Is the RF 24-50mm a serious threat for crop RF camera's?

MAC wrote:

RLight wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

Fjzk wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

Edit: I was replying to MAC, but something went wrong or I made a mistake.

I think it's a pretty bad idea to mount such a slow yet big wide angle zoom as a standard zoom on a crop camera.

The RF mount is clearly designed for full frame, and to combine this mount with aps-c sensors are clearly an afterthought.

I ordered an FE 28-60mm for compactness sake by the way. I will consider it to be an f/8.0 lens for IQ reasons. But even stopped down that far it will do the same thing as a 17-38mm f/5 on a Canon crop sensor in a really small and light weight package. I think that's a better idea than a big slow 15-30mm on an M50, with no space at all for your fingers.

And the same logic applies to the RF24-50 on the R8 or RP.

I didn't see great IQ around f/8.0 yet from this 24-50mm lens.

It will be a great option as a daylight, walk-around kit.

I hope you're right, but I'm afraid it's more a budget option than a compact option.

Those MTFs tell me it performs better than the 24-240. So it’s a budget and compact option. Quality? There’s no L here. Price is right though, as is size.

Im pausing though at any of these options. Although formidable compact power (R8/R50), I dunno, something’s missing here. R50 has several corners cut that are annoying (no self cleaning, m50 buffer size and is still UHS-I). R8 although impressive lacks a compact telephoto option. Neither of these are M-killers even though they’re clearly supposed to be. The R50 and new 55-210 get pretty close though.

Re: Canon RF-S 55-210mm f/5-7.1 IS STM Lens (Canon RF)

hmm, f7.1 on a budget crop body where focus aquisition spec would be EV +1 + would have little chance of focusing long range indoors for those school events

whereas Canon RF 70-200 F4L @ F4 on R8 would have a whopping focus aquisition of -3.2 EV (4.2 + stops better) and will focus in full moonlight - and combine the facts that it is only pop can size and dxo PL6 will give it 1-2 stops better high iso performance - all makes the small R8 the clear choice for enthusiasts that progress beyond consumer stuff

IMO, the R8 paired with the RF 100-400mm would be a far better solution than an R APS-C camera with the RF 55-210mm.  AF would be faster, reach is longer, has better low light performance and the weight/size penalty isn't bad at all for its range.