Canon Announces the RF 16-28mm F2.8 IS STM

[UpstateNYPhotog]

Yes, I absolutely love it. One of the reasons I´d rather have this one and add fast prime instead of opting for the f2.8 and skip a prime.

Yes, that lens and the RF24mm F1.8 (depends on my budget) are on my mind. I don´t really use the 24mm focal length that much, so I´d hesitate buying the expensive L version. You can buy a used copy of the F1.8 for about 450-480 €, while I haven't seen any used copies of the f1.4 for sale. Buying a new F1.4 would mean spending 1.800 €....probably not going to happen.

I used the 20mm in New Zealand (sold it afterwards cause of the weight, getting rid of the adapter and hoping for native RF mount option) and I really liked the focal range. Not too much foreground in the picture, yet wide enough for landscapes and some amateur astro shots.

Stitching is always an option but of course it means more work in post. I don't really enjoy post-processing, so I´d rather like to get right during the shot, if possible. Also, one day I´d like to try a star trail image. I guess stitching is not an option there. But also 20mm might not be an option as well Let´s see what Canon has in the cards the next few months. Or maybe Sigma will surprise us with FF RF lenses (which I honestly doubt for 2025).

The 24 1.8 at 2.8 is not as sharp as the 24-70 at 2.8. The 24 1.8 gets worse as you open it up. You get what you pay for with that lens.

 

[UpstateNYPhotog]

Why suggestion of mkii´s would be:
1. RF 28-70mm F2
2. 24-105mm F4 L
3. RF 15-35mm F2.8

several years later:
4. RF 24-70mm F2.8 (it is really heavy, although it is an extraordinary lens)

Generally, I´m wondering if Canon is considering mkii´s for the 15-35mm and 24-70mm in order to differentiate them further from the 28-70mm F2.8 and 16-28mm F2.8 in terms of IQ and/ or features/ focal length (nope, probably not messing with 24-70mm)

Since the 70-200mm got an internal zoom version, I don't think the collapsible one will get a mkii anytime soon.

Agreed, the RF 24-70 is a spectacular lens optically.

 

[Juppeck]

16-35 f/2.8 L is one of my favorite lense that i allaways on one of my cams if i go out to shoot. I use the full bandwith of the lense. The most pictures i had done was between 16mm and 20mm. From 25mm to 30mm is on the secound place - close to 16/20mm. Im not often use 35mm outdoor.
Well, my lens is an l-class device, because this is very reliable and i get excelent qulity, even it's an EF mount type using it with the Canon ring adapter. I don't need a new one.

 

[UpstateNYPhotog]

16-35 f/2.8 L is one of my favorite lense that i allaways on one of my cams if i go out to shoot. I use the full bandwith of the lense. The most pictures i had done was between 16mm and 20mm. From 25mm to 30mm is on the secound place - close to 16/20mm. Im not often use 35mm outdoor.
Well, my lens is an l-class device, because this is very reliable and i get excelent qulity, even it's an EF mount type using it with the Canon ring adapter. I don't need a new one.

Which version of the EF 16-35 F/2.8? There are three versions. The vary significantly in image quality.

 

[Juppeck]

Which version of the EF 16-35 F/2.8? There are three versions. The vary significantly in image quality.

Version III

 

[bn5fg]

The 24 1.8 at 2.8 is not as sharp as the 24-70 at 2.8. The 24 1.8 gets worse as you open it up. You get what you pay for with that lens.

And the 28mm f2.8 is sharper than the 24-70mm, so the price argument doesn’t hold up at all.

The 24mm f1.8 is all about getting an affordable f1.8—sharp enough for its weight and size. If you want a perfect 24mm f1.8, you should go with Nikon. Personally, I’m fine with Canon’s approach—I don’t use 24mm often for portraits, and I don’t want it to weight a ton. But I still want f1.8 for subject separation, and I often dial back some of the barrel distortion correction in post, which actually makes it quite sharp for me.

But that’s for environmental portraits. For landscapes and architecture, there’s also the budget-friendly RF15-30mm f4.5-6.3. It’s already well-corrected and sharp at 24mm.

 

[Juppeck]

What i notice is, that all the RF-Lenses seemst be a hit in their first version. I remeber on some rubbished L-Class lenses like EF 16-35L f/2.8 USM II, that has more disadvantages as the initial version I. Some EF-Lenses are also very good in near every release - EF70-200L f/2.8 II and III are not noticable different.
I prefere Sigma lenses, because the have a a sharp and contrast rich image. Canon RF is very expensive. My practise of the photography is just one of my hobbies. I can live easy with EF lenses with the canon converter.