@Bob Howland
I am very pleased with the quality of JJC lens hoods. Every time Canon is too expensive, I get a JJC.
Upvote
0
Canon officially launches the RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
I am very pleased with the quality of JJC lens hoods. Every time Canon is too expensive, I get a JJC.
I feel the same way about Vello lens hoods. I have probably six or eight and have never had problems with any of them.
Upvote
0
IQ: I'm still skeptical.
How good will a non-L zoom lens be?
On the other hand, I was skeptical about the IQ of the RF 2/85mm, till I tested one. Now, it's part of my light kit, thanks to its impressive optical quality.
And "only" 28 to 70 sounds good, less range could mean less optical compromising, in relation to the selling price.
So, I'm waiting for OpticalLimits and TDP to review it. Unfortunately, no need waiting for Gordon Laing's review, all the latest, and even older Canon lenses' reviews are described as "so far", and nothing comes. A pity, because, unlike most other reviewers, he took real pictures, no ones of charts. The only way of testing I trust.
Gordon, please, resume your testing!
How good will a non-L zoom lens be?
On the other hand, I was skeptical about the IQ of the RF 2/85mm, till I tested one. Now, it's part of my light kit, thanks to its impressive optical quality.
And "only" 28 to 70 sounds good, less range could mean less optical compromising, in relation to the selling price.
So, I'm waiting for OpticalLimits and TDP to review it. Unfortunately, no need waiting for Gordon Laing's review, all the latest, and even older Canon lenses' reviews are described as "so far", and nothing comes. A pity, because, unlike most other reviewers, he took real pictures, no ones of charts. The only way of testing I trust.
Gordon, please, resume your testing!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
I don't have an issue using the 16-35 with my LEE filters. But if I would switch to the RF 10-20 I have look for a different/new solution (give up the LEE-filterssystem) One of the criteria is flexibility of using combination of filters and of course minimum impact of dirt getting into the camera.
Upvote
0
For all those "cripple" complainers (not addressing you, Del Paso!), I'd really like to know how much bigger that lens would have been if we add 4 mm on the WA side or 10-15 mm on the tele side.
Apart from the price, it would have become reasonably bigger and less attractive.
This lens for sure is a compromise, but I suppose an excellent one.
Upvote
0
Canon claims it's as good as the RF 24-105mm f/4 L, or slightly better.
- YouTube
Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
www.youtube.com
I don't understand polish, but I understand the RAW files on the description
Upvote
0
Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM: First Impressions
I ordered the Canon RF 100-400mm yesterday, it arrived this morning, and the lens now "Pre-order" status on the website. I had time for just a few tests and one or two shots only, so I'll give my initial impressions and follow up later with more. I do have the RF 100-500mm and an EF 100-400mm II...
www.canonrumors.com
I wrote "Everyone should have one", so I bought 2 - one extra for my wife. At 1m distance, its 0.4x magnification make it a superb near macro lens for insects that are skittish when you get close.
Upvote
0
because of theSoon you'll get a volume discount. Would be nice, wouldn't it?
And though I was already looking at it, it was you and your impressions that made me get it at the end
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
You're right. And still the data is shifting. They should switch the titles in that table
Canon Germany claims
490 g for the RF 28-70mm F2.8 IS STM and
395 g for the RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM
also the dimensions are altered here
76,6 x 88,8 mm for RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM and
76,5 x 92,2 mm for the RF 28-70mm F2.8 IS STM
Upvote
0
FYI, the aspherical elements in the RF 28-70/2.8 they are moulded glass (GMo).
For anyone interested in the different types of aspherical lenses, here's a Canon article on them.
Upvote
0
The Sigma is good not great. They're so cheap I could recommend buying one next time they're on sale or used. I've had trouble getting photos due to MF but not due to the resolution being probably nominally lower than we'd expect for an L prime. But yeah, I had both the EF35/1.4 MkI and 24/1.4 the instant they came out and for me the 35 was just too normal and the 24 was almost unusably wide. (I take 24mm shots a lot with a 24-105, but let's say only 1/4 of them were 24mm or at least could have been 24mm. So when I mounted the 24/1.4, I'd take like at most two photos in a row with it then simply have to switch back to something else.)
Upvote
0
Similar threads
