Opinion: This patent identifies my ongoing issue with Canon

[EricN]

As an example of what this means Canon shooters are missing out on, 27mm f/1.2:

Viltrox AF 27mm F1.2 Pro E/Z Large Aperture Autofocus APS-C Lens For Sony and Nikon

The AF 27mm F1.2 Pro lens is the second ultra-large aperture prime lens of the Pro flagship series launched by Viltrox after the AF 75mm F1.2 Pro. Continuing the amazing ultra-high resolution of the Pro series and F1.2 super large aperture for extremely pleasant bokeh.

viltroxstore.com

The full frame equivalent should be 40.5mm f/1.8 Is that better than the 35mm f1.8 IS STM Macro or the 50mm f/1.8 STM? Either of those two cost less at full price, in terms of money, weight and magnification. Also, it has no IS and less magnification than the 35 or 50 (which isn't surprising) or and you could buy both for only about $155 more, or wait until Canon offers their summer discounts and probably get them for the about the same price. Is that missing out?

 

[ashmadux]

{hightlight is mine}
Perhaps you can illuminate us on why RF-S is your preferred platform? Is it RF-S or R mount in general?

Canon is clearly providing an option for crop sensor users but with the same mount as full frame. They are providing a simple upgrade path to full frame and perhaps nudging users a lot to get you there. Canon could easily repackage EF-M lenses (the good ones) to RF-S but they haven't... yet.

After 5 years of R mount, Canon has a pretty reasonable range of inexpensive and unique/expensive range of native full frame lenses to choose from and using the R7 you also get pixel density for "reach". There are niches that are missing that maybe 3rd party option would fill and maybe not.

What is the real problem you have?

Canon is the preferred platform. If that wasn't clear.

I was interested in RFS to upgrade from the m62, but the joke is on RFS users..so ..nah.

 

[David_B]

The full frame equivalent should be 40.5mm f/1.8 Is that better than the 35mm f1.8 IS STM Macro or the 50mm f/1.8 STM? Either of those two cost less at full price, in terms of money, weight and magnification. Also, it has no IS and less magnification than the 35 or 50 (which isn't surprising) or and you could buy both for only about $155 more, or wait until Canon offers their summer discounts and probably get them for the about the same price. Is that missing out?

You're aruging that a f/1.8 is the equivalent of f/1.2? Nobody here is clamoring for a 35/f1.8, everyone wants a 35/f1.2. Otherwise your comparison makes no sense at all. I get what you're trying to do - come up with a way in which to show that Canon does offer something like this new lens, except that Canon doesn't.

The lens posted is a 27/1.2 for APS-C of which there's nothing like it from Canon. It isn't a full frame lens and comparing it to a full frame lens doesn't work because there is a whole boat load of differences that come into play.

P.S. Canon's APS-C sensors are smaller than Nikon/Sony and have a "multiplication factor" of 1.6 rather than 1.5, so the 27mm on APS-C, were it on a Canon APS-C, would have the same FoV as a 43.8mm lens on a full frame. Or maybe a better thing to say is that a 27mm on Nikon/Sony APS-C is a 28.8mm on Canon APS-C. I am trying to think of when the last 1.5* APS-C Canon DSLR was made.... someone?