lenses
The RF 100-400mm is a FF lens that M users would be giddy to be able to use natively on the EF-M mount.
you canceled your R7 order. That FF RF 100-400 will do better on your R than on your cancelled R7
It is incredibly small and lightweight for its reach. Also, there is plenty of time for Canon to port over any EF-M lens to the RF-S mount they deem necessary.
hmm, they deem necessary - yeah right -- but Not m32 and maybe Not m11-22
I think we will see this happen in the coming 1-2 years.
and compete with their FF - yeah right
As for the camera bodies, the R7 and the R10 are better spec'ed than any M camera with the same resolution.
spec'ed on price and size - nope - btw did you see the m6II prime day deal recently?
It isn't even close between them.
bigger bodies alone can't take one shot
I would bet the farm that the upcoming lower end R crop camera will run circles around the M50/2 and be priced competitively with it.
bodies need glass
Do you ever expect to see a M camera with IBIS at any price point?
should they do it - yes
Do you ever expect to see a 24mp M camera with the specs of the R10?
for me 24 mpxl crop sensor is inferior and I don't want any more of that sensor - just like I didn't want any more of the old 18 mpxl sensor
I highly doubt that we will. It just seems to me that making an argument that there aren't enough RF-S lenses less than one month after the R7 has shipped is silly.
R7 is a birding/wildlife/sports camera - that's it - it has enough L tele's
Saying you aren't impressed with the R7 and R10 isn't supported by the facts.
then you don't get it - read Alastair's comment about his dead cold hands
you've been stuck on SL2 and haven't experienced latest M6II with great m32 and 11-22 and PL5
Especially so if you are impressed with the M6/2. Spec wise, the R7 is a better camera than it in all aspects but size.
yes, R7 is better for sports and wildlife - but read Alastair's comment about general use - my comments were about general use
I will wager that we will see Canon make a far more aggressive release of RF-S lenses than they did with EF-M lenses.
no you will not - you'll not see m32 or lenses like the siggy's
PLUS, the crop R cameras will have native access to FF lenses that M cameras will never see.
m cameras have access to all of EF FF
Frankly, with the M system being around for 10 years it should have a far larger lead on the APS-C R cameras and lenses than it does currently. It won't take much effort for Canon to quickly supersede the M system in the R system. They already have in many aspects.
well, not from m user perspective -- they will push more expensive and bigger and their history of EF-s development fell short
m32 f1.4, 11-22, m28, and the siggys show what is possible - but you think RF will get these with the small size and same prices -- yeah right, dream on
anorcross.smugmug.com
