That is one reason why Canon most likely will be the most used dedicated camera brand for several years to come. But even the R I believe takes better images in practice than any of the Canon SLRs, just due to AF. Where's your elementary-school teacher? Obviously those are different types of lenses for different systems, but boy, that shows you how small this lens is. Not reallyNilangsu has criticized this lens for relying on distortion correction to produce results, but has then praised two other lenses, one of which he says he uses, which rely on the same digital correction to produce results. And its hardly priced that high." 33 facts in comparison Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM vs Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM Art Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM Art Why is Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM better than Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG HSM Art? I heard 16mm isn't really sharp and has vignetting 4 28 28 comments Best Add a Comment Sweathog1016 4 mo. !?? The Canon lens is also approx 700 more than the 14-30mm can be bought new here in the UK. Huge, huge huge advantage for Canon, and +5mm. I'm sure people will find this lens useful and good. With arrival of the new RF 14-35/4 I am tempted to upgrade again mainly due to the extra 2mm and weight reduction, however, the 'old' EF is such a great lens and the new RF is so expensive here in Australia that I won't bite yet .. Just make sure you don't get booked by the police for Covid related infringement - twice - save $2,000 already for your lens. Never bet against the advancement of technology. But the Canon is priced 800 higher than the Nikon (and please do make the school debate-club argument about the 5 mm at the longer end) and could also be digitally corrected. We've been shooting with it for a few days (watch this space for a full gallery of samples soon) and so far, our impressions of this compact ultrawide are very positive. Canon has announced the RF 28mm F2.8 STM, a $300 pancake prime lens for its RF system. Admittingly is a bit of a generalization, not all EF lenses work flawlessly on the Sony bodies. As I wrote elsewhere, the Nikon 14-30/f4 is $1300 vs $1700 for this new 14-35/f4, but the Canon gives you the range from 30 to 35, and built in IS, and a closer MFD. The relatively reasonable prices of the 14-30 and 105 macro are appreciated. Use your experience to help others in the community make a decision. TRU: Im dubious when someone threatens to switch brands on a whim because of Blah blah blah, TRU: as soon as the R3 is released all those Sony shooters are gonna come back home to Canon because they want tanks.. Canon RF lenses now so expensive !, i get it - this is not just some 16-35 4. But I have to say the older EF L lenses had a more pleasant finish and looked better in my opinion. Canon going to sell a bazzilion of these little kittens. @Thoughts R Usthat is also why RF lenses biggest competitors are the EF lenses. With full-time manual focus, you can move the focus ring whilst it is in AF (autofocus) mode. The "Quality feel" is an illustion in my opinion, though I like the ergonomics and images.). In all of the discussions on the R3 I maintained quite clearly that the size proposition was a matter of choice..that some preferred smaller, and yes that some preferred the larger "tanks.". It's been done by others and maybe by you. But as noted, everyone has to make up their own mind and do what's right for them. This lens and the Nikon 14-30 f/4 will both take far finer photos than most photographers, you or I will ever take. How will I afford a Christmas goose AND my turducken this year????!!!!!". I could not justify switching from my EF 24-105.Btw the lens I use the most on my R5 is the EF 85/1.4L IS if I am not shooting close up action sports. I'm complaining about R6 pricing for a simple reason. This price of this lens is ridiculous for an f/4 wide-angle zoom. These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. It for this reason alone I much prefer Sony now and even Nikon is getting many third party Z mount lenses. Cont'd. Or keep shooting that antique SLR! Who is charging less for such lenses?? Can you finally live without third-party NR solutions? Many lenses allow you to focus to infinity. Oh well. Nevertheless I can carry with me both my R5 and the A9 and if I want to I can decide to carry only Canon EF glass with me. I compared 1 lens to 1 lens using current prices "NOW" - like the OP stated and showed his exaggeration was both wrong and unnecessary to make. Hands on with no photo of the lens extended. Why are you telling the world "I can't afford this?" Savviest. @MikeRan: Please. I could have gotten better results at 8 minutes at ISO 100 at f/4, but didn't feel like waiting around in the cold. My system doesnt have such compromises, so I have little to worry about when I am spending top dollar on their lenses. And then he also wants me not bring up the fact that this lens covers the 30-35mm range, as if that's not consequential to many users. The point is that Canon is offering users one more option, and to some it is a compelling option, regardless of whether that is true for you. For instance, I already know when the R3 drops that the STA will be out in full force, and I can almost anticipate what they will repeat over and over again. We've taken the Nikon Z8 bike racing and into the hills as we work towards a review of Nikon's sports/landscape/everything camera. Look at their A1, FX3, A7s iii, etc. I was told by these Sony users that when assessing the number of lenses for R system, that I can't count the EF lenses as the same as the RF lenses. Focusing errors or aperture getting stuck or the camera hangs and needs to be restarted. The Sony 12-24 f4 is right now going for $1773 at B&H. Because that means that the Canon mirrorless system has a huge lens selection available for it. CSPN: LOL. These sort of comments read more like a spoiled child who can't get everything they want right now. A $3000 28-70 f2 L looks great on paper, but do we really want to lug it around, let alone pay for it? Bulky, heavy, obtrusive and expensive. It's a reality of the digital world. All lenses are going up in price, especially the RF. It is cheaper, lighter, smaller with great image quality and a joy to use with its traditional controls. It sold for $800. Help us by suggesting a value. Go for it. Since this article was about Canon's 14-35/4, I looked for the closest 'Leica' lens that I could compare (and point out the absurdity of that statement) that lens is the Leica SL 16-35/3.5-4.5 and it costs $6,295 (3.7x more expensive) I think it's actually safe to say there is no point even in the next few years where Canon will make a lens - similar to something Leica has & have it's priced anywhere near a Leica. Photography can be an expensive hobby. I noticed I was leaving it at home and using my iPhone. It's that NOW that I think you may have missed that I picked up on & posted about. The Nikon Z8 is a $4000 Stacked-CMOS full-frame mirrorless camera that offers most of the capabilities of the range-topping Z9 but in a smaller, less expensive body. Compatibility: Canon RF mount. The EF 16-35 f4L is one of my favorite lenses and gives me great results. When I write about the "Leica-fication" of the camera market, I don't mean that literally every company will do exactly what Leica does. Shaun: Hey my cat is a chonk and requires an UWA zoom to capture his majesty. I have not given it a full test. But if you don't want a "well it's only $xxx.xx here" you should specify your general location. I still have a few Wasabis as backup and they're also fine for older cameras that draw less power.. but after having aftermarket battery heating issues during longer video shoots, I now only prime my X-H1s with real Fuji batteries, even though they're $70 each at the camera store. This result is based on the MTF (modulation transfer function) measurement, and gives an overall indication of the sharpness of images produced by the lens. Engineering wise this lens is unrivaled. A true macro lens has a magnification of 1:1. Yes, it's a slower aperture, but to have an UWA zoom be the same size as a prime, well that's pretty cool. Clearly "affordable is subjective but since I use around 6 lenses if each costs about 1/2 that of the body then that's hardly "affordable" in my opinion. First you praise the Nikon and I show you how that lens uses distortion correction. So its better to be repetitive with the tired comment of it being too expensive? First, that is the Australian market.don't know why the big price discrepancy, but oh well. @Simon, that's fine - kind funny though to base it on one lens (or at least that the only indication you've given).I noticed that other lenses have their short comings - excluding IQ and some are pretty close to the Canon in price (at least here in the USA)Panasonic S PRO 16-35mm f/4 $1500 (Not as wide, no control ring, no IBIS)Nikon Z 14-30/4 $1300 (Not as long, no control ring, no IBIS)Sony FE 12-24/4 $1700 (Wider but not as long, no control ring, no IBIS, no easy way to put filters on)Sony FE 16-35/4 $1100 (7yr old design, no control ring, no IBIS). Nothing surprising, the world is evolving. So there are many options out there, and as others mention, they already own some great EF glass and can adapt that. Expand your field of view with the RF 15-35mm F2.8 L is USM lens. I considered the 90D for a long time, but since the RP and R showed Canon were getting serious about mirrorless, I thought I'd wait until Canon replaced the 90D with an APS-C "R90" but 2 years on and there's no sign of that happening. Yet another reason for me to sell all my Canon gear and go to Sony or Fuji. So many photos and none, zero, with the lens zoomed to the widest and longest whilst showing the entire lens. This wide-angle, L-series lens is a dynamic addition to the EOS R Series line-up, offering a bright f/2.8 maximum aperture and 15-35mm focal length that helps capture landscapes, architecture and other wide-angled subjects in full view. My guess is that it's just such a minor extension, that most don't mention it since it's a non-issue. Nikon 14-30 f4 is substantially cheaper and pretty good from what I have read, not stunning maybee . Unbelievable! Someone mentioned that if not for price it would be their "go-to lens." The Canon and Nikon don't compete against each other, since which one you might buy depends on which system you already own. Further benefit is an extra mm of zoom on the wide end. Outside of that I mainly do landscapes, but also astro stuff too. The 6D still can perform for many, but really Canon has given the R6 more than enough to justify the price premium over the price of the 6DII. Thats why Sony doesnt do this (by this, I mean a real distortion of 6-8% corrected by software) with its GM and G wide angle primes and zooms. " They look like technical marvels but are way overkill for my (non-professional) needs and way too heavy. Im prepared to believe that this lens is (slightly) optically better than my EF 16-35mm F4 IS, but I can use the adapter with variable ND filter on my R5. This is important if you use filters, as some such as polarising or gradient filters have to be orientated a certain way. But that's the only way for this to be a viable business and survive. I heard the 15-35 is a lot Sharper especially in the corners? And all of them are doing it. @Reactive, so goodbye . Even Sony which doesn't currently have DSLRs, is increasing pricing with new models in a particular line. Some people here say it isn't worth it, for what it is, without even trying it. But again, it's nothing new. Fuji has some lenses with Aperture ring, but that's not what's on the Canon.You can use it that way, or Use it to adjust ISO, or other things, but that up to the user.So I'll amend my previous post:Sony FE 16-35/4 OSS $1100 (7yr old design, no control ring, not as wide: 16mm vs 14mm)Thanks for the catch on the OSS and the IB vs IL typo. Key Features. If you list all existing RF and Z lenses, Nikon is not always cheaper than Canon for many mid-price lenses, such as 50f/1.8, 35f/1.8 or 85f/2 and 24-240, and they don't have the 600 and 800f/11 nor the 24-105f/4 and f/4-7.1, so I think it's hard to conclude that the Z system is at the moment really more affordable than Canon's. But it will be a great lens for some. In fact it's foolish to really dwell on purchase price at all. Ill take dumb things people say for 200 Alexhttps://www.adorama.com/lc1635sl.html?gclid=CjwKCAjw95yJBhAgEiwAmRrutHCPER8PoV4VceR00yM6pibbiyMDk1YTtZMFzHPguVw2cvs_qR-poBoC4ZMQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds&utm_source=nmpi-google-dsa-new. In the meantime, sink your teeth into our updated sample image gallery for a sense of real-world IQ (and a taste of springtime in Seattle). too many manufacturers are now over feeding off the insecurities (justifiable or otherwise) of photographers with run of the mill offerings. But of course you didn't do that because you made it all up. So you better tell these other Sony uses that they are wrong, and that EF lenses adapt well and surely do count as viable lenses for the Canon mirrorless system! [I'm going to call it that 90% of photographers will be better off (get better results) by not being able to take images at 14mm]. In New Zealand you would simply get the EF version again - $1500 vs $3500. while yea, they can use their EF lenses on the RF system, they can also use them on the Z and FE systems as well. 392 helpful votes. If Canon continues to provide no new APS-C offering and relentlessly greedy price hikes, I will definitely consider giving up on Canon and trying something else. Total mush in the extreme corners. Anyone still shooting SLR is doing themselves a MAJOR disservice, except possibly nature photogs who must be able to look through a viewfinder for hours at a time. cont. Not everyone is in the same boat as you. Sure the marketeers will tell you FF is a necessity and you have to spend $1800 to have the latest heavy lens for your shiny new $4000 body.
Insulation For Rigid Duct,
Arctis Nova Pro Wireless Vs Arctis Pro Wireless,
Grove Square Cappuccino,
Best Small Tape Measure,
Tissot Prx Chronograph Automatic,