Interesting rumor, but none of these offer any advantage over the two Sigma F2.8 RF-S zooms. Both of those are very sharp and light weight. The Sigma 10-18 is sharper at 12 mm than the Sigma 12 mm prime both at f2.8 according to the Digital Pictures's comparison tool. The new Sig 15 f1.4 looks better.
These patent designs are interesting, but APS-C prime lenses having f/2.8 maximum apertures will not provide the "prime-like" look that people might expect. This aperture only provides a background blur equivalent to about f/4.5 on full frame.
This is why the f/1.4 primes from Sigma and Yongnuo are appealing, at least to me.
I could work up some enthusiasm if Canon were at least considering f/2.0 designs, but f/2.8 seems too slow to make these worth carrying over the f/2.8 zooms available. (Sigma, of course, now also offers an f/1.8 zoom.)
Jeff Nolten wrote:
Interesting rumor, but none of these offer any advantage over the two Sigma F2.8 RF-S zooms. Both of those are very sharp and light weight. The Sigma 10-18 is sharper at 12 mm than the Sigma 12 mm prime both at f2.8 according to the Digital Pictures's comparison tool. The new Sig 15 f1.4 looks better.
I REALLY wish Sigma's RF-S 2.8 zooms had IS since all but one body lacks IBIS.
Mike_5D wrote:
REALLY wish Sigma's RF-S 2.8 zooms had IS since all but one body lacks IBIS.
I've thought about the R10 but its lack of IBIS keeps me with the R7. I regularly use four non-IS lenses with my R7 and the IBIS helps a lot. Also, I like that the R7 and R5 use the same batteries, but this is OT.
I think that IS would increase the size and cost of the Sigma lenses. That they were originally designed for other manufacturers' bodies many with IBIS is another factor. Sigma now has a pretty nice selection of f1.4 primes up to 56mm. Unfortunately, none focus very close. I liked the EF-m 28 and EF-S 35 and 60 macros on their native bodies and still use the EF-S versions on the R7. Be nice if Canon rereleased those.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
I've thought about the R10 but its lack of IBIS keeps me with the R7. I regularly use four non-IS lenses with my R7 and the IBIS helps a lot. Also, I like that the R7 and R5 use the same batteries, but this is OT.
For what it's worth, I had an R10 for a short time, but I found there were too many compromises (for me). The viewfinder was small and hard to use for me (as an eyeglasses wearer). The R7 is definitely preferable not only for IBIS, I think.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
I've thought about the R10 but its lack of IBIS keeps me with the R7. I regularly use four non-IS lenses with my R7 and the IBIS helps a lot. Also, I like that the R7 and R5 use the same batteries, but this is OT.
I think that IS would increase the size and cost of the Sigma lenses. That they were originally designed for other manufacturers' bodies many with IBIS is another factor. Sigma now has a pretty nice selection of f1.4 primes up to 56mm. Unfortunately, none focus very close. I liked the EF-m 28 and EF-S 35 and 60 macros on their native bodies and still use the EF-S versions on the R7. Be nice if Canon rereleased those....Show more →
Yeah for some of the photography I'd want to do with a smaller, more casual kit, IS of some kind is absolutely necessary.
Mike_5D wrote:
Yeah for some of the photography I'd want to do with a smaller, more casual kit...
As I get older I'm finding the R5 + 24-105 f4 is getting a bit heavy in the hand for general travel photography, even though it is over half a pound lighter than the 5D4 + original 24-105 I used to carry. The R7 + 18-50|150 is over a pound lighter still. I'm doing a multi day hike with my daughter through the Cotswolds in a month and the R7 kit (∑ 3 1/4 lb) will be much easier on my back. Actually don't think I'll be sacrificing much in IQ either. We'll see.
Back to the original topic, wouldn't mind seeing a reissue of the 15-85 as long as it wasn't as heavy as the original.
Jeff Nolten wrote:
As I get older I'm finding the R5 + 24-105 f4 is getting a bit heavy in the hand for general travel photography, even though it is over half a pound lighter than the 5D4 + original 24-105 I used to carry. The R7 + 18-50|150 is over a pound lighter still. I'm doing a multi day hike with my daughter through the Cotswolds in a month and the R7 kit (∑ 3 1/4 lb) will be much easier on my back. Actually don't think I'll be sacrificing much in IQ either. We'll see.
Back to the original topic, wouldn't mind seeing a reissue of the 15-85 as long as it wasn't as heavy as the original....Show more →
I’m similar
I used to carry the 5diii & 40stm , it got too heavy so switched to the 6D & 40stm… again became too heavy
Moved over to the M50 & 22mm…. Bliss
Added the R100 (&R50) but lens choice is poor. Don’t want to use 3rd party
My other system is Pentax
Have you chaps seen the Pentax 15mm & 70mm !!! They are smaller than the 50mm standard lens. Specifically built for aps-c
I have both lenses. I don’t get why canon doesn’t create a smaller camera system??
The RP and R8 are not much bigger than aps-c bodies… but add FF glass then both bulk and weight increase significantly…. Exactly the reason why I haven’t gone FF… I just no longer want to lug about heavy expensive conspicuous glass no more. I want lightweight nimble sharp optics.
