I’d say the chances of that RF14-35 being available for use by summer are zero to none based off what we saw in 2020, but why not adapt the EF L 16-35 which is still a fantastic lens? I like the Laowa offerings (And they have some great specialty lenses) but I don’t feel in sharpness or CA handling they are necessarily the best choice for wide angle. Sigmas I’ve heard good things about but have no hands on with.
Sadly, I'm worried you're right :/
I actually forget to mention the EF 16-35 L as an option. I used to own but sold it in order to find something slightly wider (14 or 15mm). If I decide 16mm is enough for my summer project (Vienna/ alps hometown shots for prints in my dads remodeled apartment), then I´ll go back and get it.
Thx for the input! I'm searching for good reviews on the Laowa Lenses since the 12mm F2.8 and the 15mm F2 both sound tempting, but I figure there have some major downsides with these lenses. Sharpness is usually one aspect I don't like to make any compromises...
I have been happy with the Tamron 15-30 and with a firmware update (I have the original model) it works fine with the R5. Very competitive pricewise and f/2.8 with both AF and VC.
I was in the same boat, but I went with the Sigma 14-24 ART. I didn't want to wait until summer. I am thrilled with the lens. It's enormous, but after seeing the images from it with the R5 at 100%, I don't care. I have the 16-35 f4L IS, and the Sigma is much better than it at the wide end. That lens is a bargain for the corner to corner sharpness and the almost complete lack of CA even in the extreme corners. The Sigma is weakest at 24mm, but nobody is buying that lens for 24mm. Dustin Abbott's review is very accurate and mirrors my experience with it. Even when or if Canon comes out with a RF14-35 f4 , it's going to have to be the the most amazing wide angle Canon has ever made to get me to part with the Sigma. I can't wait to dump my 16-35 f4.
A 400mm F/2.8 (11500$), a 400mm F/4 (6500$) and a 100-400mm F/5.6 (2500$) should have been good enough for the start, and for all pockets.
Yes, I have both the EF mark IIs and mark IIIs. The only one that physically allows stacking is the 2x mark II. It will accept any of the others mark II or III or another 2x mark II behind it. Beyond that you are off to Kenko Land. For the hell of it, I just tried stacking the 2x mark III behind the 2x mark II behind a 135 L f/2 and attached the whole mess to an R5 via EF adapter. It lied about the aperture by two stops (i.e. f/4), and the focal length (270mm) but AF worked fine and the result was decent considering. The downside is that the IBIS was clearly misinformed re the focal length, so it would only attenuate the shake, but not remove it. The attached shot is a 100% crop. The tower is about a mile away and there is quite a bit of thermal activity in the air (hence the wiggly tower), but you can get the Idea. A good 500mm lens will show detail in the arc suppressors hanging down along side the insulators on a good day, but probably not with as much distortion as there is in the air today. Bottom line, I would say the result is on a par with a Tamron or Canon FD 500mm mirror lens. It could be useful with a 20Mp camera, but not gaining much over a single 2x with the R5. PS. Just noticed that the website did about a 50% shrink, so take that into consideration.
Well, at least there is some finished work on a potential 35/1.2: https://pdfaiw.uspto.gov/.aiw?PageN...1=canon.AANM.%26OS=aanm/canon%26RS=AANM/canon
<-- start Taboola -->
