What's your favorite lens??

@lewcehjitl3282

2 ай бұрын

Sony 200-600mm 😊

@DelaneyMedia

2 ай бұрын

Niiice what do you shoot on that?

Thanks for the video. I own the EF version of 70-200mm f/4L IS. I’m a hobbyist outdoor photographer. F4 is good enough for me for not only being cheaper but also lighter. The EF versions do not extend while zooming as it does so internally. I use it for street, wildlife and landscape photography purposes with both FF and APS-C DSLR bodies. It's also compatible with converters. A gem of a lens.

Definitely agree with most of your points! One of my favourite lenses for photography. Haven't really used it much for video - maybe something to try out. I love shooting landscapes with it, as you said, you can get some really interesting perspectives. It's awesome for pets too btw 🐶

What’s your trick to balancing this in the rs3 I can’t get enough of back balance on the gimbal to make it work.

What's the tripod and fluid head at 10:40?

Love my dude.

Really love this lens a lot, personally my main lens until I get an 85 1.2

@sjcproductionsandmedia

Ай бұрын

Yes! I own the Canon 85mm EF f/1.2 L lens & the quality is superb. I imagine the 85mm RF is even better...if that is possible!

I am still confused about the full/2.5 to infinity setting. So ...is FULL for close up’s & the latter for anything further than 2.5m’s away?

@GiacomoZonco

4 күн бұрын

Yes it’s made to avoid for example to focus on fences or fence obstacles during Sports where you might be behind something

I think my tamron ef lens is a better lens than the rf do to the internal focusing of the tamron

probably the best lens

I have the f/4. To me, I thought similar things to what you laid out... but it resulted in me going for the f/4 instead. I'm just not in love with f/2.8 zooms. For the times when I need the versatility of a zoom (I do event photo/video in pretty fast paced dynamic environments) the size/weight of the f/4s is just way more valuable than the increased stop of light on the 2.8 (and in the case of the 24-105, the increased range over the 24-70 2.8.. although now there's the 24-105 2.8, which I shot with and solves the range problem.. but increases the size/weight/cost gap to a ridiculous degree). Add in the fact that, at least on the RF zooms, there isn't a huge jump in image quality from the f/4 to the 2.8.. it just not worth it to me. When I *do* want to prioritize image quality, that's when I go for a prime. If you only ever plan on shooting zooms, then the 2.8 kit makes sense.. but if you're like me and use zooms/primes situationally, then the 2.8 zooms are really the worst of both worlds.

I understand that some people think the lens is heavy. If you’re used to shooting with an EF 70-200 with the adapter, the RF will be nothing compared to that

It’s very slow to change zoom compared to an internal zoom lens. But it’s still a superb lens. I have the 100-300 2.8 and it’s significantly better. But it’s a beast.

I heard that the next 70-200 will be F2

@DelaneyMedia

2 ай бұрын

That would be crazy

@gourami7

2 ай бұрын

​@@DelaneyMediaand crazy expensive !

@nurabdul1436

2 ай бұрын

If that's true, I wonder how big/ heavy it will be...

huge 、 heavy、expensive ，OK THATS MY PROBLEM

@AlbertKel

Ай бұрын

What are you talking about. It’s the most compact and the lightest 70-200 lens. But it is expensive

Or try the MFT equivalent. Olympus F2.8 40-150 F2.8. Canon wins by weight 3.2lbs verus 2.0 lbs. It has a DOF advantage perhaps. Olympus wins every other category speed, sharpness range.

Way too big and $$. The EF versions do almost as good for way less. I swear to god Canon and their RF mount is alienating their user base. My favourite lens is my EF 70-200 f4 and the nifty fifty.