RF Lens Wishlist

[Kayaker72]

I'm very happy with the RF 24-105/2.8 and 100-300/2.8, the two of them pair perfectly for indoor events, and as you suggest the 1.4x gives an excellent 140-420/4 for field sports, etc. The RF 10-20/4 is a great little lens

That is a really nice family portrait you have there!

I am also a bit taken by the relative size comparisons. The RF 10-20 had caught my eye as small, but I hadn't realized it was just a bit bigger than the 14-35. I had also been thinking the 100-400 might be Canon's replacement for the 70-300L, but was too tall to stand up vertically in my bag. But, looking at that, if it is too tall, it isn't by much.

The 24-105 f/2.8. I don't see much hype, but that is one sweet lens. Incredibly rapid AF, and great IQ. I already liked it a lot, but it is growing on me each time I use it.

Lots of great points here. Regarding the astro lens: I'm not sure of any advantage of an RF lens in this category (stabilization and auto focus are not typically used). Sigma makes a great 14 mm f/1.8 lens with the EF mount, so all you need is the RF adapter.

I've rented the Sigma 14 on two occasions. Great lens. I also would consider the Sigma EF 20 f/1.4 lens as a great astro/nightscape lens. A friend owns one and I've borrowed it a couple of times. I had been hoping the shorter flange distance would allow for some real improvements for a wide angle and fast prime. Still waiting, but if I were to buy today, it would be one of the Sigmas.

Canon is blocking most lens manufacturers from the RF mount, but you're all missing the weird collection of Laowa lenses:
If anyone has any comments on these alternative RF lenses, inquiring minds want to know.

Haha....no, I haven't played with a Laowa lens. But, I will say the block on 3rd party RF lenses has at least partially been lifted. We'll see where it goes. I know many have been clamoring for 3rd Party alternatives. Unless something unique really catches my eye, I'll tend to stick with Canon.

[DavidEccleston]

Haha....no, I haven't played with a Laowa lens. But, I will say the block on 3rd party RF lenses has at least partially been lifted. We'll see where it goes. I know many have been clamoring for 3rd Party alternatives. Unless something unique really catches my eye, I'll tend to stick with Canon.

Didn't know about these... but it seems Canon is only allowing Sigma to make RF-S lenses. Good for crop shooters, as Canon doesn't put much effort into quality crop lenses, and I suppose it frees up Canon to work on more full-frame compatible lenses.

[Busted Knuckles]

Perhaps a specific scenario might help focus the discussion .

I went to a fundraiser on Tuesday night for a local charity.... they had several trips for auction that where on my bucklet list so I thought I would bid on a couple of perhaps get lucky..... well..... 1 trip to Iceland and 1 to Africa later.....

I have 3 years to take the trips, and the wish list is now what lenses should I take - and even what camera body - I have a R5, but for Africa would a rental of a R1 or R3 be more appropriate?

What lenses would you take on either or both?

Thanks for the guidance.

Mike

[Kayaker72]

I received the 28-70 f/2.8 on Wednesday. It could very well become my most used lens in the near future.

I have a pre-order as well, but it hasn't shipped yet.

Congrats on the gear! I look forward to hearing how the lens performs. As David mentioned earlier, it could be a lightweight solution for me, eventually.

I went to a fundraiser on Tuesday night for a local charity.... they had several trips for auction that where on my bucklet list so I thought I would bid on a couple of perhaps get lucky..... well..... 1 trip to Iceland and 1 to Africa later.....

I have 3 years to take the trips, and the wish list is now what lenses should I take - and even what camera body - I have a R5, but for Africa would a rental of a R1 or R3 be more appropriate?

What lenses would you take on either or both?

Thanks for the guidance.

Mike

Cool...congrats! What part of Africa?

As for Iceland, I went in 2019, using my 5DIV, of my keepers, I was 7% EF 16-35 f/4 L IS, 82% EF 24-70 II, and 11% 100-400 II. I went in March. If I were to go in summer, I would also be targeting puffins (not present in March) and would make sure I had longer lenses....but, your 100-500 w/ TC might be all you need. I also had rented a Sigma 14 f/1.4 to photograph auroras....but we were clouded over the entire time so it was never used. In the summer that likely would be a non-factor due to the lack of darkness.

As for Africa, absolutely, yes, I would have a second body with me. Depending on where you are, I often hear that dust is a significant issue. Bring plenty of wipes. But, due to the dust and wanting to respond to a scene quickly, most people I see have 2+ bodies with lenses mounted. Which lenses depends a bit on where you are going and what you are targeting. Birds, always need reach. But large mammals, when I envision Africa, I am thinking large mammals in their environment. Thus, it isn't reach that you always need. But I do often hear about needing light. So, as I envision an Africa trip, I could see something for reach, your 100-500 may cover that, but then 100-300 f/2.8 with or w/o TC? 70-200 f/2.8? 24-70 f/2.8 and I've even heard some people talking about taking the 28-70 f/2.

If I was going today, I'd likely do RF 24-105 f/2.8, RF 100-300 f/2.8, and 500 f/4 II with the RF 16 f/2.8 included if I wanted UWA. I'd have at least 2 bodies and would consider 3. But when I think of that, I am in a jeep on the Serengeti with a whole row to myself.

Again, depends on where you are going (Congo? Serengeti? Botswana? S. Africa?) and what you are targeting.