Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 3 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Canon 35-105f3.5-4.5
#1
Considering this lens, it's tiny, reviews I read say it's quite decent optically, would make a better balance on RP that 24-105f4 L (that I will be keeping )
Anyone tried it ?
#2
Isn't this a DC motor lens? I strongly suspect that this is no fun via adapter.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#3
(08-13-2019, 10:30 AM)Klaus Wrote: Isn't this a DC motor lens? I strongly suspect that this is no fun via adapter.
Didn't understand you mean it's like 28f2.8? That's fine for me or it has other issues, I am more concerned about the push pull zoom and rotating front element
#4
TBVH, IMO it makes no sense considerign you own the 24-105L. It si not as if it is world shockingly large. It actually is slightly smaller than the EF version, and in addition it is in a class well above that of the EF versions.

HTH, 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 ...
#5
Well, at least it would be fun to know how bad it gets with a 1987-era lens on a 30mp mirrorless camera ;-)
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com

Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
#6
Dude... just slow down a bit, will you? Smile Looks like GAS has hit you really hard and you're in a flurry of gear decisions while not exactly knowing what you're really after. No offense intended.

First thing first, the adapter is bound to eat away at least some of the size/weight advantage you may be getting by switching to lower quality gear. There is also the issue of possible AF performance penalties, and what the AF on the 30 year old lenses is going to be like is anybody's guess.

Second, there are no really compact high quality FF zooms, much less with image stabilization. It's just the way life is. If you want full frame AND zoom with good quality, you have to deal with big lenses. None of the currently available FF standard zooms from Canon have filter threads smaller than 77mm. The old Tamron 28-75 and Canon 24-85 come closest but they have their own sets of shortcomings: neither has IS, the former has a buzzing motor and the later is "only" 3.5-4.5 and mechanically not the best. I'll leave the IQ analysis of these to Klaus - the 24-85 was never tested on FF and the Tamron was found to be not exactly stellar (at 21 MP).

Third, if you're willing to sacrifice image quality to that degree, you should not have gone to FF. In APS-C realm there are many compact AND high quality offerings like the Fuji 18-55/2.8-4.

So if you already have the 24-105 RF, just stick with it. Mucking around with adapters and thrift shop lenses is - at least in my book - not worth the paltry weight savings.
YMMV.
#7
(08-13-2019, 09:25 PM)Klaus Wrote: Well, at least it would be fun to know how bad it gets with a 1987-era lens on a 30mp mirrorless camera ;-)

Especially a 1987 standard zoom "kit" lens. Primes from the 80's still can give pretty good IQ (depending on the model of course).

Indeed, if shallow DOF is not a consideration and "modern" FF glass is considered to be too big or heavy, I too would look at APS-C and not FF. The soon to be introduced EOS m% mk II, perhaps (because of the Canon ergonomics), or maybe a Sony or Fuji model because of a certain lens in their line up?
#8
(08-14-2019, 07:33 AM)Rover Wrote: Dude... just slow down a bit, will you? Smile Looks like GAS has hit you really hard and you're in a flurry of gear decisions while not exactly knowing what you're really after. No offense intended.

First thing first, the adapter is bound to eat away at least some of the size/weight advantage you may be getting by switching to lower quality gear. There is also the issue of possible AF performance penalties, and what the AF on the 30 year old lenses is going to be like is anybody's guess.

Second, there are no really compact high quality FF zooms, much less with image stabilization. It's just the way life is. If you want full frame AND zoom with good quality, you have to deal with big lenses. None of the currently available FF standard zooms from Canon have filter threads smaller than 77mm. The old Tamron 28-75 and Canon 24-85 come closest but they have their own sets of shortcomings: neither has IS, the former has a buzzing motor and the later is "only" 3.5-4.5 and mechanically not the best. I'll leave the IQ analysis of these to Klaus - the 24-85 was never tested on FF and the Tamron was found to be not exactly stellar (at 21 MP).

Third, if you're willing to sacrifice image quality to that degree, you should not have gone to FF. In APS-C realm there are many compact AND high quality offerings like the Fuji 18-55/2.8-4.

So if you already have the 24-105 RF, just stick with it. Mucking around with adapters and thrift shop lenses is - at least in my book - not worth the paltry weight savings.
YMMV.

Totally agreed, except for potential AF performance issues. If anything, on R-series bodies AF works perfectly with the Canon adapters, and is faster than on dslrs, with the exception maybe of the 1DX II.

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 ...
#9
thanks folks, Sony guys have 28-70f3.5-5.6....
Seems I will have to wait for such a lens in RF mount, was planning on keeping just RP, I think I could still make good use, of my 750D plus kit or Sony A6000 plus kit when large aperture and high ISO are not an issue (like hiking trips in bright sunshine)
pictures taken with 750D plus kit in bright sunlight are as good in quality to what RP plus 24-105 produces, Sony 16-50 is fine at the tele end rather so so at the wide end
#10
Don't be too envious, the Sony 28-70 is not a good lens any way you slice it. I'm not only taking Klaus's opinion into account - incidentally our video operator rented one recently (to be used with A7S II), and she expressed rather... negative opinion of it's quality. And that was for video at 12MP.

I honestly don't understand going to FF, then being willing to compromise so much on image quality for the sake of compactness. If you value compactness above all else, there is MFT and a variety of APS mounts.

There is a good reason all the film kit zooms went the way of the dinosaur (with the Yucatan event for them happening about 15 years ago, in my book, right when APS-C DSLRs became good, affordable and widespread). I can understand getting the urge to try something left field - once I almost accepted a Canon 28-90 kit zoom as a gift - but you need to decide whether you want to get consistently good results without constant frustration.
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
2 Guest(s)