Thanks for this. I completely missed the post. I hope it gets produced. This is a dream zoom for me. Happy, happy, happy!You may get your wish at some point, Canon already has patent applications for f2 portrait zooms
A patent application showing an unusual f/2 zoom from Canon has appeared in Japan (Patent application: 2018-132675). It's possible that this zoom lens is relawww.canonrumors.com
Having a pair of EF IIs, looking ahead I could possibly see letting one of them go in favor of the RF version. Not both though!Wow! You're selling your EF 70-200 IS II; that really shows commitment to the new R mount!
I'm not that bold; I have the EOS R, the 5D Mark IV and the 1DX and also the same lens, EF 70-200 IS II but I don't have the guts to sell it...
I have no doubt they've thought of it, but it's a concern I've heard raised many times though I've never experienced it. I was more curious if anyone had first hand experience with a telescoping lens actually being damaged due to drawing something into the lens barrel that didn't belong there, considering that I've never heard of an example where it actually happened.Let's trust in Canon engineering. I'm sure they have thought of that fact that particles of dust or water vapor can be sucked into their premier telephoto zoom.
Actually the old lens focus breathes the opposite direction and is 270mm at minimum focus distance. So this lens is probably closer to 200 than it looks on paper.Must have appalling focus breathing to only be 0.23x @ 0.7m, old lens does 0.25x @ 1.2m, this must be close to 100mm at mfd.
Only thing that's good is weight reduction. To see an 85 f/1.2 heavier than a 70-200 f/2.8 shows we've entered a parallel universe
With it being an extending lens now they could have fixed that. Focus breathing tends to be worse in fixed length design.Actually the old lens focus breathes the opposite direction and is 270mm at minimum focus distance. So this lens is probably closer to 200 than it looks on paper.
No, the first EF 24-70L reached its full extension @ 24mm, while being fully retracted @70mm. According to the leaked images, the RF 70-200L does it the usual way (i.e. fully extended @ 200mm). Thus it would not make sense to hide the tube inside the lens hood, as the lens would have nearly no straylight protection @ 200mm then. Furthermore one can clearly see that the lens hood is going to be mounted on the extending tube and not on the lens body.So it's like the first version of the 24-70mm EF where all that extension is hidden inside the lens hood.
yeah, it is not for everyone. however I showed the RF 85 DS vs RF 85 sample photo to 10 "non-photographers" and it seems that 85 DS look wins at ratio 9:1 thoughI don't like it either. You are not alone.
Artistically I like the softer bokeh of the DS, I feel the harsh out of focus circles of the NonDS are almost celebrating the pure physics of how much Bokeh you can get, but in turn this them means the Bokeh is distracting. Throwing the background out of focus is usually to help the viewer focus on the subject. Bokeh wise i like the DS.I
yeah, it is not for everyone. however I showed the RF 85 DS vs RF 85 sample photo to 10 "non-photographers" and it seems that 85 DS look wins at ratio 9:1 though
However, with one out of ten concluded that the image was photoshopped to further blur the background
I am personally would go for the DS. stopped down, it would act like a normal lens but a bit slower by 1.5 stops approx. That's what, T2.0?
I see an opportunity for Artistic souls here. buduar, nude, portraiture and studio.
That is not possible and is not true. The calculated FL at mfd is 172mm for the mk II/III. For the new RF I've now calculated FL = 106mm. These were calculated with well known equations.Actually the old lens focus breathes the opposite direction and is 270mm at minimum focus distance. So this lens is probably closer to 200 than it looks on paper.