The Sony 20-70 is a really attractive lens to me, shame it does not work on Canon. Wish the 14-35 was at least 10mm longer.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Canon officially launches the RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
The Sony 20-70 is a really attractive lens to me, shame it does not work on Canon. Wish the 14-35 was at least 10mm longer.
Had them both, 35 and 85, I can confirm that AF for 35 is good (non great), for 85 it's somewhat okaysh in reliability (but slow) in normal conditions, terrible to the point of being unusable (constant hunting back and forth) in backlight situations (body is R6), which was my most used conditions in outdoor use for weddings and portraits, so I got rid of it in less then 6 months.
Upvote
0
If you are a pro like you then you need the expensive lenses appropriate to your work. If you are hobbyist and use a lens occasionally, then a sharp, cheap lens that is of sufficient build quality is a godsend.
Upvote
0
True, but feels like Canon under designed the 85mm F2 with worse AF than a 20 year old, cheap EF 85mm 1.8.
Upvote
0
Yeah, the 35 is okay, as long as we’re not shooting something that moves a lot.
The 85 has a focus limiter, right? Does it help, or is it still not enough?
Upvote
0
And allow me to apologize for sounding quite tetchy, which wasn't my intent nor my actual feelings. I'm wrong enough often enough my word should never be taken for gospel, and I mustn't be surprised when it's not. :-D
Upvote
0
I was a "pro" photog for like 3 years in the late 90s but even then I was developing software I hoped to sell, so while photog was my only income, it also wasn't what I was planning on retiring on. I did software before that time, during that time, and since that time. It's easier for me to just write such software than to find and learn other software. I don't say this as a brag: on a photography forum I'd prefer getting kudos for passing around killer dragonfly shots or what have you, that'd be more fun than bragging I can write software that does X...
That said, the programming language Python is good at this stuff and extremely easy to learn. My 5th grader isn't really a native English speaker but we're starting to work through an "intro to programming" book for Python. Of course I'm sitting by his side which has to count for something, but if he can get stuff working, anyone on this forum surely could too.
Upvote
0
I agree, its hard to justify paying $1100 for this lens when for just $200 more you could purchase the 24-105 f4L lens.
Upvote
0
It's a linear gain of 11.8%, it is not enough to make a significant difference. And yes, linear resolution is what matters, do not fall for the marketing-favored megapixel number. You are not getting 25% larger prints in the way that people see prints. With a change from 24mp to 30mp, you are getting 11.8% larger prints. Your maximum print size at 300dpi, uncropped, would be 22.4" x 14.9" instead of 20" x 13.3". (The area of the print will be ~25% larger, but let me know when prints start being sold by the square inch, or when dpi is measured by square inch and not linearly.)My needs are actually quite simple. I am looking for a sensor size that allows for general photography use (hardly any video) with the flexibility of 'gentle' cropping. The 24mpx works but is limiting for me when I need to crop for the albeit infrequent wildlife shoots of small animals and birds. I did consider the 45mpx R5 but find that it is taking up too much storage space and processing time for me. The 5DIV's (& R's) 30mpx fits my needs the best, so I am hoping that a future 6 series R camera would have that pixel density.
If cropping is what you want to do, then you need more pixels to make it worthwhile. On Canon that is the 45mp R5. Yes, that means larger file sizes and more storage needed. There are no free lunches, increases in linear resolution come with much larger files.
Upvote
0
Canon will sell truckloads of these lenses, just like Tamron sells HUGE numbers of 28-75/2.8 lenses on E mount, so much so that Sigma also brought out a 28-70/2.8 on E mount. They are less expensive than the Canon, but neither has IS. Lots of people want f2.8 but do not have the cash to pay for the full-fat L or GM glass.
Upvote
0
Gray market cameras could run into compatibility issues due to local standards with WiFi and Bluetooth.
I see no such disadvantages with lenses.
Upvote
0
Just the 400/4 versions, not the 70-300. Those were great white lenses that were effectively L-series based on build, price, and having fluorite. At the time, Canon was differentiating DO technology. It’s common enough now they don’t even bother highlighting it in the RF 600/11 and 800/11.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 383640
Guest
I have had three cameras that I bought on the gray market (one of them I still use) and never the slightest problem, while I had serious problems with two cameras that I bought from an authorized dealer, and my experiences with the lenses are similar.
Upvote
0
A generally accepted norm for 'comfortable' viewing distance (of an image) is about 1.5-2 times the diagonal of the image. Given that the ‘average’ human eye (20/20) can see about 300 microradians of visual acuity and has a near point of 25 cm. That works out to 75 microns, or 338 pixels per inch, or one can approximate the PPI needed for a print viewed at distance x inch using PPI ~ 3327/x. For a 4x6 in image, the PPI at 11inch in viewing distance (the most stringent in the viewing distance range) works out to a PPI of about 302, which translates into about 2.2mpx for the 4x6 print. In fact, this 2.2mpx remains 'constant' even as the image size increases (because the 'comfortable' viewing distance also increases. I have arbitrarily set for myself an acceptable minimum mpx value of about 12mpx, so to be able to crop from 24mpx is reasonable, but a more aggressive cropping would require higher mpx, but there is a limit to how high it is comfortable for me, so I have settled for 30mpx as the 'sweet spot'.
Upvote
0
The 20mm on the wide end were the reason I selected the slower 20-70 rather than the faster Sigma or Tamron 28-75 2.8. It helps with indoor shots, goes wide enough so that I can leave a dedicated wide-angle lens at home and it offers enough "meat" to stabilize video in post. Great allrounder!
Upvote
0
IIRC they had green rings instead of red ones, making them special in their own right. Now it is hardly mentioned...
Upvote
0
I'm not speaking about EU pricing, because I don't know it. What I do know is that it's not a problem finding a second hand copy in my part of the US for roughly $1400. I've even seen them occasionally dip into 1300 on sites that don't take a cut of the sale price. The point is that they aren't hard to find in the range.You've somewhat managed to prove your point that @BostonPaul is wrong (but I still think you're wrong even though there's a very small chance you're right). However, the example you used is very questionable. Namely, the seller of the ad you are referring to registered on ebay 2 days ago (September 11, 2024), there is not a single feedback for him on ebay either as a seller or as a buyer, and until this lens he has never sold a single one article. In addition, he offers this lens at an extremely low price. To me, all of this looks more like a scam than a seller who will actually deliver the purchased item to the customer. However, if you are willing to take a risk with such ads - then, good luck to you!
Currently, the lowest price in the EU that I can find is €1,900 for the new RF 24-70 f/2.8L IS USM, but from the gray market.
Canon RF 24-70mm f2.8 L IS USM Lens
â¬1,875.00 - 12 Months Warranty - 14 Days Money Back - 100% Brand New - Import Tax Includedwww.e-infin.com
On ebay, looking at EU countries, there is not a single used copy below €2000.
Upvote
0
Did no one read the official release in this thread? The lens is $1099 and had weather sealing similar to an L lens.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
