takowasa
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 Re: The R6M3 and RF 45 1.2 lens. | |
bemei wrote:
Back in the day I tested my copy of the EF 50L against a 1960's Pentax Super Tak 50mm 1.4, at f8, the Tak was considerably sharper in the corners. My 50mm 1.4 workhorse was also. But then I bought the 50L for shooting wide open, heck I couldn't get accurate focus at other apertures due to the focus shift, my 5D3 would only micro adjust for wide open.  I used the Sigma 50mm 1.4 Art on a D810 in the studio for product work, spectacular sharp lens but as you mention, a big boy. Oh and the the rendition was strictly 'modern'.
The EF 50 / 1.2L did not do as well as the slower primes well stopped down. For example, the EF 50 / 1.4 was better (resolution-wise) at f/5.6 than than the EF 50 / 1.2L. In other words, it was never a landscape lens.
RustyRus wrote:
We need Canon to be profitable as people “invested” into the system. As long as Canon is making a substantial lineup, I don’t need Sigma or any other brand to enter -
Let's be honest, few, if any of "us", *need* a camera at all. However, there are quite a few non-trivial lenses made by third party that I, and many others, certainly want. In my case, the 35 / 1.2 and 35-150 / 2-2.8 are two lenses that, eventually, I'll have to buy a Nikon or Sony to get. For others, there's the 28-45 / 1.8, 135 / 1.4, and 200 / 2, not to mention *significantly* less expensive and/or smaller options for a 50 / 1.2, 70-200 / 2.8 (in the form of a 70-180 / 2.8), etc., etc., etc..
So, while you, and others, may be well-served by Canon, many are not. And the attitude of "If you don't like it, then go buy the brand that has it" is more than a little off-putting when the reason "we" have to do so is because Canon *actively* blocks "us" from using those Canons on our Canon cameras that we do like. And the reason they do that is that they feel it increases their profits by "forcing" us to buy their lenses (although I wonder if that's really true -- do they really make more money with this strategy, or would they have made as much, or even more, by not "forcing" their customers to go look elsewhere and slam the door in the face of newcomers and/or people using other brands that otherwise might have chosen Canon?).
In other words, you feel you are best served by Canon, and Canon alone. Can you really not allow that others are not, and that they would prefer not to go dual system or switch?
jgoetz4 wrote:
There are 4 EF 50 1.2's for sale on the B/S Forum. I guess the sellers are thinning their herd for the 45 1.2.
Makes sense -- basically looking to swap for an RF version of what they see as being essentially the same lens for zero net cost. That said, I can't help but wonder if an RF 50 / 2 IS macro that cost the same as the 85 / 2 IS macro in a slightly smaller package would not have been a more popular choice.
|
