Full Frame Canon RF 20-50mm f/4 L IS USM PZ Lens.

[BasilFawlty]

Any thoughts? Anyone have it? Seems like a competent photo lens but more geared towards video.

 

[THXGEEK]

I don't have it (yet, heheheh) but it seems like a nice lens. As always, you are paying for that 'L' designation.

Have you considered the RF 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM? Its not quite as fast, and its not quite as wide, but its a third the price....

It's too bad Canon hasn't opened its lens specs to third parties... If it were Sony, you'd have the Sigma 20-60mm f/2.8-4 DG available. Faster, more reach, lighter, and half the price. That's what I'd go for...



(....oh hell. Did I just talk myself into a new Sigma lens for my A1II??!? )

 

[BasilFawlty]

Seems like a nice lens, but as always, you are paying for that 'L' designation.

Have you considered the RF 24-50mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM? Its not quite as fast, and its not quite as wide, but its a third the price....

It's too bad Canon hasn't opened its lens specs to third parties... If it were Sony, you'd have the Sigma 20-60mm f/2.8-4 DG available. That's what I'd go for...

Well, the truth is, I’m not really looking to buy either lens at this point. I was just curious what people thought of this new land since it is relatively new.

 

[THXGEEK]

Well, the truth is, I’m not really looking to buy either lens at this point. I was just curious what people thought of this new land since it is relatively new.

I used to be an absolute snob when it came to lenses for my cameras. All RF lenses had to be an 'L'... All Sony lenses had to be a 'GM'... All Nikon lenses had to be an 'S'... And so on....

And you know what? None of that really matters for most photographers. I could not tell the difference between the IQ of any of those 'premium' lenses and their lesser counterparts (including third-party) unless it was a technical evaluation in lab conditions. Guess what? I don't shoot in a lab and I don't give a rat's rump if any of my images is slightly fuzzy at the perimeter or has a touch of vignetting. If pressed, I'll bet you most pro's would typically call that 'character' or 'soul' or whatever excuse they can come up with.....

Buy what makes you happy.

 

[BasilFawlty]

I used to be an absolute snob when it came to lenses for my cameras. All RF lenses had to be an 'L'... All Sony lenses had to be a 'GM'... All Nikon lenses had to be an 'S'... And so on....

And you know what? None of that really matters for most photographers. I could not tell the difference between the IQ of any of those 'premium' lenses and their lesser counterparts (including third-party) unless it was a technical evaluation in lab conditions. Guess what? I don't shoot in a lab and I don't give a rat's rump if any of my images is slightly fuzzy at the perimeter or has a touch of vignetting. If pressed, I'll bet you most pro's would typically call that 'character' or 'soul' or whatever excuse they can come up with.....

Buy what makes you happy.

I have several non-L lenses that I’m quite happy with. I do have a few “L” lenses but I’m not a lens snob either.

 

[SwampGrizz]

I used to be an absolute snob when it came to lenses for my cameras. All RF lenses had to be an 'L'... All Sony lenses had to be a 'GM'... All Nikon lenses had to be an 'S'... And so on....

And you know what? None of that really matters for most photographers. I could not tell the difference between the IQ of any of those 'premium' lenses and their lesser counterparts (including third-party) unless it was a technical evaluation in lab conditions. Guess what? I don't shoot in a lab and I don't give a rat's rump if any of my images is slightly fuzzy at the perimeter or has a touch of vignetting. If pressed, I'll bet you most pro's would typically call that 'character' or 'soul' or whatever excuse they can come up with.....

Buy what makes you happy.

THXGEEK,
I’m really encouraged to read this. When I first got my camera, I was consumed by which premium lens I should get. I wanted to be one of the cool kids. As time went by, and I did my research, I came to the conclusion that the difference between a mid level lens that I could afford, and a top level lens that I couldn’t afford was not worth the difference to me, given my experience and skill level. At this point, my gear is not holding me back. This is not an argument against having a premium lens or top tier camera. There are photographers on this site that know what they are doing, and can use the really good gear to get phenomenal photos. I admire what they do. Where I really see the snob attitude come into play is on Reddit. I go there on occasion, and whenever some newbie comes on there to ask what lens or camera he should consider, the fan boys descend on him like piranhas. The guy barely knows how to turn his camera on, and they are telling him to get a $2000 lens because it has creamy bokeh. God help you if you have a kit lens. This kind of stuff is detrimental to people starting out in photography. That’s why I am so thankful that you and so many others on this forum are willing to share your experience and knowledge without any condescension. Buy what makes you happy indeed.

Ok, I have the camera turned on. Somebody was saying something about a “shutter button”. Any clues?