If I would favour the 50 over the 35 I think I would get one - but the 35 S and the 35Art are already in da house and he 50 is just not different enough to justify the purchase and have 2 fifties. It would be different if weight and size concerned me more.
Currently the 50 S is a tad lower in price in several countries as Nikon tries to motivate potential buyers with rebates. Apparently no one has told them that the strategy of releasing the slow "cheap" versions of widely spread standard is not too attractive.
I don't understand Nikon's strategy: People looking for their first mirrorless "fullframe" and starting with a new system (maybe there are 2 or 3 such people?) look at Nikon and see just two bodies and 4 lenses (with different FL, so the two 24-70s count as one). The FL are dull except the 14-30, which has 9-10% distortion and needs SW correction desperately. These people will carry on to search until they find Sony or Canon.
People with a DSLR system can adapt their Nikon glass and enjoy a lighter body with more precise AF - but also some AF-quirks as the face detection still has it's limits. When travelling with a DSLR and mirrorless, I only take DSLR lenses and the lightweight 24-70, but the 50 or 35 - if I take one with me - will suit the DSLR, too. Travelling without DSLR is saving weight, but a fuss with the adapter if I'm taking the S lenses with me.
I'm waiting for one lens and will order it as soon as it's announced, the 85/1.8 S
Why? So far the S lenses perform really well and match the Sigmas which in most FLs are better than the F-types of Nikon. With a 35 and a 85 I can do a lot and a lot more than with the 24-70. I really do not understand why Nikon went for this 50 mm first although it's a great, small, lightweight lens. And I understand even less why Nikon doesn't push to give us more choices in FL.
Well a very popular lens Canon 18-55f4-5.6 IS STM hasn't been tested yest....
Popular because for free with the camera, not the most interesting lens for a review.
Not interesting for me and you, but tons of this lens are sold and owners considering upgrading want to compare with what they have, it should generate some more traffic here, myself I bought 750D with kit lens, although I already had 17-55f2.8, because the combo was dirt cheap, tried it and was surprised with its image quality, findings were confirmed by Klaus review
I didn't sell it despite moving EOS RP, it's a nice lens for 4K video..
(06-20-2019, 11:55 AM)Klaus Wrote: Actually I would have access to the RF 28-70mm f/2 ... ;-)
Bit late to the show, but I would love to see a test of that lens
ANd if possible, also the other Canon lenses suggested by BC.
Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 1 zoom, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, extension tubes, an accessory plague, and an Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II and Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ...
The 28-70/2 is "on the list"
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji