Ditching the 24-70 mm from holy trinity

rightslot

EOS M50
Aug 22, 2018
31
15
I think we are stuck, until some Japanese company canon/NIKON/maybe even Panasonic or even Fuji comes up with a small Japanese Swiss Army knife equivalent for 24-70, we are stuck.
{By Swiss Army knife I mean some kind of Japanese engineering magic!}.

Seems to me if we want the light gathering capability of full frame we are stuck with a bigger kit. And I know what it is to have smaller because when I had my Fuji XT-3 the 18-55 was on my camera 85% of the time.

But of course that is a smaller sensor to allow for those smaller lenses. I wouldn’t consider the RF 24- 70 a walk around lens but for an upcoming trip I’m going to use it as such. I am sure after a while it’s going to get on my nerves – – the size and weight. But it’s only lens I’ll take so I’m going to have to get used to it.
 

navastronia

EOS RP + 5D Classic
Aug 31, 2018
629
720
Kit construction is going to be unique to everyone.

One of the more interesting minimalist kits I've come across was 14 mm prime, 35 mm f/1.4 prime, and then the 70-200 f/2.8. The purpose was mostly travel photography, but they did the occasional wedding but would rent a 24 mm prime or other lens as they felt needed. But, I do get and, in a way, love the simplicity. Typically if you want wide, you want really wide. The 35 mm f/1.4 is great as both general purpose lens, low light, landscape, and even some portraits. Very flexible. Then, the 70-200 f/2.8 for tighter shots. Great IQ, fast glass, I really have always admired that kit.

As for what you describe, I think it would work well, but would encourage you to consider how often you would need to change lenses. If you are going to walk around and go from 24-35 mm out to needing more reach (50-70 mm), then I would consider the 24-70/24-105 so that you are not always switching lenses. If when shooting UWA, you will not want to suddenly switch to telephoto, then you kit works.
The minimalist kit you describe is a lot like mine. I shoot primes at 14, 35, 85, and 200, with no zooms at all. I like that working this way challenges me to move to get the shots I want. I shoot mainly theatre, portraits, and events.
 

Bdbtoys

EOS 90D
CR Pro
Jul 16, 2020
180
124
I think we are stuck, until some Japanese company canon/NIKON/maybe even Panasonic or even Fuji comes up with a small Japanese Swiss Army knife equivalent for 24-70, we are stuck.
{By Swiss Army knife I mean some kind of Japanese engineering magic!}.

Seems to me if we want the light gathering capability of full frame we are stuck with a bigger kit. And I know what it is to have smaller because when I had my Fuji XT-3 the 18-55 was on my camera 85% of the time.

But of course that is a smaller sensor to allow for those smaller lenses. I wouldn’t consider the RF 24- 70 a walk around lens but for an upcoming trip I’m going to use it as such. I am sure after a while it’s going to get on my nerves – – the size and weight. But it’s only lens I’ll take so I’m going to have to get used to it.
I don't consider the rf 24-70 to be too big as a walk around lens as it isn't even a half of a pound more than the 24-105 which is a good weight to image quality imo.

Here's something to chew on for a few of the rf zooms (also neat tidbit for reference is a can of diet soda is about 0.82 lbs)...
24-105 f4 = 1.54 lbs
24-70 f2.8 = 1.98 lbs
70-200 f2.8 = 2.64 lbs w/ mount
28-70 f2 = 3.15 lbs
100-500 f4.5-7.1 = 3.35 lbs w/ mount

For walkaround even the 70-200 is just doable for me and the 28-70 is not. Oddly enough the shape of the 100-500 is better than the 28-70 for me... go figure.