The Canon RF lens range - a problem for Canon?

[gt3rs]

58 minutes ago, Ty Harper said:

I was referring to the EF 70-200mm f/4. The EF 70-2000 f/2.8 was obviously never an option for gimbal use. 

It make sense then. Probably the RF 70-200 F4 is even better on gimbal but it does not have a tripod collar that can make it a bit trick as you need some support on the lens. 

[Ty Harper]

9 hours ago, Django said:

Overall I think the RF 70-200mm F4 is a win. Maybe not to everybody but plenty of reviews out there give it praise and some even consider it their favourite lens:

I think IQ-wise the RF versions clearly spank their EF ancestors (as they should) - that said, I think we've just gotten to a place where the overall quality we're getting out of our equipment (particularly from the cam end alone) is so good that some shooters (maybe more than ever) are either satisfied with the older lenses they already have - and/or are even open to revisiting older ones. I never thought I'd see the day I was seeing shooters singing the praises of the OG EF 24-105mm f/4 IS, or that I'd have sold my OG EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS to buy an EF 70-200mm f/4 IS - but here we are!

[Django]

12 hours ago, Ty Harper said:

I think IQ-wise the RF versions clearly spank their EF ancestors (as they should) - that said, I think we've just gotten to a place where the overall quality we're getting out of our equipment (particularly from the cam end alone) is so good that some shooters (maybe more than ever) are either satisfied with the older lenses they already have - and/or are even open to revisiting older ones. I never thought I'd see the day I was seeing shooters singing the praises of the OG EF 24-105mm f/4 IS, or that I'd have sold my OG EF 70-200mm f/2.8 IS to buy an EF 70-200mm f/4 IS - but here we are!

EF-L lenses have their own look, I like the primes personally. Never liked the 24-105, massive barrel distortion and not a fan of slow lenses on medium wide focal lengths. 24-70mm f2.8 is usually my jam when it comes to zooms, and the RF24-70mm f2.8 does not disappoint aside from being big & heavy. And that is a concern, lenses keep getting bigger and bodies smaller. At least Canon has the R3 which is super light despite its mini sport-DSLR like body. And again that's where the RF70-200mm f4 comes in clutch. And yeah some older EF lenses too when it comes to weight/size ratio. 

The nicest combo I've experienced was Nikkor AI-S glass on Z8, and I can only imagine on the new Zf. Also awesome to see that old glass resolve in glorious 8K when it didn't impress me so much in mushy FHD during D750 days. Same can be said for EF on R5/R5C..

 

 

[Andrew Reid]

I relinquished my EOS R3 due to the lenses situation. Couldn't justify the expense for RF stuff which had no discernible advantage over my EF lenses in terms of character or size / weight.

The problem is that the R3 didn't work particularly well with adapters either. The IBIS doesn't like it, and there are fewer choices of adapters compared to Sony E-mount. No Leica autofocus adapter, no C-mount. These two I use even more than my EF adapters these days. (You may wonder about C-mount Super 16mm on full frame as in why bother, but the Z9 has a 2.3x crop mode in 120fps and the  Sony a1 has 4K 2x crop mode, and Sigma Fp-L 2.5x 4K or 2x 4.8K Cinema DNG RAW whereas none of these things exist on any Canon R camera).

The Z9 was the next stop but that too fails on the native lenses front. Too big, too expensive, too charmless.

Z-mount is however more flexible than RF and it has the lovely Megadap E-mount adapter for Sony E-mount native lenses.

So the lack of third party Sigma/Tamron lenses on RF is not the only problem, it is the lack of adapters and piss poor IBIS performance with my Leica M / Canon FD / Contax Zeiss collection too.

[MrSMW]

23 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

The Z9 was the next stop but that too fails on the native lenses front. Too big, too expensive, too charmless.

I wish I'd bought yours now. And the 1/2 dozen others I have had in and out of various baskets...but almost 100% committed now.

Zf already on preorder and almost certainly going to be followed by a used Z9 and the Tamron 35-150mm.

Big (the later combo) yup and bigger than I'd ideally like but there just is no better combo for my specific needs, ie, does not exist other than this specific combo.

It is slightly lighter and smaller than my current set up so well used to it and it's my only real compromise. But one with twice the megapixels for pure stills which I'd like and offers me the option to explore stills from 8K raw internally at 50p. Again, the ONLY option in existence at this time.

And the Zf I never knew existed or was coming until it was announced, answered the remaining questions.

Back to Nikon where it all started for me 23+ years ago.

The S1H stays for static duty because there is no need to change it and it makes n o sense to do so.

Season over for me now so starting the clear out...

 

[Andrew Reid]

23 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I wish I'd bought yours now. And the 1/2 dozen others I have had in and out of various baskets...but almost 100% committed now.

I would get a Z8 now, it has all the same advantages but a smaller and lighter body!

23 hours ago, MrSMW said:

Zf already on preorder and almost certainly going to be followed by a used Z9 and the Tamron 35-150mm.

Big (the later combo) yup and bigger than I'd ideally like but there just is no better combo for my specific needs, ie, does not exist other than this specific combo.

I am also interested in the 35-150mm but in the past have usually always come back to a bunch of smaller and lighter primes. The main concern about the zooms is they don't really have the character and beautiful rendering of the best primes.

23 hours ago, MrSMW said:

It is slightly lighter and smaller than my current set up so well used to it and it's my only real compromise. But one with twice the megapixels for pure stills which I'd like and offers me the option to explore stills from 8K raw internally at 50p. Again, the ONLY option in existence at this time.

And the Zf I never knew existed or was coming until it was announced, answered the remaining questions.

Back to Nikon where it all started for me 23+ years ago.

The S1H stays for static duty because there is no need to change it and it makes n o sense to do so.

Season over for me now so starting the clear out...

 

That will give you another 23 years to consider camera choices then 🙂

[MrSMW]

12 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I would get a Z8 now, it has all the same advantages but a smaller and lighter body!

If it was not for the requirement to have the 35-150 permanently attached, I would also, but the Z9 makes more sense than the Z8 with a grip.

I'll take ergos over weight any and every day, hence why I prefer the Z9 form factor. For this lens combo.

13 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am also interested in the 35-150mm but in the past have usually always come back to a bunch of smaller and lighter primes. The main concern about the zooms is they don't really have the character and beautiful rendering of the best primes.

In principle yes, but in practicality, for me, no. This unit needs to go from medium wide to long in an instant. I'd prefer 28 over 35 and in an ideal world, 200 over 150, but the closest thing out there to my 'ideal' right now is that 35-150.

16 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

That will give you another 23 years to consider camera choices then

I'm only going to be in the business for another 7 years so can't see any further brand swaps ever again. I'm not expecting a Zf/Z9 based set up to last that duration, but having said that, the only real reasons I've ever changed anything before are because the things I had could never quite do what I wanted them to do. This set up does and for me is actually 'Peak Camera'.

I'm at the level I was aiming for. I'm not going to be coasting from here on in but rather much more focused on the craft rather than the tools now that the tools are no longer the weakest element.

[Django]

The nice thing is on the grey market there is less than 500 bucks difference in between Z8 & Z9. And second hand Z9 might even be cheaper than a new Z8!

Ergonomics and battery life aside, the Z9 doesn't overheat AFAIK. And has a few extra specs. Superior build quality too.

Just seems like the more pro option for not substantially more than a Z8. If weight isn't a concern of course.

I'm still considering switching back to Nikon myself tbh. On paper the Z8/Z9 have almost everything: 8K60 RAW, ProRes, 45MP, battery life, stacked sensor, crop modes.. its really just missing open-gate and LUT support. But ProRes is a big one to me since my iMac Pro doesn't like 10-bit h26x files.

In practice my short time with a Z8 was a bit of a mixed bag. The menu system drives me nuts, lots of OOF shots too because the eye-AF focuses on the eye lashes bit too much imo. Video AF while good was a bit jumpy but that could be settings, there are so many.

As for the native lenses.. while they have good specs and performance, its true they are a bit clinical, lack character compared to RF/EF. But maybe that's just confirmation bias. They are smooth and silent which is great. And just like with Canon you can always adapt native Nikon F-mount glass, and even better Z-mount does open up adapting my EF, Sony Zeiss E-mount lenses as well as my Leica M & Nikkor AI-S glass. That is what is really pushing me towards going Nikon. I'm curious about that adapted performance, if Andrew could share his experience with that E-mount Megadap adapter it would be great! Because in the end it really is about the lenses. 

[MrSMW]

39 minutes ago, Django said:

That is what is really pushing me towards going Nikon. I'm curious about that adapted performance, if Andrew could share his experience with that E-mount Megadap adapter it would be great! Because in the end it really is about the lenses. 

And more of what were previously Sony only Tamron lenses are becoming available in Z Mount.

But yes, lenses have always been my issue since late Fuji really, trying to adapt things that kind of worked and then the same with Lumix, - not quite the focal lengths that worked for me and so always juggling bodies and lenses and not always having what I needed to hand or in hand as required.

If I was a pure videographer, zero issues. Ditto if I was purely a photographer, but I am neither and have not been for over a decade other than rarely.

Nikon...or rather Tamron, wipes out that issue. It's the 35-150 really, - it's a god level focal range for what I do and fast, nothing else like it.

I've known it all year but a mid season change was not realistic but now it's all in the bag, I am effectively a free agent for the next 6 months and I concluded this season adamant I would not be starting the next without the right combo of tools.

I'm sick of compromise and frustration year after year and whilst there are some aspects of what I do that I have less or sometimes no control over, in this regard, I have total control. And I'm taking it. It's not about blaming the tools, but until recently, the right combo for my unique needs simply has not been available. It only became so in recent months.

Z9 + Tamron 35-150 hybrid use. This is the key unit really.

Zf + 40mm and still deciding between 28mm or 20mm, but probably going to have to go for the 20... primarily stills but some hybrid use. This is more the 'fun' unit that reduces the burden of the above 2.5kg unit for half the day.

S1H + probably my 'vintage' Carl Zeiss 40-80mm f3.5 because it's perfect for static video duty, plus the Sigma 18-50mm APSC lens because it has some damage that makes it unsellable, but can cover off any AF requirements if needed. For full length ceremonies and speeches, it just does the job and makes zero sense to try and replace it. It's just 2x single long takes which also makes colour matching to anything else if required, much easier than dozens of clips.

A bit of a no-brainer for me. 

[D Verco]

On 10/4/2023 at 12:26 AM, Django said:

On paper the Z8/Z9 have almost everything: 8K60 RAW, ProRes, 45MP, battery life, stacked sensor, crop modes.. its really just missing open-gate and LUT support. But Pr

100%. Open gate is the only thing really holding me back on the Z8 (aside from price) it's overkill in every other way for me. In a good way. 

Also I'd prefer they still had the 4:5 crop option for photos, but I don't think anyone has that. 

[mercer]

On 10/2/2023 at 7:11 AM, Andrew Reid said:

I relinquished my EOS R3 due to the lenses situation. Couldn't justify the expense for RF stuff which had no discernible advantage over my EF lenses in terms of character or size / weight.

The problem is that the R3 didn't work particularly well with adapters either. The IBIS doesn't like it, and there are fewer choices of adapters compared to Sony E-mount. No Leica autofocus adapter, no C-mount. These two I use even more than my EF adapters these days. (You may wonder about C-mount Super 16mm on full frame as in why bother, but the Z9 has a 2.3x crop mode in 120fps and the  Sony a1 has 4K 2x crop mode, and Sigma Fp-L 2.5x 4K or 2x 4.8K Cinema DNG RAW whereas none of these things exist on any Canon R camera).

The Z9 was the next stop but that too fails on the native lenses front. Too big, too expensive, too charmless.

Z-mount is however more flexible than RF and it has the lovely Megadap E-mount adapter for Sony E-mount native lenses.

So the lack of third party Sigma/Tamron lenses on RF is not the only problem, it is the lack of adapters and piss poor IBIS performance with my Leica M / Canon FD / Contax Zeiss collection too.

One of the features from the R5C that appeals to me is the 2.9K S16 crop mode in Cinema Raw Light. I'd much rather see that mode in the R5 for the added benefit of IBIS, but it seems that most cameras I have had with IBIS were lacking in a lot of other areas, so I decided a while ago that it isn't a must have feature for me.

Btw, it's good to see you're still experimenting with interesting lenses on these new cameras while everyone else is worried about some new bullshit zoom lens that lacks any ounce of character.