The best of 2018 in gear as selected by our readers

Larsskv

Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Jun 12, 2015
684
96
#21
Yeah, but f/1.8 vs f/2.0... not a big deal. Especially considering the flexibility in focal length. Shall I choose a strict 35mm f/1.8 vs a 28-70 f/2.0? No brainer.
The 28-70 is way too big and heavy. It weighs about 5 times as much as the RF35, which offers a faster aperture and IS!

F2 is nice, but it’s still quite far away from f1.2 or f1.4.
 

Larsskv

Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Jun 12, 2015
684
96
#22
Well, I suppose for an extra 1000€ (here in Europe) it should feel a bit more luxury than the 85 f/1.4. Besides, 2500€ for a prime lens isn‘t quite a bargain and I guess there are some psychological aspects to the „very cheap“ look and feel of the 85 f/1.4. We all love our new tools ;-).
If you are in the market for L series primes and consider the EF lenses 35LII, the 50L or either of the 85L lenses, I would argue that the RF 50 L is a bargain. It has the sharpness of the EF35LII already at f1.2, (almost) the bokeh of the 85LII and better subject separation (depth rendering) than any of the mentioned EF lenses. The AF is fast and incredibly precise. In my opinion, the RF50L could be considered a bargain for its intended market.
 
Dec 13, 2010
3,603
212
#23
Well, I suppose for an extra 1000€ (here in Europe) it should feel a bit more luxury than the 85 f/1.4. Besides, 2500€ for a prime lens isn‘t quite a bargain and I guess there are some psychological aspects to the „very cheap“ look and feel of the 85 f/1.4. We all love our new tools ;-).
Haha, yeah, different price range, agreed, I guess it’s nice to really tell the difference also, since it’s pricier... that said, I’ve always felt the 85 was more midrange than I hoped for when I bought it.

I got a deal and cash back on the 50 so it was around 2000 gbp(y)
 

Ron_v_W

I'm New Here
Dec 31, 2018
3
2
#24
I voted for the EOS R, a rightful winner. Own it, love it. For an explanation I'll quote my daughter: "It seems like every single picture I take with this thing is instantly turned into a piece of art."
I had this same effect with a borrowed 5D4, that's why I wanted to have an R (to me it's a Mark-IV in a smaller body). And it truly delivers. You don't even need L-glass for that. Even combined with the cheapest 50mm "plastic fantastic", it gives you tack-sharp and smooth results every shot.
 
Jan 28, 2015
2,729
314
Irving, Texas
#25
The 28-70 is way too big and heavy. It weighs about 5 times as much as the RF35, which offers a faster aperture and IS!

F2 is nice, but it’s still quite far away from f1.2 or f1.4.
Hmmmm.... I think you mean too heavy for you. For me? Perfect. I'm not inclined to spend too much on a single focal length lens @ f/1.8 when I can get a zoom @ f/2... price wouldn't be a factor in my decision in this case at all. IS? Not a factor for me at those focal lengths.
 

Larsskv

Enthusiast with Canon related GAS
Jun 12, 2015
684
96
#26
Hmmmm.... I think you mean too heavy for you. For me? Perfect. I'm not inclined to spend too much on a single focal length lens @ f/1.8 when I can get a zoom @ f/2... price wouldn't be a factor in my decision in this case at all. IS? Not a factor for me at those focal lengths.
Canon knows their customers have different preferences. It’s great they produce the 28-70 f2 to those who want and need it.
 

YuengLinger

EOS 6D MK II
Dec 20, 2012
2,185
176
Southeastern USA
#27
The performance and relatively light weight of the ef 24-70mm f/2.8L II is just so outstanding, so decisive, that giving up 4mm on the wide end, while adding 1.8 x the weight, plus about $1500 USD in cost, just doesn't seem immediately appealing.

On the other hand, Canon hasn't had a spectacular fast-50mm...ever? For all the talk of magic in the ef 50mm f/1.2L, after looking through hundreds of images on the web, talking with high-end pro wedding photographers, and seeing, clearly, the focus shift issues it has in well done youtube videos, I can understand why it has been a "love-hate" kind of lens. Any praise has been balanced with significant criticism. And not just for the focus shift. Even with spot on AF, at wide apertures it is soft. CA rears its head. And the bokeh, while at times impressive, also can look quite ordinary or even jittery. (I think part of the reason for unpleasant bokeh can be over-application of universal sharpening to compensate for soft focus on the subjects.)

In short, the 24-70mm does great in its slot, so not a lot of photographers have been thinking, "Gee, why don't they make it one stop faster, a whole lot heavier, a little tighter on the wide end, and almost twice as expensive?" But those of us craving a superstar 50mm f/1.2 have been thinking about it for years and are happy one is finally here. Even if it is a whole lot heavier and twice as expensive!
 
Jan 5, 2013
80
31
#28
I voted for the M50. I think is the better camera for the money and at the moment the system with the most lens options. Also the 70-200 F4 II is a lot of lens for the money and will be far more reachable (will produce more imagery) than many of the other options.
I was and am more than pleased with my M50 purchase and the results it produces, even with the basic 15-45mm kit lens and at such a low price. When using Sigma's 18-35mm F1.8 Art lens, this combo produces amazing photos.
 
Likes: Frage