Struggling between RF USM and STM lineup as an amateur

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 :p), 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

Hello @sercheese,

I've owned both the EF 50mm 1.8, RF 50mm 1.8 and RF 50mm 1.2L. I also own the RF 85mm 2.0 and RF 85mm 1.2

To start with the fifties, while you might not see a big difference in sharpness, there's a massive one when it comes to bokeh quality, chromatic aberrations, color rendition and overrall "3d pop".

For the eighty fives, the RF 85mm f2 has great image quality in regard of it's price, but the AF is really really slow. The 85mm 1.2 is no 70-200 but I still use it for a lot of indoor sports events with fantastic sucess rate.

One point that is not immediately obvious, for both the 50 and 85, is that the 1.2 versions focus a lot better in low light situations or backlit situations. The F2 and F1.8 will tend to hunt more and are overall slower to focus. With the F2 or F1.8 you'd have to wait for your kid to slow down a bit to be certain that you're going to nail the focus, when you could take "action" shots with the F1.2.

If the 50mm is your go to focal length, I'd definitely go with the RF 50 1.2L

The R6 mkII will give you tack sharp 1/10th of a sec at 50mm. IBIS is also going to be usefull for video. For what you said, if I didn't have the budget for R6 + 50mm 1.2, I'd go R8 + 50mm 1.2

Best of luck with your newborn,

Nicolas

Hi,
In my opinion the L glass is not worth it if you are just a hobbyist and doesn't print big. Most of the pics taken will be viewed in a phone or in a monitor and "I think" the STM lenses will be good enough for the job. Another big advantage of STM lenses are that they are light weight.

I recently switched from Fujifilm and Sony to Canon R(R7) for these light weight, budget RF lenses. So far I am pretty happy and doesn't miss any of my older gears.
Also IMHO,  the important aspect of a photograph is the memories and feelings associated to that photo, all others are secondary.

First of all, congrats to the expected newborn :-)!

Be well prepared for really wide variety of opinions here. Each of us projects our own needs and preferences into our posts. Then you have to pick what do you feel suits you the best.

As you are saying that budget is not too much to concern, I would go for R6 mkII + RF 50/1.2 as for the start. If 50mm is your go to lens then 50mm f/1.2 lens is a premium and it gives so different images when shooting wide opened that I think it is worth it. Expect some learning curve both with a camera and the lens, so I'd not hesitate to buy the gear asap to have some time to adopt.

As for 15x21cm prints all the rest STM primes will do well. It is just needed to get used to their optical attributes to use the best of them.

Glad I could help.

I don't own the 24-70 f2.8 but the 28-70 f2. During my initial tests, for the same shot in ideal conditions with them both at f2, the 28-70 was sharper all accross the frame. The overall rendition of the 28-70 was also way better (color, bokeh, etc). Another very important thing is that the 28-70 is more consistent, from a rendering standpoint, with the image delivered. You can achieve similar results with both of them most of the time, but the nifty fifty will require more work in post.

I think you don't see such comparisons (24-70 2.8 vs 50 1.8) because most of the pros have the 50 1.8 as a backup lens in their bag. The 10 fold price difference may also be a factor ^^

sercheese wrote:

Hello,

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

Normally, I go for a lens because it is solving a problem I have with my current kit.  I'm a hobbyist.  Since you don't know why you want the RF 50 f1.2 or the RF 85 f1.2, I would buy one of the budget lenses, wear it out with use, then buy the expensive prime version only if you found your photography is missing something that prime lens solves.

I bought my RF 85 f1.2, on sale, because I liked my EF 85 f1.8 and used it a lot.  The CA from the EF 85 bothered me a lot after using it for a year.  The RF 85 f1.2 gives me better CA control and weather sealing for shots in rain and snow.  Plus, I wanted to use it for a couple of family weddings that were coming up.

My EF 50 f1.4 works fine for what I want from a 50.  Even with it's weak but accurate AF and poor contrast when the lighting is horrible.  I am happy with my RF 35 f1.8 though I don't use it much.

sercheese wrote:

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 :p), 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

You might consider to buy the RF 50mm f/1.8 stm and RF 35mm f/1.8 stm for travel, and adapt the Sigma EF 40mm f/1.4 Art for indoors use at home. It's a heavy lens, but when not traveling that's not a big deal.  The 40mm Art is sharper than the RF 50mm f/1.2 L, it has nice bokeh as well, and it also focuses better in low light than the RF 50mm f/1.2 L.  In my market the Sigma 40mm Art is only 750 euro, whereas the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2 L is 2750 euro.  40mm being a bit wider can be a good thing indoors as well.

I was in a very similar situation as you, my baby boy now is 7 month old. Here are my experiences with the R5, an old EF 50mm 1.4, the 135mm f2 and the RF 24-105 f4 L.

R5: Love it, however the R6II is plenty enough for your use case. If money is no big object for you, I wouldn't take the compromises of an R8 (handling, battery, IBIS), the size/weight difference is neglectable for your use case.

EF 50mm: in the first months, 50mm was quite perfect. In the meantime, I'm looking already for something wider, because the baby is mobile now and obviously larger. So much larger that for 50mm I need to be further away than what I want. Therefore, from my experience, I wish I had the RF 35mm right from the beginning. The 0.5x macro is neat for taking those close detail shots of hands and feet.

EF 135mm: believe it or not, I've taken some of my favorite shots so far with this lens. Indoors! I sometimes sit at the other side of the room while my wife plays with the baby. Or the baby chills on his mum. Or plays by itself. Or sleeps. With the 135mm I can take pictures unnoticed, with nice emphasis on the subject but not too close. We live in a flat, the living room is decently sized. Bonus for this lens: it's perfect for distant shots on the playgrounds, when the baby grows older. Tried it alot with my nephew already, love the results. Can't wait until my baby is old enough for it.

RF 24-105 f4: the most surprising for me. I never took videos. Completely changed with the baby. The RF 24-105 is the perfect video lens. Completely silent AF, incredible stabilization, instant focus speed. Often, it's the more fleeting moments I capture on video. For this, the zoom range is very valuable. F4 is enough since ISO is even less of an issue on video and the shutter speed is slower than with stills.

Hope this helps a little.

One further thing: Get a "camera lens doll". A little fabric animal that you can put on your lens. Some have little squeekers in it. The baby loves it and always smiles into the camera 😉

I have most of the RF stm prime lenses, and love them. The focusing is plenty fast enough for most uses, including babies. The RF 85 F2 has never seemed slow to me at all. Having said all that, if money was no object, I'd certainly get the RF 50 F1.2 as well. That just seems like an amazing lens. As someone else said, with a lens like that, you might find yourself mostly using it at home, because of the weight and bulk. The RF 50 F1.8 is so small, light, and cheap, that you could get both, and carry the little one with you when out and about, when weight and bulk might matter more. I am very pleased with the results I get from the nifty fifty, but wouldn't say no to the F1.2 version if someone wanted to give me one.

thunder storm wrote:

sercheese wrote:

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 :p), 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

You might consider to buy the RF 50mm f/1.8 stm and RF 35mm f/1.8 stm for travel, and adapt the Sigma EF 40mm f/1.4 Art for indoors use at home. It's a heavy lens, but when not traveling that's not a big deal. The 40mm Art is sharper than the RF 50mm f/1.2 L, it has nice bokeh as well, and it also focuses better in low light than the RF 50mm f/1.2 L. In my market the Sigma 40mm Art is only 750 euro, whereas the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2 L is 2750 euro. 40mm being a bit wider can be a good thing indoors as well.

I have to support this. I bought this Sigma too and it is wonderful lens for stellar bargain price. Some samples with it.

This is a good thread, with so many good replies already.

Right now I would recommend an R6mk2, an adapted EF 24-70 F2.8 mk2  and an RF 70-200 F2.8 or F4.

I’d also strongly recommend you look into an off camera flash and trigger setup, with Octobox, or at least very large reflectors.

I’d get an R5mk2 in a year or two and then get a RF50 f1.2 or EF35 F1.4 mk2

Have a look at my gear list, I use all those lenses for kids except 16-35 F4. The old EF 100 usm macro F2.8 is razor sharp and cheap. 135 F2 is amazing, as are the EF24-70 2.8 mk2

Good luck

Arthur Stanley Jefferson wrote:

This is a good thread, with so many good replies already.

Right now I would recommend an R6mk2, an adapted EF 24-70 F2.8 mk2 and an RF 70-200 F2.8 or F4.

I’d also strongly recommend you look into an off camera flash and trigger setup, with Octobox, or at least very large reflectors.

I'd strongly avoid that with the newborn for at least few first months. Their eyes are too sensitive for strong flash light.

I’d get an R5mk2 in a year or two and then get a RF50 f1.2 or EF35 F1.4 mk2

Have a look at my gear list, I use all those lenses for kids except 16-35 F4. The old EF 100 usm macro F2.8 is razor sharp and cheap. 135 F2 is amazing, as are the EF24-70 2.8 mk2

Good luck

Canon_Guy wrote:

Arthur Stanley Jefferson wrote:

This is a good thread, with so many good replies already.

Right now I would recommend an R6mk2, an adapted EF 24-70 F2.8 mk2 and an RF 70-200 F2.8 or F4.

I’d also strongly recommend you look into an off camera flash and trigger setup, with Octobox, or at least very large reflectors.

I'd strongly avoid that with the newborn for at least few first months. Their eyes are too sensitive for strong flash light.

I’d get an R5mk2 in a year or two and then get a RF50 f1.2 or EF35 F1.4 mk2

Have a look at my gear list, I use all those lenses for kids except 16-35 F4. The old EF 100 usm macro F2.8 is razor sharp and cheap. 135 F2 is amazing, as are the EF24-70 2.8 mk2

Good luck

Obviously you need to know how close, how diffuse and how much power to use…maybe ask anne

https://www.annegeddes.com/galleries

Having shot thousands of pictures of my daughter and other (small) family members you actually could even go the R8 route if you do not intend to use the camera for video.

IBIS is nice to have, but at the beginning newborns are veery static so you have a lot of time to pose your shot or even use a tripod and later on they get so quick that you will probably never go below 1/125s - 1/250s or even faster. In the latter case IBIS does virtually nothing. I used to shoot with the EOS R + 28-70 f/2 and never missed IBIS. For this style of shooting IBIS is purely optional and I don't see any benefit from the IBIS in my R5 or the Nikons I own over the EOS R.

The STM lenses are not spectacular but they will do the job. Even the 85/f2 is fast enough for some running / swinging / jumping playground action.

R5 + RF 85 f/2.0 + 1/1000s, Speeding up on a stone + jumping down, taken from a series, all photos sharp even with the not super fast lens

I actually own the RF 70-200 f/2.8 but I do not think that this is a "must have kids lens". I would either go with a set of primes (16, 24, 35, 40, 50, 85, 105, 135) and maybe mix in one of the truly special lenses (expensive: 50 or 85 1.2, 135 1.8, affordable: 40 + 105 1.4 ART) or use an all purpose lens like the 28-70 f/2 (especially indoors you rarely need something else) or if that is too heavy the 24-70 f/2.8. The adapted Art glas is fantastic and might give you similar results to the much more expensive Canon RF 1.2 glas (e.g. EF 105 1.4 vs RF 85mm 1.2).

Z6 + adapted EF 105 1.4 (Sigma Art), for ultra creamy background full body shots (up to the point of looking "photoshopped")

Body wise the R6 II is certainly a fantastic choice, but still too pricey for what it is (my humble opinion). This body will get interesting if it reaches R6 territory. The R5 was reduced in price recently in europe, maybe you should take a closer look at that, as it is only like 1000€ difference to the R6 II. The R6 is still a very capable camera, if you don't need automatic vehicle or animal detection and do not intend to crop much then this is the current pirce/performance king. The R8 would probably work as well, but of course body wise this is a downgrade (not in terms of IQ or AF though).

sercheese wrote:

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 :p), 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

I think you may be over-complicating things. You say you don’t intend to print larger than A4, so you absolutely don’t need an R5 or R3 or large L prime lenses. If you want them, that’s your choice but do please recognise that it’s all overkill, and to get the best from such equipment needs a lot of practice and dedication, time and opportunity. You would be just fine with something simpler, more compact and lighter. In fact having had kids and now grandkids, my view on child photography is that the best camera is a (very good) smartphone. It’s always at hand for those fleeting moments, needs no preparation or special lighting, can take bursts and videos too. By all means do set-piece portraits too, but they will rarely have the spontaneity that defines the best photos of babies and small children. Plus I suspect that you won’t have as much time as you expect! My suggestion, as you would clearly like to spend some money on your hobby, is to aim a little lower but more versatile - let’s say an R6ii plus the 24-70 2.8 L or 24-105 f4 L. This will cover the vast majority of family photo situations and a lot of others too. Get used to the amazing performance of a modern mirrorless camera before deciding on other lenses. Maybe later get a 70-200. And most importantly upgrade your phone! Have fun and enjoy your photography, don’t anguish over choices that will give only marginal gains. And by the way, you can print much much larger than A4 with these options should you wish!!!

Arthur Stanley Jefferson wrote:

Canon_Guy wrote:

Arthur Stanley Jefferson wrote:

This is a good thread, with so many good replies already.

Right now I would recommend an R6mk2, an adapted EF 24-70 F2.8 mk2 and an RF 70-200 F2.8 or F4.

I’d also strongly recommend you look into an off camera flash and trigger setup, with Octobox, or at least very large reflectors.

I'd strongly avoid that with the newborn for at least few first months. Their eyes are too sensitive for strong flash light.

I’d get an R5mk2 in a year or two and then get a RF50 f1.2 or EF35 F1.4 mk2

Have a look at my gear list, I use all those lenses for kids except 16-35 F4. The old EF 100 usm macro F2.8 is razor sharp and cheap. 135 F2 is amazing, as are the EF24-70 2.8 mk2

Good luck

Obviously you need to know how close, how diffuse and how much power to use…maybe ask anne

https://www.annegeddes.com/galleries

Just as fabulous pictures as they can be. Thanks for that link.

I would see a "slight" difference between Anne's capabilities, experience and practice and the very begginer's one with home set up strobes (OP no offence please).

For me the risknis not worth it unles OP would be perfectly familiar with careful strobes usage.

I think the 24-70mm f2.8 you are covered. It is a great lens.  Not swapping lens around is a great luxury.