jakemachina
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Jeff Nolten wrote:
I took the 10-18 to Italy and used it a few times. It seems pretty sharp and would make a good landscape addition to a kit like you are talking about. It is tiny and has IS and covers the missing 15mm of the 18-## kit lenses. There is also the RF 16 f2.8 of the same size, no IS, that would do close to 15 if one shoots raw and tweeks the lens corrections in post.
I really like my R7, but I use it as a general purpose body with lenses up to the 100-500 and as part of my R5 kit. But, to the OP's question and to reiterate a bit, I too would go with an R10 + 10-18 + 18-150. The R50 is only two oz lighter and its controls look too simple for my needs. I think the R10 could ergonomically handle an RF 100-400. One could easily go with just the 18-150 (~1 2/3 lb total), since these bodies have a nice cellphone like panorama builder and focus stacking to go with the 18-150's close focus ability. If my G were to die I'd seriously consider this....Show more →
The R10 handles the RF 100-400 really well, they're both lightweight and pair well together. Only issue is it's very tight between the grip and the lens. I've even done extended shooting with the R10 on the back end of an EF 300L 2.8is with a 1.4x and been happy about it, though in that case you're just using it to steer the lens.
The RF16 on the R10 is a very small lightweight goof-around pair, and it's plenty of fun.
|
