• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Forums > Back > Budget Canon gear announced ...
That's not to say all the cheap gear is crap by definition... I've found the 24-85 USM a great little lens, and I've used it successfully even on the Z9 now. But it's still a notch, or two, above the likes of the 75-300, since it has decent ergonomics and proper USM, at the very least. Its only fault is that it is discontinued since a long time ago, and I prefer not to think of what happens if I have to repair it...

The latter-day EF-S gear was all great quality, and still pretty worthwhile. But now Canon is squarely aiming it into the very bottom end probably because they intend to make people upgrade to FF at any cost. In a sense, despite its disadvantages, the M system might've been a way to avoid this rut precisely because it was a standalone system with no excuse of having the path to FF, but the execution was so half-hearted that it was kinda obvious they were going to kill it off. The APS-C RF kinda just sealed the deal (never thought I'd be lamenting the EOS-M system, but here I stand...)
Well, AFAIAC, I will stick with Canon, because I like the image files the Canon bodies generate.

As to going with APS-C vs FF lenses: I made that decision many years ago, FF it is for me, and EOS R series cameras just work fine for me, even with old (EF) lenses.

The thing is, IMO APS-C cameras do not offer anything extra over FF other than a bit of extra reach, other than that they are generally the same size, weight, etc., and with higher pixel densities they do not necessarily have the same IQ as the FF siblings.

This is why for a small camera when traveling, I went with MFT. About the same quality, but generally good lenses, and having switched from Panasonic to Olympus, I am very happy, as the image files it creates are in a way very similar to the Canon ones.

In addition, I own a couple of the 'cheap' Canon RF lenses, the RF 35 F/1.8 and the RF 24-240, and I am quite happy with those for their intended uses. Especially the 24-240 is a lot better in real life than the tests would make one think. If I need a light FF setup with a lot of reach, it is what I grab for.

Just my 2c.

Kind regards, Wim
Gear: Canon EOS R with 3 primes and 2 zooms, 4 EF-R adapters, Canon EOS 5 (analog), 9 Canon EF primes, a lone Canon EF zoom, 2 extenders, 2 converters, tubes; Olympus OM-D 1 Mk II & Pen F with 12 primes, 6 zooms, and 3 Metabones EF-MFT adapters ....
Fun fact: in the DPReview comments section, "cripple hammer" is considered a swear word, and disallowed in posts.

You probably see why I found that. Smile

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)