ilkka_nissila wrote: Zenon Char wrote:
As for the RF 100-500. I'm curios as to why 7.1 when Sigma can do 150-600 at 6.3 and Nikon can do 200-500 at 5.6?
Without doubt the f/7.1 allows Canon to make a smaller and lighter lens, which would feel more balanced when used with a smaller camera body. With mirrorless cameras, the autofocus is reported to be able to work with smaller apertures than in DSLRs, so there is less reason to aim for at least f/5.6 which was the smallest common aperture for a long time in DSLR autofocus lenses. Of course, more light is better than less light, and in many cases, one wants a larger aperture especially when photographing larger subjects at longer distances, to give clean subject - background separation, but then again, for close images of small subjects, f/7.1 may be OK if it is sharp wide open. Personally I think even f/5.6 is small for a lot of applications.
I think biggest contributing factors towards lenses with small apertures are due to the improvements in camera sensors with better ISO capabilities, combine that with IBIS, improved lens stabilization this makes for a nice light weight walk around package. Most people don't want to drag around a big old tripod these days.
Lets not forget software, there has been some major improvements in that area in dealing with noise reduction and minor correction to image stabilizing...
But then again you're not going to nail birds inflight with 7.1 in the rain forest of BC on a cloudy day.
Pius
Jun 02, 2020 at 06:46 AM
Previous versions of Pius Sullivan's message #15244101 « EOS-R5....will it live up to the hype? »
