Building a system - EOS RP

I have the godox V1 kind of big but works well with my rp. What about the 85 f2 or 16 2.8 . But I am a portrait king of guy.

Son of Thunder wrote:

I have the godox V1 kind of big but works well with my rp. What about the 85 f2 or 16 2.8 . But I am a portrait king of guy.

I don't have either of those RF lenses.  I am sure the RF 85 f2 is good.  I don't know about the RF 16mm for portraits, might be somewhat distorted?

There are some options. I would look at adding another camera with a smaller sensor. Either a bridge camera with reach or an APS-C camera with a cheaper tele. For example a Canon APS-C body with a 300mm zoom will give you 480mm of FF reach. And 70-300mm EF lenses are a dime a dozen. Kind of clunky but something to think about; I'm sure you can get an APS-C body + 70-300 for less than the cost of the RF 100-400.

Suggestions:

EL-100 flash

RF 16mm f2.8

Add these to the RF 24-240 and you will cover 99% of everything you will shoot. Both of these are weightless and the flash has bounce capability. The lens will get those wide landscapes the 24mm end of the zoom won't.

the_mac wrote:

As a next step, I'm trying to decide between:

• Godox V860 and X2 trigger so that I can have some lighting. Worried that the V860 will feel too big when mounted on the camera and I'll never use it as a walking-around flash.

As mentioned, the Godox TT350c is a much better fit. If you want to save some money, get the Adorama Flashpoint refurb version (same flash).

If you want a little higher power, faster recycling times, more batt capacity, better controls, but keep the same low profile, the Nissin i40 is also a good choice (tho lots more expensive, and a little heavier). I have both.

• Canon RF 100-400 F5.6-8 IS USM. I'm worried that it overlaps a lot of the range of my current 24-240 and isn't really buying me that much more reach.

The new RF 100-400 would be the obvious choice if you don't want to spend too much, and/or if you don't want to lug around a heavy lens.

Keep in mind that the 100-400 is much better at the long end than the 24-240. This will buy you better IQ and thus even more reach (relative to your 240). You won't have to sharpen as much, and your noise reduction will produce cleaner files. BTW I highly recommend DxO's Photolab 5 (with DeepPRIME), especially since you'll be shooting at some small apertures.

Get the RF 1.4x if you need more reach. It's excellent.

• Canon RF 800 F11 IS STM. I'm worried that between the lack of close-focus and not having any zoom that I'd miss a lot of opportunities, but maybe that just means carrying the 24-240 and switching lenses as needed.

The 800 becomes a specialty lens now, if you're mounting the 24-240 for everything else. IOW you won't want to leave the 800 (or 600) mounted for extended periods of time when hiking or just kicking around, due to its limitations (looong MFD and lack of zoom). You'll kick yourself any time you have a close(r) shot opportunity.

If you're dedicating a shoot to just (not close) birds, then the two STM primes can work out well.

I have the RF 100-500 (with 1.4x) and I just love it for the close stuff that pops up on my hikes, from birds and critters to flowers and butterflies. This reflects my own preference however.

Anhinga posing on the shoreline for us, felt my framing worked out well here

+1 very nice shot. A new lens will improve on the IQ quite a bit tho.

Start getting excited!

R2

sportyaccordy wrote:

There are some options. I would look at adding another camera with a smaller sensor. Either a bridge camera with reach or an APS-C camera with a cheaper tele. For example a Canon APS-C body with a 300mm zoom will give you 480mm of FF reach. And 70-300mm EF lenses are a dime a dozen. Kind of clunky but something to think about; I'm sure you can get an APS-C body + 70-300 for less than the cost of the RF 100-400.

The best of the cheaper 70-300 is the EF 70-300 II NanoUSM and I think it runs about $550

tdbmd wrote:

Son of Thunder wrote:

I have the godox V1 kind of big but works well with my rp. What about the 85 f2 or 16 2.8 . But I am a portrait king of guy.

I don't have either of those RF lenses. I am sure the RF 85 f2 is good. I don't know about the RF 16mm for portraits, might be somewhat distorted?

Think group shots I have a large family

Son of Thunder wrote:

tdbmd wrote:

Son of Thunder wrote:

I have the godox V1 kind of big but works well with my rp. What about the 85 f2 or 16 2.8 . But I am a portrait king of guy.

I don't have either of those RF lenses. I am sure the RF 85 f2 is good. I don't know about the RF 16mm for portraits, might be somewhat distorted?

Think group shots I have a large family

So long as you don't have people right at the edge of the frame, this can work. Even then, the distortion tool in Lightroom can come in handy

DongaMogudu wrote:

tdbmd wrote:

Son of Thunder wrote:

I have the godox V1 kind of big but works well with my rp. What about the 85 f2 or 16 2.8 . But I am a portrait king of guy.

I don't have either of those RF lenses. I am sure the RF 85 f2 is good. I don't know about the RF 16mm for portraits, might be somewhat distorted?

I also got RP with 24-240mm lens instead of RF 24-105mm F/4 lens. I have EF 24-70mm F/4

I have an order in for the 24-240 and the EF 24-70 F4.

and EF 50mm F/1.8 lens. Always wondered if it is better to sell EF 24-70mm and get 24-105mm F/4 lens

I considered this trade and actually bought the RF 24-105 F4 as a kit with my R, planning to sell the EF 24-70 F4.  To me, 105 wasn't longer enough than 70 to matter as much as the very cool 0.7-1 macro focus on the EF lens.

or 35mm prime.

If you don't want to keep a somewhat optically better normal zoom with the 0.7-1 macro, the RF 35 F1.8 is a great choice.  It's my number one low light socializing lens.  If shooting events in low light, it's one of two, combined with an 85, that make the shoot.  The 0.5-1 macro function at the 35mm length seems prefect for food and good for florals.  Occasionally, the RF 16 F2.8 could be interesting to get a few shots of the venue and large groups.