There also seems to be a penchant among those commentators to hang on to specific focal lengths as if they had been dipped in holy water. With short primes, the use case difference is simply stepping back or forward a few feet if you have a different focal length. A perfect example is the 16mm. You can find endless dissertations on the pros and cons of 24 vs 28 (FF equivalent) in discussions of cameras like the Ricoh GR, so what is wrong with 25.6 mm? that pretty much splits the argument down the middle. In the end, trolls are very annoying.While I would appreciate Rf-S variants of the EF-M 22 and 32, the current 16/28/50 FF RF lenses are very small, affordable and have decent IQ. I suspect Canon thinks they have that market covered with those lenses.
If I start using an RF-S camera, I would wish the most for a modern variant of the Ef-S 60mm macro lens.
I know that a lot of online commentators think that using a FF lens on an APS-C camera is equivalent to getting waterboarded, but those people need to grow up and start taking actual pictures.
Upvote
0