+- Opticallimits (https://forum.opticallimits.com)
+-- Forum: Forums (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Canon EOS (https://forum.opticallimits.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=11)
+--- Thread: Canon RF 16mm ... (/showthread.php?tid=5164)
Canon RF 16mm ... - Klaus - 10-21-2021
FWIW, I've seen some RAW images taken with an EOS R. Not too shabby actually. Some corner softness at f/2.8 but Ok at f/8.
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - Rover - 10-21-2021
So I wonder what the catch is. Field curvature?
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - Brightcolours - 10-21-2021
(10-21-2021, 04:17 PM)Rover Wrote: So I wonder what the catch is. Field curvature?
That it does not fit on your camera :O
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - Rover - 10-21-2021
(10-21-2021, 07:24 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:(10-21-2021, 04:17 PM)Rover Wrote: So I wonder what the catch is. Field curvature?
That it does not fit on your camera :O
I don't think it would have been on my radar even if it had fit. I don't need just every lens on the planet, you know, even though at 8 lenses in stock, I might look like a hoarder.
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - MatjazO - 10-22-2021
Good to see that a small super WA like this one can be pretty good. Not my cup of tea as it is way too wide for casual walk around. I would take zoom over it as being so wide it is difficult to sort out the framimg just by making a step froward or backward.
Yet, always nice to have an option.
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - wim - 10-24-2021
(10-21-2021, 09:03 PM)Rover Wrote:(10-21-2021, 07:24 PM)Brightcolours Wrote:(10-21-2021, 04:17 PM)Rover Wrote: So I wonder what the catch is. Field curvature?
That it does not fit on your camera :O
I don't think it would have been on my radar even if it had fit. I don't need just every lens on the planet, you know, even though at 8 lenses in stock, I might look like a hoarder.
8 lenses? OI would not call you a hoarder at all. IMO, you are only a hoarder if you keep lenses you do not and/or cannot use any longer.
Of course with that definition I am not a hoarder either, with a total of 39 lenses including converters, extenders and speed boosters ...
(10-22-2021, 11:53 AM)MatjazO Wrote: Good to see that a small super WA like this one can be pretty good. Not my cup of tea as it is way too wide for casual walk around. I would take zoom over it as being so wide it is difficult to sort out the framimg just by making a step froward or backward.I wish a lens like this would have been available 40 years ago. I got a 20 mm lens back then, and a 15 mm was possible too, but the latter was 3x the price. and very big and heavy. The 20 mm was a month salary back then ....
Yet, always nice to have an option.
It was a great lens at a time, but a wider lens would have been extemely useful to me for my purposes at the time. Of course now I own a 10 mm rectilinear lens, and a 17 mm TS lens, so I am not really complaining.
However, I may get one. Size and price seem rather convenient, and the sample photographs I have seen really look good ....
Kind regards, Wim
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - Rover - 10-25-2021
Well, I'm mollified then.
And yes, I'm using all of my lenses from tine to time, although the primes inevitably get a lot less workout, and the two intermediate zooms are also used more rarely than the two go-to units, 16-35 and 100-400. In a pinch, I could keep only these two. However, I try to give the others something to do as well. https://www.instagram.com/p/CVYlhiiMShe/?utm_medium=copy_link
Out shooting village sports.
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - MatjazO - 10-25-2021
Glad to see it would work for you, Wim. Different strokes for different folks. Just shows that variety is preffered than one size fits all approach.
RE: Canon RF 16mm ... - wim - 10-25-2021
(10-25-2021, 07:46 AM)Rover Wrote: Well, I'm mollified then.Nice, nice place you are in too.
https://www.instagram.com/p/CVYlhiiMShe/?utm_medium=copy_link
Out shooting village sports.
In a pinch I could probably go with 4 or 5 FF lenses, but then, I prefer to shoot primes.
With M4/3 6 probably, 2 sets of 3.
(10-25-2021, 09:06 AM)MatjazO Wrote: Glad to see it would work for you, Wim. Different strokes for different folks. Just shows that variety is preffered than one size fits all approach.Thank you! And yes, I agree.
Of course, I happen to have two systems, FF, Canon, and M4/3, Olympus, and with the latter I have kind of a double set of lenses, the pro stuff and a bunch of small,(er) compact lenses. It allows me to vary between systems based on travel requirements, which works well for me.
Kind regards, Wim