Re: …Said the quiet part out loud
1
MAC wrote:
Alastair Norcross wrote:
MAC wrote:
Ali wrote:
RLight wrote:
Ali wrote:
RLight wrote:
Ali wrote:
RLight wrote:
Ali wrote:
abruzzopat wrote:
Interesting that the R lens is 2/3 stop slower than the M lens from 6 years ago. Unless I'm mistaken... keep me honest here.
It is slower. Also heavier, which this ad seems to highlight as if it’s a feature.
However, you do get extra 10mm on the long end!
No, you gain a control ring, better macro ability and 10mm. Not bad.
Indeed, a little better!
(If I get the R50, I will likely get it with the kit including the 55-210, since I do like the M version of this)
…
By itself, the two lens kit, this is nice. The real question is will Canon do more crop glass? The 11-22mm is the one they need-need. By sheer coincidence I just told Canon that on a random survey. Guess they care when you drop 6 grand on a body alone. They should, I’d do it again if they gave me what I want… I’m not convinced they will is the trouble. I’m split on R8 or R50, or just wait it out. Dare I say Nikon might beat ‘em to the punch.
They do need more RF-S glass. While I have the 11-22 and like it, my most used M lens is the 32mm. I do hope they give us some fast RF-S lenses and don’t limit them to slow, “cheap” ones.
People will stone me for saying this but the RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM is good stuff. They have this covered with FF glass already. 11-22? Nope.
Folks forget the R50 can take an RF 50 and it becomes an 80, a 35 becomes a 56. And the center of those lenses are sharp too.
Well, sure, but the RF 35mm is larger and heavier than the EF-M 32mm, and I do love the f/1.4.
FF lenses can lose their luster on crop - RLight has no experience with that lens on crop
But I do, on my R7, and it performs very well. Much as I love the EF-M 32 on my M6II, I wouldn't buy an RF-S version for my R7, because the RF 35 is so good already. What it loses in aperture (2/3 stop), it gains in minimum focus and IS. I can handhold the 35 on my R7 down to 1/2s. With my 32 on my M6II, I don't go lower than 1/125.
the R7 + RF 35 isn't exactly a small setup like the m6II + 32 f1.4
True, but the R50 with the 50 F1.8 is probably a bit smaller overall than the M6II with the Sigma 56. Not as good, but still quite useful.
I agree on the ss you discussed
I'm not convinced on the sharp across the frame wide open on that lens without stopping down a bit, and the backdrop blur I want is ff equivalent of 50 fov f2.2 not having to stop down a bit
but as far as sharp across the frame at f1.4 (50 fov f2.2 equivalent), I'll stay with my m32 f1.4 and m6II since I'm not buying a crop R camera, which I think is for reach with long lenses, wildlife and sports
Yes, I basically agree. But my point is that if you do have a crop RF camera for general purpose use, the 35 F1.8 works very well with it. Although I use my R7 mostly for action, I have used it with the 35 a bit for the automatic focus stacking. I used to use my M6II for that with the 32, but the R7 takes it to the next level, with actual stacking done in camera (not just the focus bracket). You still get to keep all the RAWs, if you want to, so you can do the stack in whatever program you want. But I have been very impressed with the in-camera stacking (they call it 'depth compositing') of the R7. I can do a handheld 20-25 shot stack in camera. Amazing!
the m32 f1.4 on 32.5 mpxl m6II is incredible across the frame
True. I find myself using the 22 and 56 more on my M6II, though. Not because the 32 isn't good. It's excellent. But because those two focal lengths suit my shooting better most of the time. The 56 1.4 on the M6II is an amazing portrait combo.
-- hide signature --
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile