Can't beat physics, you need glass for that range with that aperture. And it is also an L lens.24-300 to me could be a winner as a travel lens. I guess it'll depend on the size. Hopefully not like the EF 28-300L.
Fully agree with your point. However, the newest EF lenses (400 and 600) seem to have all the benefits of the RF mount but inside the EF package. I’d imagine that it was built for RF from the ground up but adapted for EF. Two hints that seem to show this to me are that the focus rings are not full time manual but rather motor driven. In addition, the lenses have the same ‘focus motor speed setting’ switches as are available on native RF lenses within the software of the RF body... I’d expect Canon to make this clearer during the announcement of the 300 and the 500 - if this is indeed their plan. We shall have to wait! Are the newest lenses even available at this time?I have two concerns with the “just use the EF-RF adapter” issue:
Whilst I’d be happy to adapt my existing lenses, I wouldn’t want to buy a new EF mount lens with the intention of adapting it to RF mount.
- Doubling the number of lens-mount interfaces - I’ll leave the explanation to Roger Cicala: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2013/09/there-is-no-free-lunch-episode-763-lens-adapters/ No, the sky won’t fall in because of this. In the real world and with a 30MP sensor, I doubt you’d notice unless you get an unlucky combination of lens, adapter & body that are all enough out of tolerance in the same direction. On the other hand, for those advocating a future EOS R series body with a high resolution sensor, perhaps it is a worry.
- “MELVILLE, N.Y., April 1st, 2019: Canon U.S.A. Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the new EOS RS featuring Superduper autofocus*, 80MP orgasmic sensor and... [*feature only available with Canon RF series lenses]” - I think we can all see this coming! It’s pretty reasonable to assume there’s a reason for the new 12 pin connection on RF lenses.
That bag full of glass will still work for years to come, whatever corporate decisions are made.Well, it would make sense if Canon were going to invest any more energy in the EF series. My fear is that may not be Canon's strategy going forward. Sitting nervously on a bag full of EF L glass...
Canon spent millions upgrading several EF lenses over the last few years (and still are) knowing perfectly well that they were coming out with a RF Mount system. EF lenses will be around for many many years to come.That bag full of glass will still work for years to come, whatever corporate decisions are made.
Yeah, I like the look of them but they are mostly very premium products at this point.Canon spent millions upgrading several EF lenses over the last few years (and still are) knowing perfectly well that they were coming out with a RF Mount system. EF lenses will be around for many many years to come.
Besides, these RF lenses look quite untouchable to the majority market of gear buyers as they are outrageously expensive....
Yeah, it's not that I don't love L glass or recognize that they'll continue to function tomorrow. My point was that if/when I bail out of the Canon ecosystem, it's going to suck having to sell off native Canon glass at fire sale prices if I want to switch over to native XXX glass instead. Rational or not, I'm having some buyer's remorse, I suppose.That bag full of glass will still work for years to come, whatever corporate decisions are made.
I would tend think a lighter lens would be more in need of IS... based on my firearms experience. I have the current 24-70mm f/2.8L II and have not had a problem probably due to the shorter focal length. I won't be buying a 24-70 IS if it gets released. I'm happy with what I have. If I had an R body the non stabilized 28-70 would probably be my first lens purchase. However, I am more likely to get a 5D Mark V if one is released.Ouch - this makes my decision more complicated - do I go with the 28-70 f2, or the image-stabilized 24-70..
I'm still leaning towards the 28-70, just due to the enhanced optics and bokeh that I'll get from this lens. At the same time, I know the lens will be much heavier, and I wonder if the IS becomes a necessary ingredient here?
For anyone who has the current 24-70 (without IS), how do you find it? Do you find that IS would make things better?