Full Frame To Canon , or not to Canon. That is the question.

[Dean Wilson]

For Macro would you choose:

A) RF100mm F2.8 L Macro IS USM @ &1,349.00

or

B) TTArtisan 100mm f/2.8 2X Macro @ $339.00

NOTE: I have no problem using a manual lens, however it would have been nice, if...

• Join to view EXIF data.

 

[THXGEEK]

Some time ago, I was solidly in the 'get native glass' camp.

Now, I'm not so sure. I've had the opportunity to work with the likes of Sigma, Zeiss, Tamron, Laowa, Voigtlander and Viltrox (to name a few) over the past several years. Many are manual focus and it's not been an issue. And I've been slowly relying less and less on all the automatic and 'priority' modes of my gear. My attitude has more often been 'Set it to full manual' and see what happens. I think doing so connects you a lot more closely to your photography and forces you to slow down, consider context, framing, light and so on.

And can any of us look at two pictures and honestly chose the one that was taken with the 'cheap' lens? I know I can't.

Finally, consider this before you buy your next lens.

Cheers!

 

[Dean Wilson]

And I've been slowly relying less and less on all the automatic and 'priority' modes of my gear. My attitude has more often been 'Set it to full manual' and see what happens. I think doing so connects you a lot more closely to your photography and forces you to slow down

Cheers!

Coming from the Film Days, I absolutely don't care how many frames per second I can shoot, because each shot cost money to develop.

Auto ISO in Fv mode is about as "Auto" as I get. I did try High Speed once for about 3 seconds. Nope, not for me. Albeit I do use features like Multiple Exposure, HDR Mode, Focus Bracketing and even IBIS High Resolution (once in a while).

 

[Photofarmer]

Not macro but was at a horse show recently and a photographic buddy was there. I was using my 70/200 2.8 go to equine lens.
Buddy said hey ya wanna try a sigma something zoom lens photos were to me me at least on a par no complaints but auto focus particularly eye focus was woeful.

Doesnt really help your macro question.
Edit so static images no issues in quality

 

[Only RF]

If you have the patience and you don’t need high fps then $1,000 is $1,000. I’ve read good things about that lens company.

While I don’t use high fps for my static shots I couldn’t do without it for the other parts of my hobby.

 

[JCBigler]

There are some really nice manual lenses out there. I've got the Laowa Argus 35mm full frame f/0.95 in RF mount which is killer for low light, as well as several of the Sirui anamorphic lenses which are always fun to shoot with.

You just have to change your operating method since they don't provide autofocus and you won't be able to shoot as fast as the native RF lenses with autofocus.

I just shot the St. Louis airshow this past weekend and I wouldn't have been able to do that with the manual lenses. There just would be time to get on focus before the plans moved put of the shot.

 

[Grumps]

Coming from the Film Days, I absolutely don't care how many frames per second I can shoot, because each shot cost money to develop.

A couple of weeks back in a fit of curiosity I went looking to see how much a roll of Fujichrome costs now.

 

[Dean Wilson]

A couple of weeks back in a fit of curiosity I went looking to see how much a roll of Fujichrome costs now.

The last Fuji I shot was Fujifilm Neopan Acros 100 II and I don't remember the price.