Three New Lenses

[Busted Knuckles]

24-105 f2.8. Seems roughly the same size as the 100-500.

I think if I sell off all the gear sitting on the shelf I can get close to the 3k needed.

What I am penduluming on is the IQ from the 70 to 105 range. It would appear to be sunstantively better than the f4.

I am thinking with the R5 resolution, my 70-200 (which hasnt been on the R5 since the 100-500 showed up) is on the block.

15-35, 24-105, 100-500, quite a ramge in 3 lenses.

The super super long ehhhh dont have an answer there. I might have to rely on a rental when I am thinking of going super long.

[Kayaker72]

It feels a little obscene having three standard zooms,

...looking at my lens case....

I don't see a problem. Seems very normal to me.

but I can see use cases for all of them.

Phew! There we go.

Out of curiously, have you considered a dedicated video camera?

Actually, no. Interesting thought. I'll take a look. I am wanting to take more video. Looking back, getting movements, voices, mannerisms, video is important to document.

The 200-800 is an interesting lens, not L but white and weather sealed. Quite a departure. Not something that interests me, personally. That's really because I already have the RF 100-500 with TCs, RF 100-400 for travel, and EF 600/4 II that I use mostly with the 1.4xIII so I'm already at 840mm f/5.6, and nothing to do with the lens itself. I also don't typically shoot wildlife while traveling (but if I were to do so, I'd probably just use the 100-300/2.8 with the 2x TC instead of buying the 200-800).

And the 1.4x TC pretty much lives on my 500 f/4 II. Especially if doing birds. So, 700 mm f/5.6. The 200-800 is another 100 mm of focal length and 1.3 stops less bright. It is still tempting me...but if I already had the 100-500L, I'd probably just add a 1.4TC and get 700 f/10 and call that good enough. I could still go that direction. I have a few more things to mull over. Hopefully there are some respectable reviews before early December.

But, a walk around birding lens...Loons from my kayak. I can already imagine using this a good amount.

24-105 f2.8. Seems roughly the same size as the 100-500.

I think if I sell off all the gear sitting on the shelf I can get close to the 3k needed.

What I am penduluming on is the IQ from the 70 to 105 range. It would appear to be sunstantively better than the f4.

I am thinking with the R5 resolution, my 70-200 (which hasnt been on the R5 since the 100-500 showed up) is on the block.

15-35, 24-105, 100-500, quite a ramge in 3 lenses.

The super super long ehhhh dont have an answer there. I might have to rely on a rental when I am thinking of going super long.

That would be a heckuva set of three lenses, especially on the R5. Landscapes, check. Indoor, check. Portraits, you can do a lot of portraits with 50 to 105 mm f/2.8, or could add an 85 prime. Wildlife, check. Super telephoto...500 mm is already very good, add a 1.4 TC and you just need enough light, or rent.

Not bad at all.