Nice. Too bad all my Canon gear is EF mount. Eventually I suppose I'll be switching to Fuji or Sony. Sad to see Canon essentially abandon long time EF users as the EF lens portfolio shrinks.
Upvote
0
That said, the Fuji 70-300 is equivalent to 106-456mm f/6-8.5, so other than perhaps a little bit of size and the addition of weather sealing and a hood included in the box, the fundamentals of this lens and the Fuji really are not very different. Which isn't to say "how dare you, you must buy Canon" or anything—I have a bunch of Fuji gear myself and there are certainly other reasons to opt for theirs over Canon—just that you might want to wait for proper in-depth reviews (not just one day's hands-on) to come out for both lenses before choosing, since at least in terms of the most important spec they're not as different as they may first seem. Especially since I see you have the R6 and R5, I can guarantee from experience that you'll get a cleaner and more detailed image shooting either of those cameras at f/8 ISO 1600 than you will shooting the X-E4 at f/5.6 ISO 800, for example. (Especially if you downsample the R5, obviously.)
Canon is the ONE brand to make the new mount adaptable. You are not left out in the cold, in fact if you could see it as glass half full you could see how versatile your kit is. This has been regurgitated over and over in the past couple of years, your post is like a time machine back to those days of grumbling yore.Nice. Too bad all my Canon gear is EF mount. Eventually I suppose I'll be switching to Fuji or Sony. Sad to see Canon essentially abandon long time EF users as the EF lens portfolio shrinks.
Nice. Too bad all my Canon gear is EF mount. Eventually I suppose I'll be switching to Fuji or Sony. Sad to see Canon essentially abandon long time EF users as the EF lens portfolio shrinks.
and the shrinking comment....smhThey have not abandoned EF users. You can still use your EF lenses on RF cameras and they work just as well.
It's unreasonable to expect Canon to keep developing the EF mount when the whole world and competition is turning mirrorless.
Exactly. Why, over the past three years alone, the mirrorless portion of the ILC market has grown by an astounding 3% (from 54% to 57%). A whopping 1% per year shift from DSLR to MILC. The domination by mirrorless is clear, which is why it makes total sense for Canon to stop DSLR development.It's unreasonable to expect Canon to keep developing the EF mount when the whole world and competition is turning mirrorless.
RF 800mm f/11 and RF 600mm f/11 not unique?Meanwhile Sony has a 200-600 f/6.3 for $2k, and it's phenomenal. Internally zooming too!
Canon has absolutely nothing even close to that.
Why do we need another junky slow novelty lens? Where are all the innovative lenses Canon promised when they switched to RF mount?
Other than the 28-70 none of the RF lenses are unique.
The extenders are very pricy too, and I doubt you can use them at the wide end like with the 100-500I think the price will be higher with the latest price increases. If this can use the RF extenders will anyone buy the 600 or 800 f11 lenses at a much higher price?
Well the excellent Sony 200-600 costs $2000 USDI just can't find my feet in this new RF system. This is not the lens for me. I bought the 800, f11 and yeah it's light and compact, but unusable in most situations I found out, unless I really jackup the ISO. This is kinda the same. Really wish Canon come up with something like the Sony 200-600 f6.3 not just these low end toys. People much buy them because they are cheap i suppose.
Pretty much all lenses are very sharpI just bought a 70-300 II for hiking when I don't want to bring the 100-400 II. This would be a nice compromise, if it's as sharp as the 70-300.
The 100-400mm II + 2x TC does not match the 800mm f/11 on the R5. The zoom is OK at 800mm, but not much more than that, while the 800mm f/11 is significantly better - I have both lenses. The 100-500mm + 2x TC at 1000mm is very good.1.4x T.C works great on my EF100-400ii with my 7Dii
Also it works over the whole zoom range not like the crippled RF100-500 + T.Cs set up!
2x works as well but only manual focus on my 7Dii , apparently works pretty ok on mirrorless and matches the 800mm f/11 of the RF800
I would just keep my EF zoom if I go mirrorless rather than buy this new RF one.
Didn't know the Fuji XF 70-300 is a super telephotoMan, I'm not really sure what to think about this maximum aperture at 400mm. The price seems good and the size/weight are very appealing...but this isn't as compact and tidy as I was hoping for in my head for this sacrifice in light gathering. Oh well I was waiting for price/performance...but it looks like I'm getting the Fuji XF 70-300 instead for my casual walk-around super telephoto.
I know you're joking but, I was kind of surprised to see that there were so many comments asking for a mid-range zoom when we already have the 100-500mm. A zoom that is between $700 and $2800 might be between the quality of the RF 100-400 and the 100-500, but I thought the 100-500 was the "mid-range" option given the aperture at 500mm. Surely some day there will be a higher priced options like RF 200-400 or 200-500 F4 priced in the $10,00-$12,000 ball park and that will be the eventual high end option. It would also be nice to see something a bit less expensive, but still brighter than the 100-500mm (like the 400mm DO II equivalent but for zooms).[Five year from now;] There aren't enough medium-high grade lenses (2 on 1-5 scale)! There aren't enough medium-low grade lenses (4 on a 1-5 scale)!
All your EF glass works better adapted on R cameras than it did on EF cameras and far better than if you tried to adapt them for Fuji or Sony .Nice. Too bad all my Canon gear is EF mount. Eventually I suppose I'll be switching to Fuji or Sony. Sad to see Canon essentially abandon long time EF users as the EF lens portfolio shrinks.
Yeah, it's hard to imagine someone who buys a lens for $650 feeling that a TC is a good "value" at $500 (1.4x) or $600 (2x).The extenders are very pricy too, and I doubt you can use them at the wide end like with the 100-500
Well, you do realize ( I assume) that the EF portfolio of lenses is extremely wide ranging and essentiall complete, and you can buy EF lenses covering virtually any range or speed you want for your EF mount gear. And - get this - they will work just as well if you decide to get a Canon RF mount camera. If you switch to Sony or Fuji, what exactly do you gain, whereas you will lose a lot.Nice. Too bad all my Canon gear is EF mount. Eventually I suppose I'll be switching to Fuji or Sony. Sad to see Canon essentially abandon long time EF users as the EF lens portfolio shrinks.