Bryan at The Digital Picture has completed his review of the brand new Canon RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM, Canon's ‘value' wide angle zoom lens for full-frame and APS-C RF mount cameras.
If you're like me, you may only use an ultra-wide angle lens on occassion, so this is a great option for minimal cost compared to the RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM and RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM.
Is it worth owning? Bryan things so.
The Canon RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens fills the previously open affordable, compact, ultra-wide-angle zoom lens position in the RF lens lineup. Most will find an ultra-wide-angle zoom lens to be one of the most important members of their kit, and the well-featured Canon RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens is a good option for that role.
Is this the highest-performing ultra-wide-angle RF zoom lens available? No. Is this the smallest, lightest, and most affordable ultra-wide-angle RF zoom lens available at review time? Yes, and the Canon RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens is the right choice when those factors are the most important. Read the full review at The-Digital-Picture
Canon RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM $549
I find his reviews of gear to be enormously beneficial, but he definitely has a 'rose-colored glasses' bias.
I'm not aware of any other OEM UWA zooms for FF under $1K, and this lens is ≥20% cheaper than the 3rd party FF UWA zoom offerings for DLSRs or MILCs.
My experience, with landscapes taken with the mediocre EF 17-40mm L, cropped to 16:9 format, and completely filling a 5K screen, is that corner softness can be quite apparent at that scale - and that is why I wouldn't recommend either that lens, or this RF 15-30mm STM, for serious landscape work.
A much better option, IMO would be the EF 16-35mm F4 L, which is razor sharp right across the frame, and can be purchased new for GBP 870.
Canon EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM Lens
Even with an R body purchase pending, I bought a 16-35 EF instead. R mount non-L glass so far has been a giant waste of time. NONE of the non-L lenses are interesting, they are SLOW, generic options that arent exactly better than previous lenses they are replacing. The 85 f2 with the extending barrel may be the most decent of the bunch, but...its an extending barrel 85..f2. Yuck.
RF-S lenses thus far? A sick joke for r7/R10 users.
Canon is doing a great job making no middle ground in their product line, and a huge quality chasm from basic lenses to L lenses. Think I'm wrong? Cool, go buy a canon RF 50mm lens....300$ or 2200$. + It's not like 3rd party glass is available for it either...great.
Canon RF 24mm F1.8 Macro IS STM Lens Review
The point you're missing is that the shot with the "inferior" camera and lens just won't have the sharpness, detail rendition, tonality and freedom from distortion that is available with better gear. And that's important to a lot of people.
It's a shame that so many people focus on charts and lab testing of lenses. I currently am on a 5-day work even shooting the RF 24-240 EXTENSIVELY simply because of the zoom range...and you know what? The lens has a lot of problems that software fixes very nicely and the colors are brilliant and the sharpness is surprisingly excellent. Thousands of photos taken with a "non professional lens" and they're going to be published in a major national magazine in November and I am loving the results.
Oh well...I guess when people stop reading charts and lab testing on gear they start to actually go out and use it and realize how hilariously pointless much of it can be.
Some believe that it means cheap build quality, and since non-L extending zooms have a lot of wobble in the barrel that is a fair criticism.
The advantage is a more compact lens. I had the EF 70-200/2.8L IS II, and I now have the 70-200/2.8L with the extending barrel and it takes up much less room in a camera bag.
Yet, his "image quality results" can be misleading. If you look at those for the EF 180 macro, without checking other sources, you won't ever buy it. Looks optically mediocre, despite being one of the sharpest Canon EF lenses.
And he is sometimes just too polite, if you know what I mean...