(07-06-2019, 07:26 AM)toni-a Wrote: (07-06-2019, 12:30 AM)Klaus Wrote: There's also no "classic" compact standard zoom lens for DSLRs. They used to offer a 28-80mm but the only thing that comes close to that is the 24-105mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM and that's not really a small lens.
To be fair though - IMHO a $100 lens just doesn't make sense on a FF camera. This market segment doesn't need one. If you got financial constraints or like small gear, full format is just not the way to go.
Well the very popular Sony 28-70 ,Sony 28mmf2.0 and Sony FE50mmf1.8 are here to prove the opposite
Check the popularity of Canon 40mmf2.8 in Canon full frame world
I would be very happy to get the upcoming Sigma 45mmf2.8 if it's a pancake even if I already have the 50f1.4
I am very happy now using Canon 28mmf2.8 on EOS RP, although I rarely use it at f2.8 and I own 24-105f4, on his 6D2 a friend of mine, sold his 24-105f4 and is using the good old Canon 28-105f3.5-4.5 That the Sony 28-70mm is "very popular", what is that based on?
Is the Sony 28mm f2 a "classic standard zoom lens"? Or a $100 lens for FF? No. Then why do you mention them? Same goes for that 50mm f1.8. Which is not a very popular lens, due to its faults.
It is fine for someone to use an old 28-105mm of course, but is that a very popular choice? And not for the pixel peepers, for sure (same goes for that funny little 37-70mm I found).
Frankly buying an expensive FF camera and then using rock bottom lenses on it smacks of Luddism to me... At least a little.  I'm with Klaus on this one, although I do get curious at times, too.
It's more size than price, Canon 40mmf2.8 pancake is more expensive than 50mmf1.8 and doesn't offer real optical advantages, so why it is selling ?
I dpn't always want to carry huge gear, for hiking I am using my Sony A6000 plus 16-50 for size and wight, with a lightweight compact standard zoom like Sony's 28-70 in Canon land I would use my EOS RP instead.
07-09-2019, 10:01 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019, 10:04 AM by Klaus.)
So here we go:
https://www.canon-europe.com/lenses/rf-24-240mm-f4-6-3-is-usm/
Disappointing ... https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf24-240-f4-63/image/spec/spec-mtf.png
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
with Canon 24-105f4 having a close price, close size and weight, superior build quality and fixed aperture with practically one full f stop advantage at 105mm, I can see no reason to get this one, ok there's the 105-240 range but how much is it interesting to have a 100-240f5-6.3 zoom ?
lightwieght travel option is already covered by Cameras like RX100 and G7 ,EOS M50 plus EFM18-150 would be anyway a better option anyway with such combo you are not really after shallow DOF
07-09-2019, 11:58 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-09-2019, 12:04 PM by Brightcolours.)
Toni, with a RX100 or the others you can't do 50mm f1.2. Nor 85mm f1.2. Nor even 35mm f1.8. So, that is your answer. Cameras with lens mounts and separate lenses are not meant as a single lens camera. You can make it be a 24-240mm camera when you want that one day, and a 85mm f1.2 portrait special the next day.
And with 240mm f6.3 on FF, you do get shallow DOF (240 / 6.3 = 38mm aperture after all).
It is just that, "a convenient super zoom lens". I have never been a superzoom lens customer (never looked at any of the 18-200mm APS-C lenses or any FF equivalent), but I realize that other people might have a want for one.
(07-09-2019, 10:01 AM)Klaus Wrote: Disappointing ... https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf24-240-f4-63/image/spec/spec-mtf.png
Looks not bad for a superzoom, to be frank.
Comparing it to the Nikkor 28-300mm:
https://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-fTYlSZPBjlMhlFa1VHARsAMnUXbUr7JVMy59DqMksG-PXFl7J9v-FTV4SAbYhgfatpJWqkPJdzAwsgWRMuL--/Misc/AFS_28_300_ED_VR_MTF_w.jpg
https://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-fTYlSZPBjlMhlFa1VHARsAMnUXbUr7JVMy59DqMksG-PXFl7J9v-FTV4SAbYhgfatpJWqkPJdzAwsgWRMuL--/Misc/AFS_28_300_ED_VR_MTF_t.jpg
(07-09-2019, 11:58 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: Toni, with a RX100 or the others you can't do 50mm f1.2. Nor 85mm f1.2. Nor even 35mm f1.8. So, that is your answer. Cameras with lens mounts and separate lenses are not meant as a single lens camera. You can make it be a 24-240mm camera when you want that one day, and a 85mm f1.2 portrait special the next day.
And with 240mm f6.3 on FF, you do get shallow DOF (240 / 6.3 = 38mm aperture after all).
It is just that, "a convenient super zoom lens". I have never been a superzoom lens customer (never looked at any of the 18-200mm APS-C lenses or any FF equivalent), but I realize that other people might have a want for one.
(07-09-2019, 10:01 AM)Klaus Wrote: Disappointing ... https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf24-240-f4-63/image/spec/spec-mtf.png
Looks not bad for a superzoom, to be frank.
Comparing it to the Nikkor 28-300mm:
https://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-fTYlSZPBjlMhlFa1VHARsAMnUXbUr7JVMy59DqMksG-PXFl7J9v-FTV4SAbYhgfatpJWqkPJdzAwsgWRMuL--/Misc/AFS_28_300_ED_VR_MTF_w.jpg
https://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-fTYlSZPBjlMhlFa1VHARsAMnUXbUr7JVMy59DqMksG-PXFl7J9v-FTV4SAbYhgfatpJWqkPJdzAwsgWRMuL--/Misc/AFS_28_300_ED_VR_MTF_t.jpg
The effective resolution on the 30mp EOS R will be lower than the effective resolution of the 12-100mm PRO on a 20mp MFT body ...
https://asia.olympus-imaging.com/content/000085683.gif
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
(07-09-2019, 10:27 PM)Klaus Wrote: (07-09-2019, 11:58 AM)Brightcolours Wrote: Toni, with a RX100 or the others you can't do 50mm f1.2. Nor 85mm f1.2. Nor even 35mm f1.8. So, that is your answer. Cameras with lens mounts and separate lenses are not meant as a single lens camera. You can make it be a 24-240mm camera when you want that one day, and a 85mm f1.2 portrait special the next day.
And with 240mm f6.3 on FF, you do get shallow DOF (240 / 6.3 = 38mm aperture after all).
It is just that, "a convenient super zoom lens". I have never been a superzoom lens customer (never looked at any of the 18-200mm APS-C lenses or any FF equivalent), but I realize that other people might have a want for one.
(07-09-2019, 10:01 AM)Klaus Wrote: Disappointing ... https://cweb.canon.jp/eos/rf/lineup/rf24-240-f4-63/image/spec/spec-mtf.png
Looks not bad for a superzoom, to be frank.
Comparing it to the Nikkor 28-300mm:
https://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-fTYlSZPBjlMhlFa1VHARsAMnUXbUr7JVMy59DqMksG-PXFl7J9v-FTV4SAbYhgfatpJWqkPJdzAwsgWRMuL--/Misc/AFS_28_300_ED_VR_MTF_w.jpg
https://cdn-4.nikon-cdn.com/e/Q5NM96RZZo-fTYlSZPBjlMhlFa1VHARsAMnUXbUr7JVMy59DqMksG-PXFl7J9v-FTV4SAbYhgfatpJWqkPJdzAwsgWRMuL--/Misc/AFS_28_300_ED_VR_MTF_t.jpg
The effective resolution on the 30mp EOS R will be lower than the effective resolution of the 12-100mm PRO on a 20mp MFT body ...
https://asia.olympus-imaging.com/content/000085683.gif I doubt that for 3 reasons.
- The center resolution for the lens seems pretty ok wide open. So you will get more "effective resolution" on 30mp on your subject for sure, it is not like 30mp is too taxing.
- The Canon RF 24-105 f4 24mm Canon MTF chart is not that different from this 24-240mm lens, and that 24-105mm lens did a very good job when it comes to image resolution, according to some reviewer based in Australia.
- The charts for the Olympus lens are for.... f4 on MFT. That is equivalent to f8 on FF. The charts for the Canon lens are for f4 on 24mm, and f6.3 on 240mm.
Other points: - The Olympus does not do 240mm FF equivalent.
- I don't know of any 20MP MFT bodies that have an AA-filter, so the "resolution" will be contaminated with false detail and fake sharpness due to aliasing anyway, so any comparison is moot.
Besides that, the Olympus is a sharp lens of course, that is apparent. In FF terms, a sharp, slow 24-200mm f8 lens. A slow lens that weighs 239 grams less than the faster Canon 24-240mm f4-6.3 lens. A slow lens that is weather sealed, and $200 more expensive.
09-06-2019, 06:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2019, 06:08 PM by Rover.)
Vignetting... totally off the scale at the wide end unless the distortion correction is turned on. Looks like what an APS-C lens gives when mounted on APS-H camera outside its comfort zone - not sure if it can be called vignetting at this point, or just "going outside the image circle":
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1611970/0#14970167
And I thought the Sony 24-105 was bad in this regard... So let's pack it up and go home - there are no miracles.
09-06-2019, 07:00 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-06-2019, 07:01 PM by Brightcolours.)
So they went the Sony/Olympus way, not correcting the wide end to keep the lens simple, and rely on distortion correction in post capture. What you lose by doing this is resolution in the corners. You will get a corrected 24mm FOV image, but not with maximum possible resolution.If I understood JoJu correctly. Nikon also is guilty of under-correcting with the new Z lens line.
|
