Investing in camera lenses can be a tough decision, especially when balancing quality and cost. If you're considering Canon RF lenses, you might wonder if they're worth their high price of entry.
Coming to you from Prince Meyson, this insightful video breaks down the experience of owning and not owning RF lenses. Meyson sold his RF lenses due to financial constraints while in school. Despite the exceptional quality of these lenses, he needed to prioritize getting a car over keeping high-end equipment. This personal narrative sets the stage for understanding the practical considerations behind such investments.
Meyson discusses the high quality of RF lenses, emphasizing their superb image quality and autofocus performance. RF lenses offer sharpness, color accuracy, and reliability that can be hard to match with third-party or older EF lenses. This distinction is particularly important if you’re seeking that extra 1% in image quality that can make a difference in professional work. However, the cost is a significant factor. With prices often exceeding $2,000, these lenses represent a substantial investment.
For those earning a good income from photography, Meyson believes RF lenses are worth the investment. The superior quality and performance can enhance your confidence and excitement during shoots, potentially improving your work. However, if you’re not making enough money to justify the expense, it may not make sense to stretch your budget for these lenses. While clients may not notice the difference, you might feel it in your work’s quality.
Meyson shares his preference for certain focal lengths, highlighting his use of the 50mm and 85mm lenses over the 70-200mm. He finds the longer focal length less useful for his style, preferring to be closer to his subjects. Understanding your needs can help you make more informed decisions about which lenses will provide the most value.
In his experience, third-party lenses, while good, don’t quite match the quality of Canon’s RF lenses. The Tamron 85mm lens he currently uses is a solid performer, but he misses the exceptional quality and autofocus of his previous RF lenses. Considering the potential investment, Meyson advises prioritizing lenses over upgrading your camera body, as high-quality lenses can have a more significant impact on your photography than the latest camera model. Check out the video above for the full rundown from Meyson.
Not a Canon shooter, but if you're a professional getting the best glass you can is never a bad investment. Are there more cost effective options? Probably. Does cost outweigh a plethora of other subjective deciding factors? No.
RF is just fine. But if you like supporting the photo industry .. buy Leica or Hasselblad ..
I bought a brand new Canon 24-70 RF F2.8. It has focusing problems, which I had to prove with a focus test. It's been over a month and it's still in technical service. It's sad, but I recommend that when you buy something, whatever the brand, you check that it works well.
Canon RF lenses ... no. I have no doubt they are good lenses, BUT, for the price they are just not worth it. Competition has lenses that are less constricting and offer more options while on or around same level of quality for lower price. At the moment i would not invest any money in RF mount for that reason alone, and i have several more.
The RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1 L IS USM Lens is unbeatable for sharpness and close-focusing. Close enough that for larger subjects like this dragonfly it can serve as a macro lens. It's one of the very best lenses that I have ever owned. Worth every penny.
That is such a cool photo. But does not justify cost and lens itself.
Let me explain why.
My photo was taken with Canon 400D (aka Rebel XTi) and Sigma 70-300 DG Macro APO, which i think was like 110$. Same as yours, a Dragon Fly, but handheld on camera that was back in 2008 paid 300$ second hand. We are talking bottom of the line camera with bottom of the line lens and yet it looks just as impressive as yours some 15 years later (well to me at least, and the fact setup was so cheap).
Price difference is so big that it does not justify the difference in cost if you can create same quality photo on both. Also i still would prefer to use something other then what Canon overlords serve me. This Sigma lens is such a gem i to this day love it to bits.