What’s wrong with 28-70 F2. Too much ovelapping, I’d say.35-85mm 1.8 or f2
That would be fine thanks Canon.
Upvote
0
What’s wrong with 28-70 F2. Too much ovelapping, I’d say.35-85mm 1.8 or f2
That would be fine thanks Canon.
You've named the name that musn't be named! I hear him approaching.I’m going to submit a rumor about a 24-200mm f/2 Uber DO nano materials lens that is the size and weight of a 24-105/4. I think that’s actually a lens designed by HarryFilm, but still, if this post gets enough likes I bet Canon will leverage Harry’s free public GNU license and produce it. If they don’t, Sony will and I’ll switch.
I think AF-ing such narrow dof is a big challange… Laowa 33mm f0.95 is relatively small…FUJIFILM was originally slated to produce a 33mm F1 prime for their X-Series. The project was cancelled and revived more than once before they ultimately decided it would be too big and expensive to be practical. They pivoted to a 50mm F1 and later produced a 33mm F1.4. Both turned out to be good and successful products.
Why not just use the RF 24-105 f/4 L? I own the RF 24-70 2.8 and didn't see much of a drop in quality each time I've used the RF 24-105, and the extra reach is really nice...Only waiting for one lens, the RF 24-70mm f4.0L IS USM
RF600mm f/6 DO !!! Saying f/6 instead of f/5.6 to cut cost a little and keep the front element to 100mm...I’ve said it before (many times) and I’ll say it again..
RF 500mm f5.6 DO!!!!!!!!!
(Like Nikons 500mm f5.6 pf)
Some of the in-the-past-rumored lenses would hit the spot for me:
I use the 24-105mm F4 L ISand the 16mm F2.8.A 17-70 f/4-5.6L IS would be a nice traveling lens...