p.6 #1 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Try comparing the 100-500 to the Sony 200-600. Or the Nikon 800mm pf to the Canon 800mm 5.6. Night and day.
AmbientMike wrote:
You wonder if people complaining about price have looked at Sony. 24-105 L is the same as Sony, except it's better and at least Canon has less expensive options, including EF mount. 85/2 Canon is on sale so it's less than Sony 85/1.8. It's telly pretty comparable imo. 70-350 is a lot more than 55-250
p.6 #2 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Gotta say I have too many non R Canon lenses to even think about a R camera without an adaptor. I was thinking about the next R5 until I read this and would not even consider a Canon R camera until they get a reasonable fix for this mess.
Sep 01, 2022 at 04:09 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.6 #3 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
3iron wrote:
Gotta say I have too many non R Canon lenses to even think about a R camera without an adaptor. I was thinking about the next R5 until I read this and would not even consider a Canon R camera until they get a reasonable fix for this mess.
I think the Canon adapter $100. Definitely EF-RF adapters available
Sep 01, 2022 at 04:13 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.6 #4 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
jwolfe wrote:
Try comparing the 100-500 to the Sony 200-600. Or the Nikon 800mm pf to the Canon 800mm 5.6. Night and day.
p.6 #5 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
Nukon 800/5.6 is over $16k.
Why on Earth would you buy that lens when you can buy the 800mm f6.3 for $6500.00? Nice try but that's not the comparison I'm making. Especially since the Canon 800mm is a 400mm with a 2x built in. Yuck.
p.6 #6 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Ambient Mike, Thanks, I did not realize Canon made an adaptor. So what is all the huff about, Isn't Canon just trying to protect their turf? Kinda crude about how they are doing it, but........ just gotta ask.
Sep 01, 2022 at 04:38 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.6 #7 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
jwolfe wrote:
Why on Earth would you buy that lens when you can buy the 800mm f6.3 for $6500.00? Nice try but that's not the comparison I'm making. Especially since the Canon 800mm is a 400mm with a 2x built in. Yuck.
I have no idea, but apparently people want it if they are selling for $16k. The 800pf is an anomaly. You can't lambaste Canon if theirs is a "measly" $13k vs $16k for Nikon. Looks like the RF is $17k, but the Nikon is probably F mount and needs Z adapter. However yucky you find the RF 800 Canon at least it has a matched adapter I guess.
Honestly in think it's weird to call the 800pf inexpensive. But that's where we are
p.6 #8 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
I have no idea, but apparently people want it if they are selling for $16k. The 800pf is an anomaly. You can't lambaste Canon if theirs is a "measly" $13k vs $16k for Nikon. Looks like the RF is $17k, but the Nikon is probably F mount and needs Z adapter. However yucky you find the RF 800 Canon at least it has a matched adapter I guess.
Honestly in think it's weird to call the 800pf inexpensive. But that's where we are
The 800mm pf is just like the 500mm pf, amazingly light and sharp. The people I've talked to who shoot it say it's every bit as good as the 5.6 unless you are a pixel peeper. Just look at how back-ordered it is. The thing is going to keep selling like hotcakes. I've shot the 500mm pf for several years and it blows away the zooms in sharpness.
I doubt Nikon or Canon sells hardly any of the 800mm 5.6's. Who has $16,000 to spend on a hobby? Not anyone I know.
p.6 #9 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
You wonder if people complaining about price have looked at Sony. 24-105 L is the same as Sony, except it's better and at least Canon has less expensive options, including EF mount. 85/2 Canon is on sale so it's less than Sony 85/1.8. It's telly pretty comparable imo. 70-350 is a lot more than 55-250
The Sony lens is quite a bit older so you’d expect the Canon to be better (technically any newer lens should in theory be better).
Once again not everyone wants to use an adapter or bigger more expensive EF lenses.
The 85mm f/2 may be cheaper where YOU live, but not where everyone lives. Locally the Canon 85mm is $998 AUD on sale, Sony FE 85mm is $736 at the cheapest and I bought the Sigma 85mm DN Art for $1155 on sale which is much closer to the Canon price than the Sony. I’ve also owned both those lenses and would prefer the Sony 85mm over the Canon if I’m doing anything but product photography.
p.6 #10 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
I was chatting to someone from Sigma here in Australia (CR Kennedy) when I was getting my lens serviced and he reckons RF lenses apparently are happening; supposedly licensing stuff is getting sorted out super vague but hopefully that's true.
Third party lenses are not just about cheaper alternatives anymore, my 14mm f/1.8 and 105mm f/1.4 are great examples of that. Would love to see what other manufacturers can come up with on the RF mount.
p.6 #11 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
It is absolutely true. I have a couple old Sigmas including 400/5.6 macro that don't stop down. Sure, by the mid 2000's they started to be fine. But, like I said, the older 3rd party lenses didn't work on any but the oldest digital cameras
I think it kind of depends on the lens and its age/technology. My 150-600 contemporary does not play well with eye autofocus. Just doesn't do it. But it still works. Just not as well.
p.6 #12 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
I have no idea, but apparently people want it if they are selling for $16k. The 800pf is an anomaly. You can't lambaste Canon if theirs is a "measly" $13k vs $16k for Nikon. Looks like the RF is $17k, but the Nikon is probably F mount and needs Z adapter. However yucky you find the RF 800 Canon at least it has a matched adapter I guess.
Honestly in think it's weird to call the 800pf inexpensive. But that's where we are
Just a point here - the 800 f/5.6 Canon does share many of its optics with the 400/2.8, but the lens groups that make it an 800 rather than a 400 are not optically the same as the 2X RF teleconverter. It's specifically designed for this lens, as the 1200 f/8 isn't just a 600/4 with the 2X teleconverter. Different optics again.
Personally, I'd rather have the base lens and teleconverters, but at those prices, I'll stick with my gently used EF 500/4 II
p.6 #13 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
No one I know would buy them. Price is oblivious but also size. Who wants to lug that around? Nikon’s 800mm pf is perfect. Affordable and light. The Olympus 150-400mm is the same. Innovative lens designs like these are going to be the future.
Tom_W wrote:
Just a point here - the 800 f/5.6 Canon does share many of its optics with the 400/2.8, but the lens groups that make it an 800 rather than a 400 are not optically the same as the 2X RF teleconverter. It's specifically designed for this lens, as the 1200 f/8 isn't just a 600/4 with the 2X teleconverter. Different optics again.
Personally, I'd rather have the base lens and teleconverters, but at those prices, I'll stick with my gently used EF 500/4 II
p.6 #14 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
A big part of the huff is Sony users have over 150, native, third party options.
I have Sony bodies with 3 Sony lenses, 1 Voigtlander, 1 Samyang, 2 Sigma lenses (all native) and an EF mount Sigma that works with all but 1 feature when used with Sigma EF to E adapter: it's limited to 15 fps so I don't get the full 20fps my Sony A9 is capable of. That lens is 500 f4 so there is no extra bulk issue with needing an adapter.
Sony imposes 2 limitations for native third party lenses: 15 fps max and no TC use.
Canon does not impose limitation, rather a ban.
3iron wrote:
Ambient Mike, Thanks, I did not realize Canon made an adaptor. So what is all the huff about, Isn't Canon just trying to protect their turf? Kinda crude about how they are doing it, but........ just gotta ask.
Sep 01, 2022 at 07:22 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.6 #15 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Tom_W wrote:
I think it kind of depends on the lens and its age/technology. My 150-600 contemporary does not play well with eye autofocus. Just doesn't do it. But it still works. Just not as well.
Around 2005 or a little before pretty much all the previous 3rd party lenses rendered obsolete. Didn't work for some reason. Whether the reverse engineering not advanced enough or whatever I don't know. The ones I've seen only worked wide open. One exception is Sigma apparently re-chipped some lenses so you could use them on the rebel xt and new bodies. The older lenses apparently still fine on 1D possibly others.
Sep 01, 2022 at 07:50 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.6 #16 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
jwolfe wrote:
The 800mm pf is just like the 500mm pf, amazingly light and sharp. The people I've talked to who shoot it say it's every bit as good as the 5.6 unless you are a pixel peeper. Just look at how back-ordered it is. The thing is going to keep selling like hotcakes. I've shot the 500mm pf for several years and it blows away the zooms in sharpness.
I doubt Nikon or Canon sells hardly any of the 800mm 5.6's. Who has $16,000 to spend on a hobby? Not anyone I know.
Well I wouldn't call the 800pf light And if you don't pixel peep the difference between a good and great lens might not be too noticeable. 500/5.6 might be nice but idk that it's that far ahead. Hey I'm not sure how many people have enough to get 800pf either.
p.6 #17 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
AmbientMike wrote:
Another thing, Canon has TS-E 45/2.8, if you want 45mm prime. Also 3rd party 45/1.8 in EF that people seem to like.
I don't like computational imaging but canon has the 16mm rf.
You can disable the computational imaging in LR—most nature images don't need it. Coverage is about the same as my Samyang 14mm 2.8 with the profile disabled. If I crop out the vignette it's back to 16mm. I like it much more than the Samyang 14mm 2.8—and about 1/4 the size to boot.
Other the years I've owned dozens of lenses from Sigma, Tokina, Samyang and others on the Olympus, M series and EF mounts and my experiences were not good. I won't miss them on the RF mount. Plus, too many choices between EF and RF as it is. I just sold EF 15 (!) lenses to MPB and still have a cupboard full of lenses.
p.6 #18 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Photosbydlee wrote:
The Sony lens is quite a bit older so you’d expect the Canon to be better (technically any newer lens should in theory be better).
Once again not everyone wants to use an adapter or bigger more expensive EF lenses.
The 85mm f/2 may be cheaper where YOU live, but not where everyone lives. Locally the Canon 85mm is $998 AUD on sale, Sony FE 85mm is $736 at the cheapest and I bought the Sigma 85mm DN Art for $1155 on sale which is much closer to the Canon price than the Sony. I’ve also owned both those lenses and would prefer the Sony 85mm over the Canon if I’m doing anything but product photography. ...Show more →
Either is $600USD here but the Canon 85/2 is $100 off right now. I'd imagine either are quite good. EF 24-105 STM isn't heavy or expensive. People can adapt the older 24-105 L EF if they want, some do. Much less expensive than the Sony or newer better RF L.
Sep 01, 2022 at 08:41 PM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.6 #19 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
3iron wrote:
Ambient Mike, Thanks, I did not realize Canon made an adaptor. So what is all the huff about, Isn't Canon just trying to protect their turf? Kinda crude about how they are doing it, but........ just gotta ask.
Basically canon has made a lot of advances people tend to ignore and instead lots of people have decided to complain about lack of 3rd party lenses that Canon isn't letting anyone make. In spite of the fact that hardly anyone on here has been using 3rd party in recent years. It doesn't make a lot of sense. Is this a permanent situation or is Canon trying to sell license in the near future to make lenses nobody knows. How much does Sony owning a lot of tamron have to do with it, who knows.
p.6 #20 · Is Viltrox Getting Sued? (No more RF-EF Adapters/Speedboosters/Lenses)
Have you shot with the 500mm pf? It’s TACK sharp. It’s every bit as sharp as the f4. It’s head and shoulders sharper than the Canon 100-500 and the Sony 200-600, which are both very good. The 800mm is the same.
AmbientMike wrote:
Well I wouldn't call the 800pf light And if you don't pixel peep the difference between a good and great lens might not be too noticeable. 500/5.6 might be nice but idk that it's that far ahead. Hey I'm not sure how many people have enough to get 800pf either.
And if you don't pixel peep the difference between a good and great lens might not be too noticeable. 500/5.6 might be nice but idk that it's that far ahead. Hey I'm not sure how many people have enough to get 800pf either.