RF 24-240 + RF 35 thread

[RLight]

Starting a thread dedicated to this combo. RF 24-240 for outdoors and RF 35 for indoors. Lower cost FF solution where the only lens swap is environmental...

First up RF 35mm

 

[JustUs7]

24-240

 

[JustUs7]

More 24-240

 

[RLight]

Landscape












Landscape




Fine detail












Landscape





Labeled the picture profile adjustments in RAW (from Auto)

 

[RLight]

I'll touch on this image later when I do a formal review...

 

[JustUs7]

From the 24-240 on a hike and in the yard. When I use the Canon app to move to my phone, it appears to shrink and distort the files I’ll have to look into that.









And one from the RF 35....

 

[thunder storm]

Labeled the picture profile adjustments in RAW (from Auto)

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

--
M for zooms, RF for primes

 

[RLight]

Labeled the picture profile adjustments in RAW (from Auto)

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

I need to setup another C mode to address (with HTP on, or off perhaps).

Like HTP, things start to look a bit cartoonish when enabled (sometimes), or when you post it to be HTP if you will, like I did here without. Canon themselves warns enabling HTP can produce images that look less, normal, if you will too. I've noted it myself. Works better on the M6 II in my observation (for producing "normal" looking images). I'll be looking at HTP harder the next R body I get, assuming I get one. HEIF formats can hold more DR (making more use of HTP) and furthermore the age of the R's sensor vs the M6 II shows in things like post processing latitude and ISO response (for the format size; FF should be a larger advantage when Canon updates their FF sensors) which I suspect the R5 and R6 should bring the same level of improvements as the M6 II sensor brought vs the M50.

 

[PhotoKhan]

...I find your approach one of the most effective I have ever seen, in what comes to price/performance on FF.

Kind of a low cost Egg of Columbus, really...

PK

 

[thunder storm]

Labeled the picture profile adjustments in RAW (from Auto)

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

Yes that's a problem, you can't go lower than 200 with HTP.

I need to setup another C mode to address (with HTP on, or off perhaps).

I have a C-mode for outdoors/plenty of light (Av, full mechanical shutter), and i have HTP in the My Menu. I'm debating if i will have HTP turned on on default in that C-mode, as every time you switch the camera off and back on again you have to think about turning on HTP.

With the sigma f/1.4 primes i have the same problem as you with the f/2.0 zoom >> ISO 200 is the lowest you can get. And you can't program the drop in ND filter in a C-mode (we are not in heaven, are we ). A filter is useful, but i noticed the 105 f/1.4 looses it's tracking capabilities with the CP filter (which aren't all that great already without filter). I have no dummy filter, and changing adapters is a pain of course. Maybe the conclusion should be here: i should get that dummy adapter, but i really don't want to as it has a stupid high price for what it is.....

Like HTP, things start to look a bit cartoonish when enabled (sometimes), or when you post it to be HTP if you will, like I did here without. Canon themselves warns enabling HTP can produce images that look less, normal, if you will too. I've noted it myself. Work better on the M6 II in my observation (for producing "normal" looking images).

I didn't run into these problems yet, but thanks for the warning.

--
EF glass = bang for my buck

 

[RLight]

Labeled the picture profile adjustments in RAW (from Auto)

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

Yes that's a problem, you can't go lower than 200 with HTP.

I need to setup another C mode to address (with HTP on, or off perhaps).

I have a C-mode for outdoors/plenty of light (Av, full mechanical shutter), and i have HTP in the My Menu. I'm debating if i will have HTP turned on on default in that C-mode, as every time you switch the camera off and back on again you have to think about turning on HTP.

Ditto. Same problem and solution (Setting it to a C mode; already have it in a My Menu). Be nice to have a button you can program against this (there isn't, that I know of).

With the sigma f/1.4 primes i have the same problem as you with the f/2.0 zoom >> ISO 200 is the lowest you can get. And you can't program the drop in ND filter in a C-mode (we are not in heaven, are we ). A filter is useful, but i noticed the 105 f/1.4 looses it's tracking capabilities with the CP filter (which aren't all that great already without filter). I have no dummy filter, and changing adapters is a pain of course. Maybe the conclusion should be here: i should get that dummy adapter, but i really don't want to as it has a stupid high price for what it is.....

Like HTP, things start to look a bit cartoonish when enabled (sometimes), or when you post it to be HTP if you will, like I did here without. Canon themselves warns enabling HTP can produce images that look less, normal, if you will too. I've noted it myself. Work better on the M6 II in my observation (for producing "normal" looking images).

I didn't run into these problems yet, but thanks for the warning.

 

[RLight]

...I find your approach one of the most effective I have ever seen, in what comes to price/performance on FF.

Kind of a low cost Egg of Columbus, really...

PK

I think that's the idea (on Canon's behalf) in providing the first two non-L RF lenses for the system to address the most common scenarios. You could even go a step further and pair it with an RP, for low-er size/footprint too. I think the R6 will fill this slot later this year.

To your point, meshing 35mm for indoor/low light with 24-240 for outdoor/bright light actually was the result of a challenge I gave myself to simplify my setup back in October of last year where I spent 40 days shooting just the EF-M 22mm and EF-M 18-150mm on the M6 Mark II (we had a 40 day fast so I choose to simplify my camera gear as that's a large part of my personal life). I ignored my EOS R setup entirely and all my other optics. Spectacular results and very effective (if you ask me). It also allows you to focus on just shooting. It helps with creativity having to work around where you would otherwise swap a lens; you capture more moments, and use more ingenuity in doing so and never need to bring a bag, or another lens for that matter in most cases.

I believe you're an M shooter if memory serves me. I highly recommend this combo both for the M system (22 for indoors, 18-150 for outdoors) and R system (35mm for indoors, 24-240 for outdoors).

 

[sobrien]

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

Yes that's a problem, you can't go lower than 200 with HTP.

If you think about what HTP does I think you would realise that that is not a problem.

When you shoot HTP the camera underexposes by a stop (hence why ISO 200 is the minimum value you can select) and applies a tonal adjustment to balance out the exposure, whilst preserving highlights. So when you are at the limit of your shutter speed and shooting HTP at ISO 200 you are retaining the same highlight information as you would shooting without HTP at ISO 100. The two images will look the same except the HTP one should have slightly boosted shadows.

I need to setup another C mode to address (with HTP on, or off perhaps).

I have a C-mode for outdoors/plenty of light (Av, full mechanical shutter), and i have HTP in the My Menu. I'm debating if i will have HTP turned on on default in that C-mode, as every time you switch the camera off and back on again you have to think about turning on HTP.

With the sigma f/1.4 primes i have the same problem as you with the f/2.0 zoom >> ISO 200 is the lowest you can get.

Again, not a problem, so you needn’t let it be a cause of stress. Leave it on all the time if you like the look of the tonal adjustment. If you use it, though, you can’t also use ALO, which is also a useful tonal adjustment.

And you can't program the drop in ND filter in a C-mode (we are not in heaven, are we ). A filter is useful, but i noticed the 105 f/1.4 looses it's tracking capabilities with the CP filter (which aren't all that great already without filter). I have no dummy filter, and changing adapters is a pain of course. Maybe the conclusion should be here: i should get that dummy adapter, but i really don't want to as it has a stupid high price for what it is.....

Like HTP, things start to look a bit cartoonish when enabled (sometimes), or when you post it to be HTP if you will, like I did here without. Canon themselves warns enabling HTP can produce images that look less, normal, if you will too. I've noted it myself. Work better on the M6 II in my observation (for producing "normal" looking images).

I didn't run into these problems yet, but thanks for the warning.

 

[sobrien]

thunder storm wrote

Ditto. Same problem and solution (Setting it to a C mode; already have it in a My Menu). Be nice to have a button you can program against this (there isn't, that I know of).

See my reply to Thunder Storm above. I think that problem might be entirely illusory.

I agree, though, that it would be nice to have a button dedicated to it. Maybe a button that toggles between HTP, ALO and off? That’d be kinda cool actually.

With the sigma f/1.4 primes i have the same problem as you with the f/2.0 zoom >> ISO 200 is the lowest you can get. And you can't program the drop in ND filter in a C-mode (we are not in heaven, are we ). A filter is useful, but i noticed the 105 f/1.4 looses it's tracking capabilities with the CP filter (which aren't all that great already without filter). I have no dummy filter, and changing adapters is a pain of course. Maybe the conclusion should be here: i should get that dummy adapter, but i really don't want to as it has a stupid high price for what it is.....

Like HTP, things start to look a bit cartoonish when enabled (sometimes), or when you post it to be HTP if you will, like I did here without. Canon themselves warns enabling HTP can produce images that look less, normal, if you will too. I've noted it myself. Work better on the M6 II in my observation (for producing "normal" looking images).

I didn't run into these problems yet, but thanks for the warning.

 

[RLight]

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

Yes that's a problem, you can't go lower than 200 with HTP.

If you think about what HTP does I think you would realise that that is not a problem.

I concur with your rationale regarding image quality. However, when you shoot fast glass at mid-day outside, things like f/1.2 and f/2 means your shutter is punching 1/5000-1/8000, at ISO100. At 200? Overexposure, or drop your stop. When you're shooting a RF 28-70 f/2L on a portrait, dropping your stop is not what you want to.

Now if you're shooting f/2.8 glass or slower? You're correct, might as well leave it on. You'll never exceed 1/8000, even at ISO200.

 

[RLight]

thunder storm wrote

Ditto. Same problem and solution (Setting it to a C mode; already have it in a My Menu). Be nice to have a button you can program against this (there isn't, that I know of).

See my reply to Thunder Storm above. I think that problem might be entirely illusory.

I agree, though, that it would be nice to have a button dedicated to it. Maybe a button that toggles between HTP, ALO and off? That’d be kinda cool actually.

Now that's smart. To your point both ALO and HTP are very useful. Wish I could toggle that on a dial! That'd be sweet where I can scroll through and preview the effects (sorta like how you can with WBs in video).

 

[sobrien]

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

Yes that's a problem, you can't go lower than 200 with HTP.

If you think about what HTP does I think you would realise that that is not a problem.

I concur with your rationale regarding image quality. However, when you shoot fast glass at mid-day outside, things like f/1.2 and f/2 means your shutter is punching 1/5000-1/8000, at ISO100. At 200? Overexposure, or drop your stop. When you're shooting a RF 28-70 f/2L on a portrait, dropping your stop is not what you want to.

My point is that shooting HTP at ISO 200 does not overexpose any more than shooting without HTP at ISO 100. It is an identical raw exposure. It might feel wrong to be at ISO 200 in those circumstances but you are no worse off in terms of blown highlights.

Now if you're shooting f/2.8 glass or slower? You're correct, might as well leave it on. You'll never exceed 1/8000, even at ISO200.

 

[RLight]

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

Yes that's a problem, you can't go lower than 200 with HTP.

If you think about what HTP does I think you would realise that that is not a problem.

I concur with your rationale regarding image quality. However, when you shoot fast glass at mid-day outside, things like f/1.2 and f/2 means your shutter is punching 1/5000-1/8000, at ISO100. At 200? Overexposure, or drop your stop. When you're shooting a RF 28-70 f/2L on a portrait, dropping your stop is not what you want to.

My point is that shooting HTP at ISO 200 does not overexpose any more than shooting without HTP at ISO 100. It is an identical raw exposure. It might feel wrong to be at ISO 200 in those circumstances but you are no worse off in terms of blown highlights.

Not true.

I had the same thought and shot both my former M6 Mark II + 32mm @ f/1.4.

It overexposed with HTP @ f/1.4 (but not f/2) and correctly obliged f/1.4 @ 1/4000 without overexposure with HTP off.

To DPR's own point, it comes down to what tonal curve and sensor response are used to get a given exposure. The base exposure, is higher as the ISO 200 indicates. But, it's coming to ISO 200 through a different means (not sensor amplification, and different tonal curve, if I understand it correctly).

But, ISO 100 is still ISO 100 and ISO 200 is still ISO 200. ISO is ISO and exposure is exposure is what I'm saying.

You're saying the how, comes with no real drawbacks. I'm saying there's one, exposure

 

[diarimarcopolo]

Starting a thread dedicated to this combo. RF 24-240 for outdoors and RF 35 for indoors. Lower cost FF solution where the only lens swap is environmental...

I have the combo RF 24-105L and RF 35 and I really enjoy them on R!

The 35 is really special and when I want to stay light I use only this also for outdoor... with 35mm you can do everything, from landscape to portrait and macro!

I think that also the bokeh is really pleasant!

 

[sobrien]

Did you use Highlight Tone Priority?

I didn't there, no. Highlight trim and shadow push in post on these. About 2-3 stops if memory serves me. DPP4 and LR's Auto wanted to push it harder and I yanked it back as you want some contrast for dramatic flare if you will.

Unlike the M6 Mark II, I don't use HTP as perversely; even though I have 1/8000 capability, I also have 28-70 f/2L capability, which will hit it, at ISO 100...

Yes that's a problem, you can't go lower than 200 with HTP.

If you think about what HTP does I think you would realise that that is not a problem.

I concur with your rationale regarding image quality. However, when you shoot fast glass at mid-day outside, things like f/1.2 and f/2 means your shutter is punching 1/5000-1/8000, at ISO100. At 200? Overexposure, or drop your stop. When you're shooting a RF 28-70 f/2L on a portrait, dropping your stop is not what you want to.

My point is that shooting HTP at ISO 200 does not overexpose any more than shooting without HTP at ISO 100. It is an identical raw exposure. It might feel wrong to be at ISO 200 in those circumstances but you are no worse off in terms of blown highlights.

Not true.

I had the same thought and shot both my former M6 Mark II + 32mm @ f/1.4.

It overexposed with HTP @ f/1.4 (but not f/2) and correctly obliged f/1.4 @ 1/4000 without overexposure with HTP off.

To DPR's own point, it comes down to what tonal curve and sensor response are used to get a given exposure. The base exposure, is higher as the ISO 200 indicates. But, it's coming to ISO 200 through a different means (not sensor amplification, and different tonal curve, if I understand it correctly).

But, ISO 100 is still ISO 100 and ISO 200 is still ISO 200. ISO is ISO and exposure is exposure is what I'm saying.

You're saying the how, comes with no real drawbacks. I'm saying there's one, exposure

The drawback is added noise in the darker parts of the image that have had to have been amped up.

Rawdigger folk have confirmed that HTP ISO 200 is the same as non-HTP ISO 100 but subject to selective amping/tonal curving or however you want to describe it. It’s actually pretty clever when you think about it.

Loading…

www.rawdigger.com

That is also consistent with my own testing - different tones but same highlight clipping with HTP and ISO 200 as with ISO 100 and all other setting identical.