Don’t expect any third-party autofocus lenses in the near future
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
Good idea. That way those 'EF' lenses might even fit Sony, Nikon, Panasonic mirrorless with the correct adapter. But unfortunately there will always be some retards that will try it on a DSLR and crash the mirror
Upvote
0
I generally agree, which is why I have kept my EF 100/2.8L Macro and not bought the RF version. I do often want to shoot at >1x magnification, but for that I have the MP-E 65mm 1-5x.
Upvote
0
Are you aware of the RF 28-70mm f/2L, which was one of the first lenses announced for the mount? Yes, it's big and heavy (relatively speaking, it's a lot smaller and lighter than my 600/4 II). But for me it's like carrying around a bag of primes, since I usually shoot them at ~f/2 anyway, and unlike the EF 35/50/85L that benefit optically from being stopped down, the 28-70/2 is optically excellent wide open.
Upvote
0
Good point about supply chain issues, though I think everyone is suffering the same conditions.
I think we have a couple of what I'd call middle tier lenses - the RF 85 f/2 might be considered middle tier, as would maybe the 35 f/1.8 (though I don't think there's much room for a lens below either, unless Canon decides to toss out a $200 version of each). There is room for an 85 f/1.4 (and the EF lens is very good for that spot in the meantime). A mid-range 50 is obviously missing, especially since the high end 50/1.2, while potentially the best 50 mm out there, is way too expensive for us mere mortals. Right now, I have the 50/1.2L EF version, which really is nice, warts and all. An awful lot of great images have come from that lens (well, in the right hands, which may not be mine).
You're probably right about Nikon and Olympus, or anyone else outside of a few smaller players - Canon selling glass in other mounts is probably not going to happen. Unless Canon buys Sigma or something like that, but given their ability to spit out 4-6 new designs a year, that really isn't necessary except to gain a foothold in other brands' markets.
Upvote
0
I agree - the size advantage of APS-C disappears as the lens gets longer because the diameter of the entrance pupil is governed by the f/stop. 600 mm lens and f/4 will have a minimum of 150 mm diameter entrance pupil regardless of the size of image it projects at the other end of the lens.
Upvote
0
Perhaps @Chaitanya means something along the lines of an RF-S 55-200/250mm zoom? The RF-S 18-150 is a straight repackaging of the optics from the EF-M 18-150, the could easily do the same with the EF-M 55-200mm, or design one going to 250mm like the EF-S version.
Certainly it's true that longer focal lengths gain nothing in terms of design from the smaller image circle.
Upvote
0
Even doing photography for living I'm very discouraged to pull the trigger on RF lenses, I am still on EF glass (16-35 2.8LII, 24-70 2.8LII, and 70-200 2.8L (no IS)). It's insane the prices of the new lenses. OBS: All the new lenses have IS, it's just one more thing to break inside the lens.
Upvote
0
Should probably go back to film cameras and fully manual lenses. Cameras and lenses these days are all new fangledy and are just chock full of stuff that can break.
In fact, maybe stick to paintbrushes and canvas. Sure, it's a bit slower but then the only moving parts are your joints. No, that won't work since those can break, too.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
meh. Olympus is interesting for sure, but their 300 f4 is not cheap. It's better than the EF 300 4L, but not cheap at all. In a backyard handheld test of the inexpensive options, a Canon M6II with an adapted 55-250 at 250 was better than a 70-300 on an EM1MarkII, cropping the canon shot to same field of view.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
