p.2 #2 · RF 85mm f/2 macro vs. the alternatives .. which appeals more?
I would get an 85mm-100mm macro if it was a good street lens too, but most of them seem to have slow AF, or at least too slow for rapid action on the street (100L case in point). The Canon 85/2 may be better because it is 1:2. How many people really need 1:1? I wonder.
p.2 #4 · RF 85mm f/2 macro vs. the alternatives .. which appeals more?
It depends on what you photograph. For outdoor field photography I've settled on the 180-200mm range. I've tried all the lengths over the last 50 years and have been using that range for the last 30. Right now the 135T/S with a 1.4x. Unless you are into lensbaby type photos, f2 is not needed.
For studio or other setups, sorter lengths are fine or situations where you are contrained by space. I carry a 24-105 for that. It is rare in these situations in the field that you need beyond quarter life size. If you need more magnification than that you have to get close enough so space is no longer an issue.
To me the RF85 f2 is a protrait lens. I don't do that type of work myself but from what others have said the additional close focusing capability will be appreciated in that kind og work.
