p.2 #2 · Outstanding or unique RF-mount lenses (affordable primes or zooms): What are your favorites?
Canon also has a 'variable character' lens in the form of the RF 100/2.8 macro lens. It has a spherical aberration control ring that allows you to under and overcorrect SA, which affects bokeh quality. This lens also has a focus shift issue in the macro range and the SA adjustment helps neutralize it with a bit of trial and error based on a discussion here a few years ago.
TDP has an image sequence showing how the bokeh character changes through the SA adjustment range. Other than this though, it's a sharp, clinical, modern, high performance lens and not a 'character' lens in the sense of old school/vintage lenses.
p.2 #3 · Outstanding or unique RF-mount lenses (affordable primes or zooms): What are your favorites?
These days:
- 28mm f2.8 (the best auto-focusing pancake lens on any system)
- 35mm f1.8 (really good optically for the price and size, but it is its combination of ILIS and the 0.5x macro capability that makes it such a great all-rounder. I wish there was something similar on E mount).
- 45mm f1.2 (nothing like it on any other mount for the money)
- 100-400mm (same thing here, for $600 there is nothing like it on either Nikon Z or Sony E)
- 600mm f11 (nothing like it on E/Z)
- 800mm f11 (nothing like it on E/Z)
In the past:
- 16mm f2.8 (Nowadays Viltrox, Sigma and Samyang all have small and lightweight options for the E mount too. But I know at least one person who switched to Canon for this lens a couple of years back).
- 28-70mm f2 (Sony now has their own version, but before that, it was a totally unique offering).
p.2 #4 · Outstanding or unique RF-mount lenses (affordable primes or zooms): What are your favorites?
The VCM primes took a ton of flak on launch for their use of digital distortion correction, but I think they're maybe the finest lenses I've ever used, especially the 35. Sentiment seems to be changing (I think people are realizing how silly those early critiques were), but for a time you could get them *way* below MSRP on various BST forums. I got a brand new in box 35 1.4 VCM from a user here for $1,000 shipped, and it's become my favorite lens of all time.
I'll also throw in a good word for the 70-200 f/4 RF. These pop up on BST here from time to time for between $950 and $1100, and they are an insanely good value at that price. Light, sharp, contrasty, and ultra fast focusing; I would highly recommend it to anyone who does anything even vaguely related to events/photojournalism. The only "concession" is the maximum aperture, but for roughly $1,000, I'll trade one stop of light for the cost & size savings any day.
Dec 12, 2025 at 07:08 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #5 · Outstanding or unique RF-mount lenses (affordable primes or zooms): What are your favorites?
100-400 looks interesting, only 1.5 lbs, really close macro. F/8 @ 400mm but probably good/great stabilization
Dec 12, 2025 at 10:33 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.2 #6 · Outstanding or unique RF-mount lenses (affordable primes or zooms): What are your favorites?
nightnight wrote:
The VCM primes took a ton of flak on launch for their use of digital distortion correction, but I think they're maybe the finest lenses I've ever used, especially the 35. Sentiment seems to be changing (I think people are realizing how silly those early critiques were), but for a time you could get them *way* below MSRP on various BST forums. I got a brand new in box 35 1.4 VCM from a user here for $1,000 shipped, and it's become my favorite lens of all time.
I'll also throw in a good word for the 70-200 f/4 RF. These pop up on BST here from time to time for between $950 and $1100, and they are an insanely good value at that price. Light, sharp, contrasty, and ultra fast focusing; I would highly recommend it to anyone who does anything even vaguely related to events/photojournalism. The only "concession" is the maximum aperture, but for roughly $1,000, I'll trade one stop of light for the cost & size savings any day....Show more →
PPeople got so concerned about the 35/1.4 distortion, but it's 3-4% like 16-35's have been for years. Sony 16-35/4 & 20-70/4 are closer to 9% at some settings and don't get near the attention for it. So it doesn’t really make a lot of sense
p.2 #7 · Outstanding or unique RF-mount lenses (affordable primes or zooms): What are your favorites?
AmbientMike wrote:
100-400 looks interesting, only 1.5 lbs, really close macro. F/8 @ 400mm but probably good/great stabilization
I have the lens. It's probably the one that gets the least use, not counting my 65 MPE. This is because in practice, it doesn't feel any smaller or lighter than the 100-500, which is oodles better. I know that objectively it is smaller and lighter, but my perspective is "what fits in my bag" and the (consumer, RF) 100-400 takes up the exact same slot in my bag as the 100-500 would, so why not? Subjectively, I don't save anything by taking the 100-500, because my bag is 10kg regardless and the same slot is filled.
p.2 #8 · Outstanding or unique RF-mount lenses (affordable primes or zooms): What are your favorites?
stanj wrote:
I have the lens. It's probably the one that gets the least use, not counting my 65 MPE. This is because in practice, it doesn't feel any smaller or lighter than the 100-500, which is oodles better. I know that objectively it is smaller and lighter, but my perspective is "what fits in my bag" and the (consumer, RF) 100-400 takes up the exact same slot in my bag as the 100-500 would, so why not? Subjectively, I don't save anything by taking the 100-500, because my bag is 10kg regardless and the same slot is filled.
Makes sense if you already have the 100-500 or use that range enough to justify the price point but I paid something like $400 used (granted a great deal from a lens rental place) for that 100-400 and I could not justify the extra 2K-ish for something that is not part of my core shooting. Similar to the new 45 where most reviews contain the words "for the price" at some point - The 100-400 is an interesting lens for the price.
