Never ever try a PRIME lens.. Going back to a ZOOM, you get too obsessed w. IQ

Thx Roger, Mac, Dave, will upgrade my std zoom (EF 24-105 Mk ii) as it is too far from my primes..  And yes, the RF version is supposedly better

Looking at EF 24-70 F/4 or EF 24-70 F/2.8 Mk ii for now

The one lens I will NOT sell... my EF 135 F2, truly special shots with this one lens..

Thx again, rgds, Gaul

MAC wrote:

gaul wrote:

davel33 wrote:

I have a few questions if you dont mind

#1 Do you crop a LOT, size and how often ?

#2 When you made this comparison how much did you enlarge them, 100% ?

#3 What res is your monitor ?

I use two Asus ProArt 24" at 1920 x 1200 = 2,304,000

My R6 has a 20mpx sensor 5472 x 3648 = 19,961,856

My Canon photo printer will print 13x19 at maybe that res at max dpi, I would have to check but the amount of ink would bankrupt me

BUT I do sorta agree with you When I bought my R the first lens's were all primes rf35 rf1.8, rf 50 f1.8 and RF 85 f2.

I like to do my composition in camera as much as I can which can be hard to do with primes.

I am asking because I was an electrical engineer and one thing that I had to learn the hard way is a closed mind never gets better**, so I ask a lot of questions

Thank you

Dave

** Your mind is like a parachute it MUST be open to work

Hi Dave,

Yes, I was doing "pixel peeping"

32inch 4k Monitor and yes at 200%

Yes, yes, I am at fault, I confess...

Still, my PRIMES (all of them) did shine more from F/4 to F/5.6 compared to my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii

But a 2nd batch of test with these 2 parameters changed are interesting too:

- In order to give an advantage to the zoom and benefit from IS, I did reduce the shutter speed for pics with my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii

- I also included tests at lower apertures as F/8

Both new parameters made the EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii results look more interesting

For what it is worth, following my own humbles tests, UPDATED RESULT:

• All my primes are much better at normal or high shutter speed than my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii
• Apart from focal flexibility.. obviously... I will now consider my usage of my zoom EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii for the following scenario: Slow shutter speeds thanks to IS and low apertures F/8 and less

My primes tend to be "old" ones without IS, so yes, this is not a perfect test of a new prime with IS vs a new zoom with IS

Rgds, Gaul

swapping to primes is a pain, gets you dust, and pixel peeping doesn't represent real pictures

In real pictures, viewed at the image level where real pictures are viewed, the versatility of the RF 24-105 F4 L, the best 24-105 ever made, is one of my favorites

For sure the versatilty together with its small size and weight and mostly very good IQ are very appealing assets of this lens. I like it too for these reasons.

Still there is the price to pay - it will never give the look which 40/1.4 or 105/1.4 can give. Or allow to shoot handheld under conditions these two allow. No pixel peeping needed.  And swapping lenses is the price one has to pay if he wants something different or just demands more for whatever reason.

Different tools for different purposes.

Canon_Guy wrote:

MAC wrote:

gaul wrote:

davel33 wrote:

I have a few questions if you dont mind

#1 Do you crop a LOT, size and how often ?

#2 When you made this comparison how much did you enlarge them, 100% ?

#3 What res is your monitor ?

I use two Asus ProArt 24" at 1920 x 1200 = 2,304,000

My R6 has a 20mpx sensor 5472 x 3648 = 19,961,856

My Canon photo printer will print 13x19 at maybe that res at max dpi, I would have to check but the amount of ink would bankrupt me

BUT I do sorta agree with you When I bought my R the first lens's were all primes rf35 rf1.8, rf 50 f1.8 and RF 85 f2.

I like to do my composition in camera as much as I can which can be hard to do with primes.

I am asking because I was an electrical engineer and one thing that I had to learn the hard way is a closed mind never gets better**, so I ask a lot of questions

Thank you

Dave

** Your mind is like a parachute it MUST be open to work

Hi Dave,

Yes, I was doing "pixel peeping"

32inch 4k Monitor and yes at 200%

Yes, yes, I am at fault, I confess...

Still, my PRIMES (all of them) did shine more from F/4 to F/5.6 compared to my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii

But a 2nd batch of test with these 2 parameters changed are interesting too:

- In order to give an advantage to the zoom and benefit from IS, I did reduce the shutter speed for pics with my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii

- I also included tests at lower apertures as F/8

Both new parameters made the EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii results look more interesting

For what it is worth, following my own humbles tests, UPDATED RESULT:

• All my primes are much better at normal or high shutter speed than my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii
• Apart from focal flexibility.. obviously... I will now consider my usage of my zoom EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii for the following scenario: Slow shutter speeds thanks to IS and low apertures F/8 and less

My primes tend to be "old" ones without IS, so yes, this is not a perfect test of a new prime with IS vs a new zoom with IS

Rgds, Gaul

swapping to primes is a pain, gets you dust, and pixel peeping doesn't represent real pictures

In real pictures, viewed at the image level where real pictures are viewed, the versatility of the RF 24-105 F4 L, the best 24-105 ever made, is one of my favorites

For sure the versatilty together with its small size and weight and mostly very good IQ are very appealing assets of this lens. I like it too for these reasons.

Still there is the price to pay - it will never give the look which 40/1.4 or 105/1.4 can give.

yep, different horses

Or allow to shoot handheld under conditions these two allow.

for moving subjects, yes

for static subjects, the 5 stops of IS is really good

No pixel peeping needed. And swapping lenses is the price one has to pay if he wants something different or just demands more for whatever reason.

Different tools for different purposes.

well said

Rodger in Edmonton wrote:

gaul wrote:

Thx Roger, Mac, Dave, will upgrade my std zoom (EF 24-105 Mk ii) as it is too far from my primes.. And yes, the RF version is supposedly better

Looking at EF 24-70 F/4 or EF 24-70 F/2.8 Mk ii for now

The one lens I will NOT sell... my EF 135 F2, truly special shots with this one lens..

Thx again, rgds, Gaul

I was looking at your gear Gaul are you a 6D or an RF cat?

Hello Roger

Still with a 6D Mk i

At some point will have to gradually initiating a move to RF

Thx, Gaul

MAC wrote:

Canon_Guy wrote:

MAC wrote:

gaul wrote:

davel33 wrote:

I have a few questions if you dont mind

#1 Do you crop a LOT, size and how often ?

#2 When you made this comparison how much did you enlarge them, 100% ?

#3 What res is your monitor ?

I use two Asus ProArt 24" at 1920 x 1200 = 2,304,000

My R6 has a 20mpx sensor 5472 x 3648 = 19,961,856

My Canon photo printer will print 13x19 at maybe that res at max dpi, I would have to check but the amount of ink would bankrupt me

BUT I do sorta agree with you When I bought my R the first lens's were all primes rf35 rf1.8, rf 50 f1.8 and RF 85 f2.

I like to do my composition in camera as much as I can which can be hard to do with primes.

I am asking because I was an electrical engineer and one thing that I had to learn the hard way is a closed mind never gets better**, so I ask a lot of questions

Thank you

Dave

** Your mind is like a parachute it MUST be open to work

Hi Dave,

Yes, I was doing "pixel peeping"

32inch 4k Monitor and yes at 200%

Yes, yes, I am at fault, I confess...

Still, my PRIMES (all of them) did shine more from F/4 to F/5.6 compared to my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii

But a 2nd batch of test with these 2 parameters changed are interesting too:

- In order to give an advantage to the zoom and benefit from IS, I did reduce the shutter speed for pics with my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii

- I also included tests at lower apertures as F/8

Both new parameters made the EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii results look more interesting

For what it is worth, following my own humbles tests, UPDATED RESULT:

• All my primes are much better at normal or high shutter speed than my EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii
• Apart from focal flexibility.. obviously... I will now consider my usage of my zoom EF 24-105 F/4 IS Mk ii for the following scenario: Slow shutter speeds thanks to IS and low apertures F/8 and less

My primes tend to be "old" ones without IS, so yes, this is not a perfect test of a new prime with IS vs a new zoom with IS

Rgds, Gaul

swapping to primes is a pain, gets you dust, and pixel peeping doesn't represent real pictures

In real pictures, viewed at the image level where real pictures are viewed, the versatility of the RF 24-105 F4 L, the best 24-105 ever made, is one of my favorites

For sure the versatilty together with its small size and weight and mostly very good IQ are very appealing assets of this lens. I like it too for these reasons.

Still there is the price to pay - it will never give the look which 40/1.4 or 105/1.4 can give.

yep, different horses

Or allow to shoot handheld under conditions these two allow.

for moving subjects, yes

for static subjects, the 5 stops of IS is really good

Yes, it is. But in the real life even the IBIS alone does an incredible job. Especially with the 40/1.4. Honestly I can not see any significant difference in hand-holdable exposure times in the real world usage. With both lenses (40/1.4 and 24-105/4) the reasonable limit is around 0.6s. Beyond that it starts to be a lottery with both lenses.

But what makes the big difference is the AF aquisition speed and confidency in the low light. Where f/4 starts to struggle the f/1.4 is still flawless. Also the response of the OVF is much more confident. Those 3 EV make big difference. Same as going from f/4 to f/11...

No pixel peeping needed. And swapping lenses is the price one has to pay if he wants something different or just demands more for whatever reason.

Different tools for different purposes.

well said

Rodger in Edmonton wrote:

gaul wrote:

Rodger in Edmonton wrote:

gaul wrote:

Thx Roger, Mac, Dave, will upgrade my std zoom (EF 24-105 Mk ii) as it is too far from my primes.. And yes, the RF version is supposedly better

Looking at EF 24-70 F/4 or EF 24-70 F/2.8 Mk ii for now

The one lens I will NOT sell... my EF 135 F2, truly special shots with this one lens..

Thx again, rgds, Gaul

I was looking at your gear Gaul are you a 6D or an RF cat?

Hello Roger

Still with a 6D Mk i

At some point will have to gradually initiating a move to RF

Thx, Gaul

I am 6D Mk 1 and have no plans for an upgrade of my MK 1 24 - 105.

Unless your 24 - 105 Mark II is a total dog -

>>why not consider a 100 - 400 Mark II ? - get one new from Japan on Ebay for about 1600 USD.

Of al my zooms, which are Fisheye EF 8 - 15 mm F4 L, EF 16 - 35mm F4 L MK1, 24 - 105 mm F4 L MK1 ... the 100 - 400 Mark II is by far the most " Primelike" in looks and sharpness - it is sharper than the 70 - 200 at full tilt, blazing fast and accurate AF and a charming color palette that ranks with the 135/2 and 100/2.8 macro if you don't have the 100 macro - you need that puppy too. It certainly lives up to the " Canon White body" lore

If you sent me to the desert island and said only take 2 lenses- I think the 24 - 105 and 100 - 4-- II would be it.

BION the 400 II is so sharp and the AF so good you can do dragonflies on the wing and they look almost macro. Because the DOF is so shallow at F5.6 / 400 mm - you get that great separation of subject from background.

Hello Roger

I actually just got a 2nd hand EF 100-400 Mk ii that looks as new for a competitive price.. now that’s a good zoom 👍🏻.. (also in these focal ranges I have no real comparison with primes .. above 135mm that is).. I only had old 70-300 zooms .. I like a lot my EF 135 F2 .. but it cannot go to 400mm so no comparison..

I will offload my EF 24-105 Mk ii which found no love from me

Probably getting an EF 24-70 f/4 or f/2.8 Mk ii to replace it .. or à Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 G2

thx

gaul