Struggling between RF USM and STM lineup as an amateur

sercheese · Mar 7, 2023

Hello,

As many of you, I dream about Canon R5(Mk II)/R3 with some USM L primes like RF 50mm F1.2, etc. to have the best quality of photos.
The reality though is, that I am an amateur. All photos taken with this combo would be family related. I am a pharmacist (not a dentist

), so I have no plans to sell my photos in the future.
I have watched some comparison videos, i.ex. 50mm F1.2 vs 50mm F1.8 and tried to cover the captions. I've found it very hard to see the real difference. I've learned that many profis show some difference (i.ex. a sharper eye) but only while zooming in.
I have printed some photos up to the size 15×21 cm. I have no need to print them bigger than A4.
So as hard as it is, I think a better option would be Canon R6 Mk II with some STM non-L primes.
I've used to shoot with Canon 50d and Nikon d500. I had few years of pause, while shooting only with my smartphone. The reason why I want to buy a new camera is because my first newborn is coming to the world in Mai. I want to take some beautiful photos of my family now and some vacation photos in the future.
I've also thought about a macro lens like RF 100mm F2.8L Macro to take some photos of those tiny hands, lips, etc. But now I think this is also a too expensive lens for my needs and for this short period of time. I have no interest in taking photos of flowers, insects, etc. in the future.
On one side, it is financially possible for me to go all out and buy the best gear. I've used to do it this way with other things, like a road bike, etc. But I'm starting to realise that there is a lot of marketing going on and a territory of marginal gains. The additional advantage of the STM line would be its compact size and weight. Is it true that the new RF lineup is much better than the old EF lineup, even in STM range?
I guess, I'm expecting your acknowledgement. I am just afraid that without this sweet RF 50mm F1.2 I will lose something, some important detail...
If I would go the STM way, there are many primes at the moment:
RF 16mm F2.8
RF 24mm F1.8 Macro
RF 35mm F1.8 Macro
RF 50mm F1.8
RF 85mm F2.0 Macro
I even thought about the new R8, which would be even lighter, but it lacks IBIS, so I think that's not a good idea, especially indoors.
The 50mm focal length is my go to lens. Which one should I accompany it with so that it makes sense?
Or should I buy the RF 50mm F1.2 (because USM will focus quicker as my child becomes quicker as well?) and wait for a RF 35mm F1.2 to get the best of the best...?

Thank you for your thoughts

sercheese · Mar 11, 2023

R2D2 said:
Keep in mind that the 85mm f/1.2 will be the equivalent (on FF) to the 50 you were using on crop. However, I think that 50mm is much more desirable than 85 for small kids (and you might want to go wider yet).

Many years ago I had Canon 50d and I've used to shot portraits of my family and colleagues a lot with @55mm on my Canon EF-S 17-55mm F2.8. So this would be roughly an equivalent to 85mm on FF.

But now it's more important for me to take pictures of my wife (or me) with the child in her/my arms. I've found my old 50d and tried some composition at home and I can acknowledge that 85mm on FF is too long for my needs. I.ex. a photo of a person on a sofa, or a photo of a person with the stroller, etc.

I'm pointing more in the direction of RF 24-105mm F4 as a universal lens and RF 50mm F1.2 for those special photos.

And what about photos of those small feets, nose, fingers, etc.? Can I do them with this RF 50mm F1.2 or do I need an additional macro lens, i.ex. RF 100mm F2.8? If yes, maybe I can just rent it for 2 weeks? Or with your experience, such a lens could be useful as well in the future?

Could someone give me some good tips for the lightning at home, without additional flashes? As I said, my wife wouldn't be content seeing me placing a lot of additional gear at home. But maybe a reflector near the window to bounce the light back would be helpful?

And this question I wanted to ask few times already, but I've forgotten each time: Is it possible to take a photo with R6 Mk II while recording a video? I.ex. while blowing candles? This would be useful for few years kids in our family.

koenkooi · Mar 11, 2023

R2D2 said:
R2D2 wrote:
[…]
Keep in mind that the 85mm f/1.2 will be the equivalent (on FF) to the 50 you were using on crop. However, I think that 50mm is much more desirable than 85 for small kids (and you might want to go wider yet).
[…]

Whenever I use the 85mm with my kids I think to myself ‘I need a larger house’ or ‘Why do I need to run so far ahead?!???’

The results are generally worth it, but a 50mm will get you a lot more useable pictures. I rented the RF24-105 shortly after the 2nd child was born and it worked great for nearly all situations.
The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

sercheese · Mar 11, 2023

koenkooi said:
The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

If that's true, it would bring us back to the 2nd option with RF 24-70mm F2.8 as universal lens, with no practical need for F1.2, unless I take few stops back, i.ex. to F2, still with better IQ. Not so easy to decide...

I don't take RF 28-70mm F2.0 as an option, because it's a beast (as 85mm F1.2 is). Or... should I?

koenkooi · Mar 11, 2023

sercheese said:
koenkooi said:

The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

Click to expand...

If that's true, it would bring us back to the 2nd option with RF 24-70mm F2.8 as universal lens, with no practical need for F1.2, unless I take few stops back, i.ex. to F2, still with better IQ. Not so easy to decide...

I don't take RF 28-70mm F2.0 as an option, because it's a beast (as 85mm F1.2 is). Or... should I?

Personally, I find the 85mm f/1.2 almost cartoonishly large, the 28-70 takes that 2 steps further. Great results, but it turned taking pictures into a very deliberate effort for me.
I had the feeling I would need to shape the hobby around that lens, with bigger bags, use the battery grip more, work harder at socializing to not scare other parents, etc
I’m very glad I rented all those huge lenses, it helped me realize that the smaller variants were a better fit for me. And they leave enough space in the bag for my 100-500

MikeJ9116 · Mar 11, 2023

sercheese said:
koenkooi said:

The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

Click to expand...

If that's true, it would bring us back to the 2nd option with RF 24-70mm F2.8 as universal lens, with no practical need for F1.2, unless I take few stops back, i.ex. to F2, still with better IQ. Not so easy to decide...

I don't take RF 28-70mm F2.0 as an option, because it's a beast (as 85mm F1.2 is). Or... should I?

IMO, you are way overthinking your situation. A f/1.2 lens used wide open is very limited in most shooting situations. The DoF is so thin at close distances that the area in focus won't even encompass the majority of the face of the person you are shooting. If I were in your situation I would start with a more basic lens kit like the RF 24-105mmL and a few primes like the RF 35mm f/1.8, RF 50mm f/1.8 and the RF 85mm f/2. Use these lenses and then figure out what lenses you NEED to compliment them. The lenses I just mentioned would make a great travel kit, or for general shooting situations. I don't think buying them would be a waste of money for your use case. You can always supplement them later with higher end lenses.

Alastair Norcross · Mar 11, 2023

RogerZoul said:
sercheese said:

Thank you for your first insights.

The answer of Liter resonate well with my feelings. To compare it to the road bike world, I have a road bike with electronic groupset Ultegra di2. It's obvious one can shift the gears manually, but I have not once regretted this upgrade, I love it! I can imagine, that does small things, which are hard to notice at first would be a game changer for me. I'm certainly looking for this 3d pop and I would get irritated if a lens would struggle with focus, while I would loose an important shot for me. The 1.8 looks plastic to me and the 1.2 with it's weight looks "right in place".

50 mm is my go to lens because it's very universal. At the beginning we will be staying a lot in the flat, with time we will take a walk with a baby carriage, etc. So I thought 85 mm can be too narrow. And I also want to make some photos of my wife on sofa with our daughter and some close ups.

I am quite surprised, I was sure everyone will tell me, that it makes no sense to go for the upper level.

Initially I was waiting for the announcement of R5 Mk II, but as it's been delayed till 2024, that is why I've decided to buy R6 Mk II now. This moment of a newborn at home and all of those months without a camera isn't worth the waiting. And if I really want to, I could still exchange this camera for a R5 Mk II next year...

While waiting for more insights, I have a second question.
I find a lot of videos comparing i.ex. RF 24-70mm F2.8 to RF 50mm F1.2 but I see none comparing this zoom lens to F1.8 prime. Should images from the 1.8 prime lens still be better than from this F2.8 L zoom lens? I have some doubts due to the "nifty fifty" label... It's so small, so little glass comparing to the bigger lenses...

Click to expand...

If you don't want to wait for an R5M2, why not an R5M1 now, rather than an R6M2? Why is an R6M2 your step down rather than an R5M1?

Obviously I can't speak for the OP, but a couple of reasons spring to mind, if I were in the OP's position. First, the R6II is quite a bit cheaper than the R5. Even with some nice (temporary) price drops, the R5 is still $1000 more than the R6II. The updates in the R6II mean the AF system in particular is even better than the one in the R5. You also get some nice features, like variable e-shutter speeds (single, 5fps, 20fps, 40fps, compared with only single and 20fps in the R5), raw burst, in-camera focus stacking (not just focus bracketing), an auto select feature for the subject to detect, etc.. The only advantage of the R5 seems to be more resolution, and it's not clear how much, if at all, that would benefit the OP.

sercheese · Mar 11, 2023

Alastair Norcross said:
RogerZoul said:

If you don't want to wait for an R5M2, why not an R5M1 now, rather than an R6M2? Why is an R6M2 your step down rather than an R5M1?

Click to expand...

Obviously I can't speak for the OP, but a couple of reasons spring to mind, if I were in the OP's position. First, the R6II is quite a bit cheaper than the R5. Even with some nice (temporary) price drops, the R5 is still $1000 more than the R6II. The updates in the R6II mean the AF system in particular is even better than the one in the R5. You also get some nice features, like variable e-shutter speeds (single, 5fps, 20fps, 40fps, compared with only single and 20fps in the R5), raw burst, in-camera focus stacking (not just focus bracketing), an auto select feature for the subject to detect, etc.. The only advantage of the R5 seems to be more resolution, and it's not clear how much, if at all, that would benefit the OP.

Thank you for your answer. It all comes to me wanting to have the newest gear on the market. I know that R6 Mk II came in Nov 2022 and it will be the one R6 for the next few years. I don't want to buy the R5 Mk I, as the risk that Mk II comes is high. I know it seems silly, but it would be a kind of disaster for me. If R5 Mk II was just announced, I would have difficulties choosing between it and R6 Mk II. I.ex. my old trusty 50d has an upper screen, etc. But it's true, I don't need high MPx camera. That would only produce an additional storage problem. Also for our parents living outside Switzerland (we come from Poland) and downloading those big files.

I know, I am being quite irritating with my need for RF 50mm F1.2, but I love to ask. Even if I would set few stops back (i.ex. till F2.8), I imagine the general IQ should be much better. Or am I a victim of the marketing and YouTube reviews?

Yes, I am aware that I'm overthinking it. I know this is my personal problem. I do the same with cars, road bikes, coffee machines, etc. It's quite tiring for my wife. That is why I'm testing your patience, instead of hers...

It was the same with the MacBook Pro M1. I was waiting for this kind of a laptop many years. I was watching each announcement, telling my wife "this is this year!" and then being once again disappointed by apple. But since I have this laptop, I am very happy (although it's clear I'm not using it's potential) and I will have it for many upcoming years.

I like the newest gear at the moment, particularly not long after the announcement. But afterwards I keep this gear for many years, not upgrading every 3 years. My smartphone is almost 5 years old, as I am waiting for the iPhone with USB C

So I am sure, I will stick to my choice for the camera and lens for many years. Maybe I will add additional one. But it would be difficult to explain why I need an upgrade from RF 50mm F1.8 to F1.2 in few years.

davel33 · Mar 11, 2023

Let me be a bit blunt

It seems like you are diving into waters way over your head.

YOU DONT NEED GIGA DOLLARS LENS'S to start out.

I would get an R body with the RF 24-105 stm and learn how to use it.

Then figure out what you want to do and how to do it and lens's to use and NO you dont need f1.2 lens's.

thunder storm · Mar 11, 2023

R2D2 said:
sercheese said:

thunder storm said:

Stm is about the AF-system, it has nothing to do with IQ.

Click to expand...

I know that, I just wanted to define STM lenses as those non L lenses.

After a while, I'm thinking about one of those two options:
1) RF 24-105mm F4 (for travel) plus RF 50mm F1.2 (at home or near home)

2) only RF 24-70mm F2.8 (general use for all situations)

Any thoughts?

Click to expand...

Both fine choices.

Agree.

R2D2 said:
Keep in mind that the 85mm f/1.2 will be the equivalent (on FF) to the 50 you were using on crop. However, I think that 50mm is much more desirable than 85 for small kids (and you might want to go wider yet).

Sigma 40mm f/1.4 Art HSM. Sharper, more affordable, and most important: faster AF.

R2D2 said:
The 50 will give you much more DOF control than either of the zooms, for that “special” look. And the 24-105 makes for a really nice walk-around lens (that’s what I use it for). Great combo.

OTOH the 24-70 is also very capable and always ready!

It also combines f/2.8 with fast AF.

R2D2 said:
R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

--

thunder storm · Mar 11, 2023

sercheese said:
koenkooi said:

The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

Click to expand...

If that's true, it would bring us back to the 2nd option with RF 24-70mm F2.8 as universal lens, with no practical need for F1.2, unless I take few stops back, i.ex. to F2, still with better IQ. Not so easy to decide...

I don't take RF 28-70mm F2.0 as an option, because it's a beast

No. Unusable for walk around purposes, so you would need another standard zoom for that.

sercheese said:
(as 85mm F1.2 is). Or... should I?

Generally too long for indoors and too heavy to bring along outdoors.

--

ZX11 · Mar 11, 2023

sercheese said:
koenkooi said:

The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

Click to expand...

If that's true, it would bring us back to the 2nd option with RF 24-70mm F2.8 as universal lens, with no practical need for F1.2, unless I take few stops back, i.ex. to F2, still with better IQ. Not so easy to decide...

I don't take RF 28-70mm F2.0 as an option, because it's a beast (as 85mm F1.2 is). Or... should I?

The thing about the 50 f1.2 is it is so versatile.

It can do DOF shots at f1.2, and gather dim light like f1.2 does, while still able to adjust to f2, f2.8, f4, etc to get a couple people's eyes sharp at the same time. Same can not be said about the non "L" options. You crank a RF 50 f1.8 open to f1.2 with a pair of pliers, it falls apart. It's not as photo versatile.

You also get durablility, lens coatings, a hood, UD elements, fast AF (ignore claims that it is slow), weather sealing, and edge to edge sharpness with the RF 50 f1.2.

Cries about it being expensive can be mitigated if you have the budget. Cries about it being heavy can be mitigated if you are a healthy adult. If two pounds bothers some, I offer a cell phone for photos as it is hard to beat for being light weight, and far lighter than a R5 with Sigma 40mm (truly a boat anchor

).

The dog wants this two pound dumbell that is easily carried.

--
"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."

sercheese · Mar 11, 2023

Thank you all for yet another insight full responses.

I don't want to be chaotic, but I have a 3rs option in mind right now

3) RF 24-70mm F2.8, RF 50mm F1.2 and RF 70-200mm F4.0

So I would like to ask is it better to have two lenses of the holy trinity but with no room between the edges @70mm or the combo RF 24-105mm F4.0 and RF 70-200mm F4.0 would give more flexibility, as one doesn't have to immediately change the lens after @70mm?

If I would go the 3rd route, then I would just buy all three altogether. If I would go the 4th route, I would wait with the tele zoom to see if I need it.

I'm asking because you sometimes wrote that the flexibility to take a shot, without change the lens is more important than having the whole focal range between 24mm and 200mm.

RF 50mm is a premium lens, which I will buy to have this unicorn.

And one more interesting thing if my past. As I used to be a student in Poland many years ago, I had some pocket money from my parents, less than 1'000zł/month. I saved two years, making some part jobs to buy a 5'000zł set Canon 50d & EF-S 17-55mm F2.8. I won't sell this combo, as it only has emotional value to me. It shows that I could patiently save money for something what I wanted, not having a lot of earnings. Nowadays to buy this whole set I'm talking about is just a matter of a financial decision if I want to burn a lot of money. But it's no stretch for me, as it was in the past. I am also no millionere, so I understand that this decision will affect my progress in savings, etc. But as I already wrote, I will have this camera and those lenses for many years. I am a Canon Believer. I've tried the Nikon way but couldn't get accustomed to the differences. So I am sure I will be happy with Canon. I've even rented R6 Mk I and it was a great experience. I immediately felt in home.

thunder storm · Mar 12, 2023

ZX11 said:
sercheese said:

koenkooi said:

The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

Click to expand...

If that's true, it would bring us back to the 2nd option with RF 24-70mm F2.8 as universal lens, with no practical need for F1.2, unless I take few stops back, i.ex. to F2, still with better IQ. Not so easy to decide...

I don't take RF 28-70mm F2.0 as an option, because it's a beast (as 85mm F1.2 is). Or... should I?

Click to expand...

The thing about the 50 f1.2 is it is so versatile.

It can do DOF shots at f1.2, and gather dim light like f1.2 does, while still able to adjust to f2, f2.8, f4, etc to get a couple people's eyes sharp at the same time. Same can not be said about the non "L" options. You crank a RF 50 f1.8 open to f1.2 with a pair of pliers, it falls apart. It's not as photo versatile.

50mm f/1.2 is great.

ZX11 said:
You also get durablility, lens coatings, a hood, UD elements, fast AF (ignore claims that it is slow),

It's all relative, but the 40mm Art is faster, and the 50mm GM is way faster yet.

ZX11 said:
weather sealing, and edge to edge sharpness with the RF 50 f1.2.

Cries about it being expensive can be mitigated if you have the budget. Cries about it being heavy can be mitigated if you are a healthy adult. If two pounds bothers some, I offer a cell phone for photos as it is hard to beat for being light weight, and far lighter than a R5 with Sigma 40mm (truly a boat anchor ).

The 40mm Art is for indoors at home. For it's wider slightly wider focal length it's a nice addition to a fast focusing 50mm. For portability Canon is simply the wrong brand, you can't blame Sigma for that, as the Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM is the goddess of all 50mm lenses for portability, AF speed & accuracy, and the complete silence of her AF system. The heavy RF 50mm f/1.2 boat anchor can't touch it.

For portability >> go Sony. The same is true for a compact 85mm f/1.4 as well.

Canon is the brand for slow focusing boat anchors.

MasterWayne · Mar 12, 2023

sercheese said:
Thank you all for yet another insight full responses.

I don't want to be chaotic, but I have a 3rs option in mind right now

3) RF 24-70mm F2.8, RF 50mm F1.2 and RF 70-200mm F4.0

So I would like to ask is it better to have two lenses of the holy trinity but with no room between the edges @70mm or the combo RF 24-105mm F4.0 and RF 70-200mm F4.0 would give more flexibility, as one doesn't have to immediately change the lens after @70mm?

If I would go the 3rd route, then I would just buy all three altogether. If I would go the 4th route, I would wait with the tele zoom to see if I need it.

I'm asking because you sometimes wrote that the flexibility to take a shot, without change the lens is more important than having the whole focal range between 24mm and 200mm.

RF 50mm is a premium lens, which I will buy to have this unicorn.

And one more interesting thing if my past. As I used to be a student in Poland many years ago, I had some pocket money from my parents, less than 1'000zł/month. I saved two years, making some part jobs to buy a 5'000zł set Canon 50d & EF-S 17-55mm F2.8. I won't sell this combo, as it only has emotional value to me. It shows that I could patiently save money for something what I wanted, not having a lot of earnings. Nowadays to buy this whole set I'm talking about is just a matter of a financial decision if I want to burn a lot of money. But it's no stretch for me, as it was in the past. I am also no millionere, so I understand that this decision will affect my progress in savings, etc. But as I already wrote, I will have this camera and those lenses for many years. I am a Canon Believer. I've tried the Nikon way but couldn't get accustomed to the differences. So I am sure I will be happy with Canon. I've even rented R6 Mk I and it was a great experience. I immediately felt in home.

When I bought the R5, I deliberately took the decision to go with the RF 24-105 F4 instead of the RF 24-70 2.8.

Reasons being:

The 24-105 is 200gr lighter - - > good for traveling.

24-70 is a rather limited focal length, imo. I used this equivalent focal length in the past, and it was often too short when trying to focus on something more distant. 105mm is definitely better.

At 105mm f4, the DOF is even shallower than at 70mm f2.8, so at least the same portrait potential.

Last but not least, f2.8 is often not bright enough in the very low light situation a living room in the evening provides. So you'd end up with a prime anyways.

After 2.5 years, my conclusion is that this was the right decision for me. At no point I considered a switch or was mad about that decision. Rather arguing what primes go well with it..

Note that the IQ of the RF 24-105 in the corners(!) is only "ok" at 24mm. There seems to be some sample variation with respect to that property, some report it, some not... Maybe it's also just a matter of personal expectations. Since you're targeting a "normal resolution" body, it probably is no issue at all..

sercheese · Mar 12, 2023

After a night sleep I've thought one more time, that the best option, the most optimal is combo RF 50mm F1.2 for those low light indoor situations and for 3d pop near home, plus RF 24-105mm F4.0 as a light lens, for a general use, also for my wife or other people who would make some pictures of us, also good for filming.

I asked about the RF 100 mm F2.8 macro lens (MFD 26cm, 1.4x magnification). My fear is that RF 50mm won't be optimal for those close up photos of feet, nose, fingers, etc., while not being a macro lens (MFD 40cm, 0.19x magnification). Does it matter? Or maybe I should rent it for 2 weeks (1/5th of the price) and that's it? As I already wrote, I have no plans to take pictures of some insects or flowers in the future. Could I use it also as a tele prime for people?

RF 135 mm F1.8 would be quite nice, but it's just on the opposite side of my needs (MFD 70cm, 0.26x magnification). This lens would be better for low light situation in church, school, etc. so no need for it right now. But a great extension in the future, I think better than RF 100 mm F2.8 macro.

Laqup · Mar 12, 2023

The 50 1.2 is great, but the max aperture has limits in terms of usefulness when being used indoors at relatively small distances to the subject. You will see that not too much is in focus at 1.2. At the same time you are worried about macro.

This sounds like you could actually benefit from a set of primes 35,50,85 STM for less money overall while covering all your "macro" needs. 1:1 magnification is not really necessary for the kind of shots you have in mind.

And btw, if you are not super experienced it will be hard for you to see any difference between 50 1.8 STM and 50 1.2 both at 1.8 with subjects in the center area in most use cases. The huge price tag is a bit misleading, you pay mainly for the ability to go to 1.2 in the first place and for better performance in the corners (often not needed for portraits) and then some additional overall optical performance that will not be visible in a lot of situations indoors.

PAntunes · Mar 12, 2023

sercheese said:
After a night sleep I've thought one more time, that the best option, the most optimal is combo RF 50mm F1.2 for those low light indoor situations and for 3d pop near home, plus RF 24-105mm F4.0 as a light lens, for a general use, also for my wife or other people who would make some pictures of us, also good for filming.

I asked about the RF 100 mm F2.8 macro lens (MFD 26cm, 1.4x magnification). My fear is that RF 50mm won't be optimal for those close up photos of feet, nose, fingers, etc., while not being a macro lens (MFD 40cm, 0.19x magnification). Does it matter? Or maybe I should rent it for 2 weeks (1/5th of the price) and that's it? As I already wrote, I have no plans to take pictures of some insects or flowers in the future. Could I use it also as a tele prime for people?

RF 135 mm F1.8 would be quite nice, but it's just on the opposite side of my needs (MFD 70cm, 0.26x magnification). This lens would be better for low light situation in church, school, etc. so no need for it right now. But a great extension in the future, I think better than RF 100 mm F2.8 macro.

Have you considered other brand options?

If you want good lenses but don't want to spend a fortune, you have great lenses for sony from both OEM and third party that would fit perfectly.

samyang 50 1.4 II £499.00 with a fast AF and great IQ even wide open. Would give you great separation even indoors.

Tamron 28-75 2.8 £849.00 is super light, so a great walk around lens the will be useful indoors as well, instead of a f4 lens.

If you want a macro that would also be a good portrait lens:

Sigma 105mm F/2.8 £649.00
Sony FE 90mm F/2.8 £849.00
Sigma 70mm F/2.8 £449.00

For the price of the 50 1.2 you get the full lens set.

PS: Have you considered an extra compact camera to have around the baby all the time? I got a sony rx100Va, 20mp, 28-70 1.8-2.8 lens, 4k videos, eye-af, phase detect af, specifically to be a family camera when I don't want to grab the big kit. A good phone could do a similar job, but...

Myles Baker · Mar 12, 2023

thunder storm said:
ZX11 said:

sercheese said:

koenkooi said:

The RF50 f/1.2 I rented handled the shallow DoF things, but I didn’t encounter many situations where f/1.2 was useful, a person holding a baby rarely fits into the DoF. Unless you go for full body portraits, which enters the ‘I need a larger house’ situation again

Click to expand...

If that's true, it would bring us back to the 2nd option with RF 24-70mm F2.8 as universal lens, with no practical need for F1.2, unless I take few stops back, i.ex. to F2, still with better IQ. Not so easy to decide...

I don't take RF 28-70mm F2.0 as an option, because it's a beast (as 85mm F1.2 is). Or... should I?

Click to expand...

The thing about the 50 f1.2 is it is so versatile.

It can do DOF shots at f1.2, and gather dim light like f1.2 does, while still able to adjust to f2, f2.8, f4, etc to get a couple people's eyes sharp at the same time. Same can not be said about the non "L" options. You crank a RF 50 f1.8 open to f1.2 with a pair of pliers, it falls apart. It's not as photo versatile.

Click to expand...

50mm f/1.2 is great.

thunder storm said:

You also get durablility, lens coatings, a hood, UD elements, fast AF (ignore claims that it is slow),

Click to expand...

It's all relative, but the 40mm Art is faster, and the 50mm GM is way faster yet.

thunder storm said:

weather sealing, and edge to edge sharpness with the RF 50 f1.2.

Cries about it being expensive can be mitigated if you have the budget. Cries about it being heavy can be mitigated if you are a healthy adult. If two pounds bothers some, I offer a cell phone for photos as it is hard to beat for being light weight, and far lighter than a R5 with Sigma 40mm (truly a boat anchor ).

Click to expand...

The 40mm Art is for indoors at home. For it's wider slightly wider focal length it's a nice addition to a fast focusing 50mm. For portability Canon is simply the wrong brand, you can't blame Sigma for that, as the Sony 50mm f/1.2 GM is the goddess of all 50mm lenses for portability, AF speed & accuracy, and the complete silence of her AF system. The heavy RF 50mm f/1.2 boat anchor can't touch it.

For portability >> go Sony. The same is true for a compact 85mm f/1.4 as well.

Canon is the brand for slow focusing boat anchors.

The Sony 50 f1.2 is 87mm x 108mm and 778g

The Canon RF f1.2 is 89.8 mm x 108mm and 950g

The 2 lenses are almost exactly the same size but the Sony is 172g lighter.

The Sony 85 f1.4 is 89.5mm x 107.5mm and 820g

Canon doesn't have an RF 85 f1.4 but does have an EF 85 f1.4 which is 88.6mm x 105.4mm and 950g. Again almost identical in size but 130g heavier. I would expect an RF version (if & when one comes out) to be lighter.

Canon has a larger & heavier RF 85 f1.2 and a smaller & lighter RF 85 f2. Sony doesn't have an 85 f1 2 at this time but their 85 f1.8 is quite a bit lighter than Canons RF 85 f2 but doesn't have IS nor can it match the minimum focus distance / max. magnification of the Canon.

I expect the rumoured Sony 85 f1.2, based on what they have done with their latest lenses, to be lighter than Canons as well but not necessarily smaller.

None of the f1.2 lenses are exactly what I'd call small & light, but I don't think anyone is expecting them to be, the size is virtually the same and the weight difference, not that significant.

For reference the Nikon Z 50 f1.2 is 85.9mm x 150mm and 1090g (bith larger & heavier than the Sony & Canon.

thunder storm · Mar 12, 2023

sercheese said:
After a night sleep I've thought one more time, that the best option, the most optimal is combo RF 50mm F1.2 for those low light indoor situations and for 3d pop near home, plus RF 24-105mm F4.0 as a light lens, for a general use, also for my wife or other people who would make some pictures of us, also good for filming.

I asked about the RF 100 mm F2.8 macro lens (MFD 26cm, 1.4x magnification). My fear is that RF 50mm won't be optimal for those close up photos of feet, nose, fingers, etc., while not being a macro lens (MFD 40cm, 0.19x magnification). Does it matter? Or maybe I should rent it for 2 weeks (1/5th of the price) and that's it? As I already wrote, I have no plans to take pictures of some insects or flowers in the future. Could I use it also as a tele prime for people?

Maybe that's where the 85mm f/2.0 IS stm comes in. 0.5 times magnification is more than enough, and it's a usefil lens for other purposes as well.

sercheese said:
RF 135 mm F1.8 would be quite nice, but it's just on the opposite side of my needs (MFD 70cm, 0.26x magnification). This lens would be better for low light situation in church, school, etc. so no need for it right now. But a great extension in the future, I think better than RF 100 mm F2.8 macro.

100mm is not flexible, and f/2.8 is nothing special for a prime.

sercheese · Mar 12, 2023

I have a side question about the SD Cards. I can buy Lexar Professional 1667X UHS-II v60 or Lexar Professional 2000X UHS-II v90, the 1800x is not available. I read that v60 was enough for photos with R6 Mk I. I haven't found much information about R6 Mk II and additional video recording. 2000x v90 cost twice as much as 1667x v60 for the same size.

Considering my usage (family photos with some short videos) which one should I choose? I will shoot RAW + JPEG and record 4k video - should I buy 2x 128GB (redundancy mode) or 2x 256GB?

Struggling between RF USM and STM lineup as an amateur

Member

Member

Senior Member

Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Member

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Veteran Member

Member

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts