I just sold off all my Canon gear. Maybe I shouldn't have. Either way they need to come out with a small full frame camera body (like the Sony A7C) to pair with this lens and the 28mm pancake.
jaygould wrote:
I just sold off all my Canon gear. Maybe I shouldn't have. Either way they need to come out with a small full frame camera body (like the Sony A7C) to pair with this lens and the 28mm pancake.
The R8 at the low end and C50 at the high end are really petite FF EOS cameras. The R8 is a little small and I find the larger R6 and R6 MK II easier to hold, especially with larger optics.
Gochugogi wrote:
The R8 at the low end and C50 at the high end are really petite FF EOS cameras. The R8 is a little small and I find the larger R6 and R6 MK II easier to hold, especially with larger optics.
I still find the R8 too big. It's much bigger than the Sony A7C (which with the 28mm Viltrox fits in a front pocket). Also it doesn't have IBIS, which is a requirement for the 28mm and this 45, since none of them have ILIS. Just my opinion and my own requirements.
PinholeR5 wrote:
So I decided to do a bit of comparing the two. I used my R5 II (all in electronic shutter) fo comparing. Every time I try to do this, I gain renewed respect for folks who do reviews online. Doing these comparisons is hard and labor intensive!!
I'm coming late to this but I just want to say well done on a really excellent comparison series!
I enjoyed the 45mm FL when I had it (Tamron SP 45) and I've always been intrigued by the EF 50L, so I was quite interested to see how this new lens squares up. It really looks like it's great value for money, but it's not going to dislodge my Sigma 50 Art.
That said.. if you ever feel like getting the RF 50 1.4 VCM and doing a comparison test with that...
I used to be deep into the EF system but never justified paying for the 1.2L. I still keep an old 5D and still love the plastic EF 50/1.4 for its sufficient performance and vintage characters. I am currently using the Nikon Z as my main mirrorless system and love the Z50/1.4 for the same reason. Many people online say bad things about the Z1.4 but I think most of them don't actually take good pictures. I use the lens for professional work without an issue. For example: Bliss by Sander Li, on Flickr
When I saw the announcement of the RF45, I got to admit that I was jealous as a Z shooter because the RF45/1.2 is faster and yet lighter than Z50/1.4. Both are far from being optically perfect but offer sufficient performance for professional work. The RF offers even more vintage characters which I actually like. It is a winner for RF shooters.
