You wanted a slimmed down 24-70 f/4. How about the new 28-70mm f/2.8? Would you miss the wide end? Willing to live with the vignette and distortion?
I'm thinking this lens would make my wife happy, being wide aperture, and light. Just waiting for the Canadian retailers to realize they need add a listing. (Vistek has it listed, but with 7-14 day uninsured shipping as their only option... nope).
On Flickr - Namethatnobodyelsetook on Flickr
Canon: R8 | R7 | 7DII | 10-18mm STM | 28-70mm f/2.8 | 50mm f/1.8 | 85mm f/1.8 | 70-300mm f/4-5.6L | RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L
Sigma: 18-35mm f/1.8 Art | 35mm f/1.4 Art | 50-100mm f/1.8 Art Laowa: 100mm 2X Macro
i wasn't the one hoping for a 24-70/4, but the new 28-70/2.8 is a pass for me. Never say never, but I won't pre-order it. Small, light, good IQ and f/2.8 are all plusses, but the main use case for the lens for me would have to be travel, and I would definitely miss the few mm on the wide and even more the long end. I use the 24-105/4L as my standard zoom for travel, and for that use case ~25% of my shots with it are wider than 28mm, and ~45% of my shots are longer than 70mm. I don't typically need f/2.8 for travel, if I need faster than f/4, one stop isn't enough so I bring the 24/1.8 along.Originally Posted by DavidEccleston
Vignette is readily correctable and little cost unless you're already at really high ISO. I don't get why people have an issue with forced correction of distortion – all rectilinear wide lenses have it, and there's no inherent advantage to correcting it with glass instead of silicon. I tested the RF 14-35/4 against the EF 11-24/4, the former after correction was just as sharp in the corners as the latter at 14mm, and the 11-24 doesn't really have distortion to correct at that focal length.
Plus, I already have three standard RF zooms (24-105/4, 24-105/2.8, 28-70/2), so I really don't need a fourth. The only real use case I can see for me would be on the R8 as a second body when I'm shooting with the R3 and 100-300/2.8. So far, though, swapping on the 24-105/2.8 has bee working fine.
More generally regarding the lens, it's got weather sealing (second non-L lens to get it), and Canon says it has L-series optical quality. Things like that are good news for everyone!
Last edited by neuroanatomist; 09-13-2024 at 01:24 AM.
I am traveling for work at the moment. But my thought is to wait for more reviews. Build quality is important for a travel lens. Like Neuro, the losing the 24-28 mm range does concern me.
Had this been an L, I might have pre-ordered. But, as a non-L, maybe. Let’s see about reviews.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote