Canon R5 + RF 28-70mm Tips + Tubes

Sittatunga wrote:

Ephemeris wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

Ephemeris wrote:

Hi folks

Any tips or help for the use of this lens appreciated. It will replace an older EF 100 F2.8 lens and also an RF 28-105 F4 lens (I don't really like this lens - the EF was doing as much work for us).

The lack of IS is making me a little nervous and also that I can't use a TC.

It's a 28-70mm f/2, so the IBIS of your R5 should be sufficient, especially as that lens will give you two stops of speed over your EF 24-105mm.

The shouldnt is the logical concept but I'm still nervous.

It's an RF 24-205 and screwed up because of my 28 typo, sorry about that but can edit it.

The title said 28-70mm, not 24-105mm.

The title is correct.

I also mentioned our EF100 and RF 28-105 (typo for 24 - 105).

I've not mentioned a 24-205.

There isn't an RF 24-205mm, the RF 24-240mm IS is a different class of lens, and the RF 24-70mm has IS.

The 28-70 (F2) as in the title doesn't ha s IS.

Thehe only other ways you'll get native RF 100mm are with the macro lens (with adjustable spherical aberration but nobody seems to have made that feature work for portraiture),

The RF 100mm f2.8 doesn't seem to offer very much over the EF we have and won't accept a TC.

either RF 70-200mm lens (neither of which can take teleconverters),

Yes I made that point as a reason we won't buy one.

the 100-400mm f/5.6-8 or the 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 (which can't take a TC if it's set to shorter than 300mm).

Apart from perspective control lenses I can't see the point of putting a teleconverter behind any lens shorter than 135mm, maybe that's my lack of imagination. I'd rather put an R7 behind that lens than a TC, even if a TC were possible.

We have two R5 bodies and not an R7 (after much reading I don't think it would help us)

32Mpx, IBIS, self leveling horizon and effective 45-110mm f/3.2 or 40-110mm f/4.5 sounds reasonably close to what you would achieve with a TC behind a standard zoom were that possible, and I'd have thought it would give better image quality.

We only have two R5 full frame bodies and the R7 isn't a consideration after discussion, reading and investigation. The solution must be for full frame.

With a TC 1.4 we are very close to 100mm which would help to have a similar viewing angle to the EF100mm but as I understand it's not possible

Being able to put a TC on can be helpful. We use it a lot on EF 70-200 and why we can't use the RF.

Canon don't do RF mount extension tubes yet and it's not compatible with EF tubes. The shortest third-party (11mm) tube I can find will probably focus impossibly close at 28mm and to, at most, a couple of feet from the sensor at 70mm, so it's not a lens I would use with extension tubes. The AF should still be usable, but there's really no point. That lens does focus a couple of inches (50mm) closer than the EF 24-105mm L lenses though

I use tubes a lot with the EF100 and EF70-200. When trying to maximise the frame size of a failed bolt they are golden, use them everyday.

11mm is about the shortest you can buy with electrical contacts. It makes sense with 70mm (about ⅙ life size) but not with a standard zoom. You'll just be too close to light a failed bolt using a standard zoom with extension tubes,

It's more that it is only 2 tubes not 3 tubes so the maximum length is limited rather than minimum.

We use all 3 tubes in the EF100 regularly for day to day work.

I thought the minimum focus is 39cm which is at the wide end I'm not sure at the long end.

Kenko appear to have some but this is just two tubes (not sure why not 3).

https://www.speedgraphic.co.uk/extension_tubes__adapters/kenko_dg_extension_tube_set_canon_rf/29453_p.html

Do any of you use this lens with extension tubes/rings? Is the AF still usable?