Canon Announces the Canon RF 14mm f/1.4L VCM
- Thread starter Richard CR
- Start date
So is everyone hearing end of Feb for the arrival date? I'm in Australia and I got an email after my pre-order saying March.
Upvote
0
That’s actually a big plus, as I already use them 82mm on the 24-70. Vignetting should not be huge with thin filters from what I’ve seen.
Upvote
0
yes, use a new canon IBIS camera. It's called Peripheral Coordinated Control IS. It's not out for the older camera bodies, and I'm not sure it's even possible to fully get away from it - it's just something people have to be aware of when shooting.
Sony I believe gets rid of it in post because it tags it in the meta data, but it's still there. If it really is a problem use a gimbal.
Upvote
0
I didn't even bother comparing the MTF of that lens to the 14/1.4 - I didn't want the EF lens to experience that kind of beat down.
Upvote
0
I presume you mean overlapping zooms, because having a zoom and then complementing it with a much faster prime is like .. what most people actually do.
as far as overlapping zooms, i'm going to weigh in on this so Craig get out your popcorn.
overlap is good - the rule of zooms is that if you are at the absolute ends you tend not to get the best performance out of that zoom - so if you have overlap, let's say three zooms:
14-35
24-105
70-200
optical characteristics will be different on each zoom, one zoom may be better at the wide versus tele. it may be better to shoot with the 70-200 in the 70-105 range than it is with the 24-105. this gives you options to choose what is better optically by knowing your lenses and how they perform. and that's not even considering the usefulless of using one lens and having the option to go further in the zoom either wider or longer because of the overlap. I loved this for instance, on the M's with the 11-22 and the 15-45. the overlap was great.
having options is a really good thing.
if you go from that example to say;
14-24
24-70
70-200
you are at the mercy of the optical designers that the lenses are equally good throughout the entire zoom range and you inheriently are swapping lenses far more often.
(not picking on you, but just wading into this convo)
Upvote
0
Interesting, but I would argue that buying expensive L-glass (particularly F2.8) should give a solid enough performance through the whole zoom range. The 15-35 is weaker on the long end, more reasons to take that range out and add a couple of millimeter at the wide end with a 12-24 option
Plus, your point of swapping lenses doesn't sum up, as the reason you give for overlap is exactly switching to another lens that performs better, thus not using a range you paid for. Sure, you keep more flexibility, but the original discussion started not by giving up an overlapping range alone, but to have a lens with less overlap but in exchange a wider wide end. Your two examples have same starting and ending focal lengths, but try to compare these (in the realm of F2.8):
- 12-24 (hypothetical, only Sony has one) vs 15-35
- 24-70 vs 24-105 (net win for the longer lens, but it's much bigger and more expensive)
- 70-200 vs
100-300(astronomical price difference, doesn't count)
In my view, trying to optimize the number of bright, high performing zoom lenses to have would be easier with the option of 12-24 2.8. It's not about avoiding overlap, but looking at what less overlap could accomplish with a different zoom range. For sure going to 35 is extremely useful, but knowing I can go there (with better performance, following your reasoning on optical quality) with the 24-70 makes it less valuable.
Upvote
0
@Etnaphele yes, I use front filters on my RF 15-35 2.8 L at 15mm without vigneting - zero! It's a huge plus!
Upvote
0
Or just use filters larger than the thread size. I've been using Nisi 95mm filters which will work on any of my lenses including the 15-35mm with no vignetting.
Upvote
0
Well, I can understand your arguments doing astro photography and also owning the Sigma 14/1.8. But I also do hike - sometimes - to my destinations, so weight can be an issue. I see the new RF 14/1.4 as an additional option. Based on the recent reviews the RF lens has less coma but more vignette, is faster and lighter, but also $$$$. There is no immediate reason for me to buy the new RF lens.
From my perspective there are several suitable 14mm 'astro' options for Canon mirrorless cameras now:
Sigma Art 14/1.8 (2nd hand only)
Samyang XP 14/2.4 (need software update for newer RF bodies)
Pergear / 7Artisan 14/2.8 (seems to be the same optical construction with different 'casings', coma is slightly stronger than the Samyang, but the vignette is high. Weight and price are low)
Canon RF 14/1.4 (good 'astro' lens, but $$$$)
not so well suitable for astro
Laowa 15/2 OK (15 is very close to 14) Based on reviews I find the coma a little bit too strong, also at f/2.8
several Samyang 14/2.8 lenses: I hate the poor Samyang QC, the so called 'Samyang-lottery' for decentered lenses!
TTartisan 14/2.8: Based on reviews I find the coma a little bit too strong
Each lens has pros and cons (and MF lenses are usually easier to focus than AF lenses for astro).
Upvote
0
I already use the 82mm filters I have with step up rings on the 70-200 and 82mm seemed the right size to go. It bums me not being able to use the hood on the 70-200 for that reason. Going 95mm is not an option for me but it's actually a good idea - probably with substantial price increase though.
I'm seeing myself going with the 15-35 sooner or later, I tried a variable ND (much thicker than a fixed ND obviously) on one in the shop and the vignetting was minimal + other commenters saying 82mm filters work fine. The appeal for me would be the very good video performance in addition to a heap of other uses.
Upvote
0
15-35 is a great lens. Perfect for landscape photography but I've also been able to use it for astro on a tracking mount. I went with 95mm because I was sick of having to buy multiple sets that do the same thing. Personally I think you'll love the 15-35. It's very versatile and has great performance.
Upvote
0
Do you also own the 24-70 F2.8 by chance? I suppose the 24mm end of it should give similar results for astro, so it could be my learning ground.
Upvote
0
