I guess so, yes. There is always an aperture (which is not the sensor) and when you go through a circular aperture with an inclination it should not be circular anymore. But it‘s hard to imagine right now...With the mirror box gone, is there still clipping of bokeh balls at the edges of the frame?
Well... you can use older glass that is inhibited in its own way with a nice rear filter adapter, or you can use newer R glass that is often sharper and even faster with comparable or less weight... so there is a trade off you have to make. Longer lenses don‘t profit so much, perhaps this is why we see these new long tele EF lenses, especially there the filters come in very handy.If the back focus distances allows an EF version: Yes please, prefer that.
Why? Simple: Being able to use the rear drop in filter adapter for either C-PL or Vari-ND.
That is the biggest problem I see in using native R glass.
The gave us the brillant rear filter adapter but it isn't in the full R glass.
I sure hope you are right, that Canon will maintain the EF line for years to come. The already released EF lenses this fall may show that - but even more interesting will be to follow the 2019 - 2020 releases of new EF lenses and EF mount EOS cameraes. Canon has the power to maintain both RF and EF for years, and at least until the RF line is more "complete" - but when that time comes witin the next 8-10 years - will EF and DSLR then be continued? - I hope so.Nah. Not even close. 10 years? 15? Not even close.
Yes, because Canon sells millions of such lenses. These big whites address a need of a tiny fraction of Canon's top tier customers, namely working sports and wildlife professionals and fit, wealthy retirees. The new versions probably incorporate necessary technology to work optimally with the RF adapter.Indeed. I think the new EF 400 and 600 L III lenses are a pretty solid statement (at $12 and $13K each, respectively) that EF isn't going to be obsolete any time soon.
exactly. And those 2 were the last big whites for an update. We will not see many new/updated EF lenses for quite a while. Now it's "RF time" at Canon.Yes, because Canon sells millions of such lenses. These big whites address a need of a tiny fraction of Canon's top tier customers, namely working sports and wildlife professionals and fit, wealthy retirees. The new versions probably incorporate necessary technology to work optimally with the RF adapter.
Just to jump in for a moment, I had thought that the other two big whites due for the refresh were the 300 f/2.8 and the 500 f/4. As per the rumors posted here, the 400 and the 600 would come out slightly earlier than the other two. But I believe you are right that there won't be ANY additional EF lenses coming. The existing ones are pretty great. If phototogs want the latest and greatest, they'll have to adopt the new system. Still, the existing lenses should continue to transmit light just as well as they did before the RF releaseexactly. And those 2 were the last big whites for an update. We will not see many new/updated EF lenses for quite a while. Now it's "RF time" at Canon.
Wait I don't quite understand - are you saying that EF lenses shift focus when at different apertures? That would be the first I have ever heard of that but I am always open to learn something new about lens design...I think the EF 50/1.2 would do a bit better if it was corrected for focus shift, it could be slightly out of focus as it is being stepped down.
Or does he manually re-focus for every shot?
I know that RF lenses always open up to their widest aperture when focusing for stills in AF-S mode.
I guess EF lenses in liveview don't change the aperture to focus so no focus shift?
Hmm. The weight and price are seriously not acceptable here. The "modern 50mm" game has gotten completely out of hand.I went straight to comparing it to the Otus 55mm. The Otus stills beat it as far as sharpness on those test charts goes, but not by much. So, at half the price, the Canon is a steal!
I thought maybe the RF 50 was a touch in front when you set them both to f/1.4, but either way they definitely seem close. The prices aren't close though.Had a look at the comparison between the new RF50 1.2 and the Sigma 50 Art. To my eyes, it seems the Sigma is performing tiny bit better.