Sadly, I grew up in SoCal and also lived in Nevada for 6 years. I never did get to Death Valley.Death Valley in August made me HATE black tele-lenses as well as black bodies !
Upvote
0
Sadly, I grew up in SoCal and also lived in Nevada for 6 years. I never did get to Death Valley.Death Valley in August made me HATE black tele-lenses as well as black bodies !
Will it come with a trial voucher for your local gym?
Very nice picture! Since you are into big beautiful bokeh and portraits and have the 85 f1.2, have you ever tried the DS version of it? I'm just curious. I know the DS bokeh has a unique smooth edge falloff but has a smaller wide open average blur diameter(about half), which quickly becomes the same as the non-DS version when stopped down. If you have suggestions regarding the two it'd be interesting to hear for those that might buy one of them in the future.Well, the 85mm has a permanent home, but you are right. I have no need for the R5 and I am done with the 70-200 focal length. I'd be more interested in an R Mark II with IBIS.
My 28-70 is all about shallow DOF and bokeh for me. I almost always use flash. Low light, yes, when shooting the grandson indoors. That's about it. I see vignetting as a benefit. Focus shift (breathing?) doesn't bother me.
Unless Canon decided to use plastic lenses, such as Lomo cameras haveThe Sigma 50-100/1.8 is for APSc and it's 1.5 kg. Scaled up to 70-135 FF means it will very likely be HEAVY, even for mirrorless.
I use my ol' EF 500mm F/4.5 as a club, if I get with that gear in trouble somewhere out in the wilderness. A large mass in your hand can sometimes be a decisive advantage, if you get attacked...I could think of many ways to use this.
Lenses like this are why I have been doing CrossFit since 2008.
I've not tried the DS and am not interested in it. I thought I might regret getting the non-DS once the DS came out, but no. The effect, from what I understand, disappears as one stops down. I prefer the hard edge on bokeh light balls on the rare occasion they are in the background.Very nice picture! Since you are into big beautiful bokeh and portraits and have the 85 f1.2, have you ever tried the DS version of it? I'm just curious. I know the DS bokeh has a unique smooth edge falloff but has a smaller wide open average blur diameter(about half), which quickly becomes the same as the non-DS version when stopped down. If you have suggestions regarding the two it'd be interesting to hear for those that might buy one of them in the future.
Form what I gathered the white was originally so they stood out against the Nikon lenses when Nikon was king. And speaking of Nikon super tele lenses are taken to the same extremes without white paint. I am sure there is something to keeping the lenses cooler in direct sunlight, but I think it is marketing thing like that distinctive red ring.
I did speak once to an ex war photojournalist who said that white lenses were far preferred because they were less likely to be mistaken for some kind of weapon. But again, I don't think that's primary reason.
The EF 200mm f/2.8 is black.
White vs black is not a style decision by Canon, it's a technical decision based on reducing heating of lenses used in strong daylight.
So, it will be white if it needs to be for heat dissipation reasons, and black if not. Generally this means more complex lenses with a longer reach, but there's nothing stopping Canon putting an ultrawide lens in a white shell if they feel it's the best way to reduce heat buildup.
Sadly, I grew up in SoCal and also lived in Nevada for 6 years. I never did get to Death Valley.
I own the 28-70 f/2 and love the images it produces. Yes, it's heavy. I can't use its for video without a tripod and it's too heavy for a gimbal. But for still photos... it is like having a series of primes. I would expect the same from the RF 70-135/2L. Most prime lens packages (at least in film production) have a 70mm, 75mm or 85mm and then jump to a 105mm or 135mm. Having all those options in a single, quality lens is appealing....especially when the R5 comes out. Keep in mind that Canon doesn't offer Cinema Primes in the RF mount nor are they currently licensing the RF mount to other lens manufacturers like Zeiss and Cooke.
Nah."But for still photos... it is like having a series of primes."
It does not have the quality of a prime: The color rendering, for example, of the RF 50 1.2 is far better than RF 28-70
Spot on. 28-70/2 distortion level @28mm is: barrel, around 3.6%. Good to Soft mid frame and corners wide open. Much better at F2.8."But for still photos... it is like having a series of primes."
It does not have the quality of a prime: The color rendering, for example, of the RF 50 1.2 is far better than RF 28-70
"But for still photos... it is like having a series of primes."
It does not have the quality of a prime: The color rendering, for example, of the RF 50 1.2 is far better than RF 28-70
NO!Form what I gathered the white was originally so they stood out against the Nikon lenses when Nikon was king. And speaking of Nikon super tele lenses are taken to the same extremes without white paint. I am sure there is something to keeping the lenses cooler in direct sunlight, but I think it is marketing thing like that distinctive red ring.
I am interested too in seeing the examples. Or even a link. Thank you.Can you point us to any examples?
I am interested too in seeing the examples. Or even a link. Thank you.
I do believe the prime will be better but want to see the real-life examples, difference.