I didn’t ask them to release cherry picked marketing hype. That was their choice and they’ve kept it up right through the pandemic.
That is what they did with a full trinity of RF F2.8 for the same weight as the EF F4 trinity, no?I bought a couple 5DIV's in September of '18 as the R was announced, eighteen months later a pro version may be announced. I have no regrets with my choice and hope that the R Series does well, I'll keep an open mind to how it may benefit my work. My initial impression of the R lenses was how expensive they are compared to my EF L's, with the sensor located closer to the mount shouldn't it be easier to make faster lenses?
EF flange distance = 44.00mm
RF flange distance = 20.00mm
Now I don't have a PhD in Mathematics or a degree in optical lens design, but 20mm is ~54% shorter than 44mm. If that's "marginally shorter" to you, then very well. Regardless, I'd take Canon's engineers' word for saying that RF has enabled them to make lenses that are smaller/faster/optically superior than their EF counterparts.
I had the EF 24-105 f4l and now have the RF version. They are very similar and although Im not a scientist and haven't done this comparison scientifically, the RF version does seem a little faster and is a little more 'squat' than the EF version. It's probably because I now use the RF version but I do prefer it.An EF 28-70 f/2 wouldn't be noticeably larger than the RF version because they both cast the same image dimensions.
A marginally shorter flange distance doesn't change physics. f/2 is still f/2 and in fact trickier optics are needed in RF to get the light rays to converge in a shorter distance.
Look at the 24-105 f/4 for a direct comparison; RF and EF are identical in diameter and about 9mm different in length.
RF was a good opportunity to introduce new and faster lens communication but it cannae change the laws of physics, Cap'n.
Wait, I thought there was just one announcement a few months ago, the rest is rumours.
I have the RF 24-105 f4l which was part of a kit package when I purchased the R, trading in my EF 24-105. I could have just used an adapter and kept my EF one but I'm glad I traded it in as the RF version does seem a little faster and smaller in the hand, plus I don't have to mess with adapter's.You compare only what is between the sensor and the focus point, that is just one side of the equation.
Even in this side, if you make the focus point closer, you'll have to put optics with bigger angles to make to rays converge to the sensor.
With bigger angles optics you'll have more chromatic aberrations and other issues with quality, and weight.
That is what they did but a little, balancing with quality to make the best lenses.
I think they choose the right balance between weight, quality, center of gravity and size, it was not easy but they did it very well
Thanks, derpderp - Your post makes me want to take a 2nd (or 3rd...) look at the RF 28-70 F2. I had been assuming that the significant weight would be too much for me to want to carry around. Any chance you could talk more about the issues carrying it around, and about what kind of pictures you can get that make the f2 really shine?I've been using the RF 28-70 F2 and its a truly incredible lens. Yes, its pretty big and bulky, but I'd rather have it on my EOS R than having to carry 3 prime lenses (35, 50, 85).
That would be really helpful information as I'm the same, ditch the RF 24-105 for the 24/28-70 or not???Thanks, derpderp - Your post makes me want to take a 2nd (or 3rd...) look at the RF 28-70 F2. I had been assuming that the significant weight would be too much for me to want to carry around. Any chance you could talk more about the issues carrying it around, and about what kind of pictures you can get that make the f2 really shine?
It is a beast. It is big and it is heavy. But like @derpderp said, it would be easier than carrying three fast primes... unless you are carrying 3 f/1.8 primes.Thanks, derpderp - Your post makes me want to take a 2nd (or 3rd...) look at the RF 28-70 F2. I had been assuming that the significant weight would be too much for me to want to carry around. Any chance you could talk more about the issues carrying it around, and about what kind of pictures you can get that make the f2 really shine?
The R6 at 20mp is fine for the majority of landscape photographers.
I need an announcement, i can't stand sony fanboys anymore
No need to run, they are buried deep in their menusTell them Fuji is better than Sony, it'll keep them restrained for a couple of days. Then... run!!
Yet it is perfectly fine for those who only ever post to social media and want FF. I can also see it for people who take indoor shots without flash and want better noise control. Really, 20mp isn't anything to really discount too much. Depending on the price, this will probably be a big seller.20mp is too little by modern standards. I guess most landscape photographers would disagree.
20mp with good low light performance can be good for astroscapes, but it's a niche sub-genre.
Only at the Canon Mexico announcement.Its such a big annoucement , even Jesus will make an apearance.
I still don't understand the talk of an R6 being announced before the final R5 announcement. Sure the rumour site has been talking about an R6 since the time we started talking about the R5. But Canon has not even hinted at an R6 and they have already released the majority of R5 specs, had it briefly in the hands of press, have it on their website etc. I would find it very odd if they all of a sudden do a full R6 announcement before doing the final (full specs, price, release date) R5 announcement. Yet we've continually heard on this site that the R6 was coming in May and the R5 in July. Makes no sense to me given what Canon had done so far in regards to the R5.
To be honest much things in the "supposed" R6 doesn´t make too much sense....Maybe they will make sense after the release...or better after we know something more about it. Canon didn´t made yet any announcement on this one but we did had rumored specs shortly after the first R5 rumors.I still don't understand the talk of an R6 being announced before the final R5 announcement. Sure the rumour site has been talking about an R6 since the time we started talking about the R5. But Canon has not even hinted at an R6 and they have already released the majority of R5 specs, had it briefly in the hands of press, have it on their website etc. I would find it very odd if they all of a sudden do a full R6 announcement before doing the final (full specs, price, release date) R5 announcement. Yet we've continually heard on this site that the R6 was coming in May and the R5 in July. Makes no sense to me given what Canon had done so far in regards to the R5.