Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: bobbydvideo
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
Dec 15, 2021 09:42:02   #
amfoto1 wrote:
The R6 is a full frame camera.

The EF-S 18-135mm lens is designed for crop sensor cameras. While it can be adapted onto the R-series cameras, it really doesn't make much sense to do so. Your images are probably being cropped a bit, to conform to the lens.

The EF-S 18-135mm USM is a good lens that you should sell on to someone who has an APS-C Canon DSLR they can use it upon.

There are a lot of great "RF" lenses available for your R6... You also can adapt any of the "EF" lenses for use on the camera with little to no loss of performance. EF lenses are made for full frame DSLRs, so will not cause cropping on your R6.

Without knowing what you like to shoot, it's hard to recommend any of the RF or EF lenses. But between the two lens series, there is just about anything you might want.

EDIT:

First, I forgot to mention above: Keep that EF to RF adapter in case you want to use some other EF lenses on your R6.

And, I looked at your previous posts. I see you have asked about the RF 14-35mm, RF 35mm and RF 50mm lenses.

The 35mm and 50mm duplicate focal lengths you've already got in your 24-105mm. While they might be smaller, lighter lenses with larger apertures, there since you only have a single lens for use on the R6 I think it would be better to try to avoid duplication for the time being. Later you might have some specialized needs that call for one of those lenses, but for now I would not recommend the 35mm or 50mm.

The RF 14-35mm would better complement the RF 24-105mm lens you already have. But that's an ultrawide zoom, if very nice but rather pricey, and may or may not be an ideal lens for your purposes.

In the previous post where you asked about the RF 14-35mm you first wondered if it was "a good all around lens", which it's not. The 24-105mm you already have is much more of an "all arounder". Later in that previous post you asked a bit more specifically about shooting wide and close. The RF 14-35mm certainly can handle "wide", but isn't really a close up lens.

While the RF 14-35mm looks to be quite a nice lens, there are some alternatives:

RF 16mm f/2.8 STM is small, light and inexpensive at $300. And it's very wide (though not quite as wide as 14mm).

There also are excellent EF 16-35mm f/4L IS USM an EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM III ultra wide zooms that can be adapted for use on your camera. The EF 16-35mm f/4, in particular, would be lower cost than the RF 14-35mm and is it's equal in most respects. Plus there are even wider EF 14mm f/2.8L and, in RF mount (no adapter needed) Rokinon/Samyang 14mm f/2.8 lenses available.

So there are a lot of ways you can "get wider"... but the RF 16mm f/2.8 appears pretty hard to beat! (Note: Like other Canon non-L series lenses, it doesn't include the matched lens hood. I highly recommend budgeting another $30 or $40 for that.)

Instead of a specialized close-up lens, for now you might want to consider getting macro extension tubes that can be used with your 24-105mm to make it closer focusing. Canon is not yet making macro extension tubes themselves, but some third party manufacturers are. Of those, the Viltrox brand appears the best and I've found other products of theirs to be quite good. It is a set of two tubes (12mm and 24mm) that can be used singly or combined. This gives you three different possible amounts of extension to fit in between the 24-105mm and your camera, which causes the lens to be able to focus a lot closer. On it's own the 24-105mm can do approx. 1/4 life size magnification. Once the 12mm tube is added you will probably get around 1/2 life size, around 3/4 life size with the 24mm and about full life size with both tubes. Macro extension tubes have no optics themselves, so do not degrade image quality. There's a little loss "forcing" a lens to focus closer than it's designed, but it is usually only minor softening in the corners and perhaps some vignetting. Often both can be reduced by stopping the lens (which you will probably be doing anyway, to increase depth of field which gets very shallow at higher magnifications).

Later you might consider a "true" macro lens just for the convenience and if you find yourself doing a lot of close up and macro work. The Canon RF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM Macro lens is excellent, but it ain't cheap! I also don't think the RF 100mm lens can be fitted with a tripod mounting ring, while the EF 100mm f/2.8L IS USM and EF 100mm f/2.8 USM both can, plus can be found for considerably less money and used with the adapter you already have.
The R6 is a full frame camera. br br The EF-S 18... (show quote)


Thank you for taking the time.
Go to
Dec 14, 2021 17:48:37   #
General photography, portrait, landscape and video.
Go to
Dec 14, 2021 17:47:41   #
Hip Coyote wrote:
What are you intending to photograph? Bugs / flowers, animals, birds in flight, vacation travels, sports in action? A little bit of info might help the crew here help you better.


General Photography. Portrait, Landscape and video.
Go to
Dec 14, 2021 11:15:42   #
I am not that educated when it comes to camera lens. I have a Canon EOS R6 with a 24-105 lens. Thinking about buying more. What do you think of these two?

Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro STM Lens
Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM Lens

Thank You
Go to
Dec 13, 2021 09:55:24   #
I have an Canon EOS R6 mirrorless with a 24-105 f/4L USM lens.
I also have a Canon 18-135mmf/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens that I used on my T7i which I no longer have. So I use and adapter which I don't like. Should I sell the lens and get something that works with my new camera without the use of an adapter or keep it?
Go to
Dec 8, 2021 19:10:40   #
Photolady2014 wrote:
I will be in Sedona the first two weeks of January. I know several of the main photo spots, but I’m looking for some off the beaten path spots to photograph. I can hike all day, but my husband has sciatica and can’t go far, so both hiking and driving spots would be great. The surrounding areas would be good too! We have a keep so 4 wheel drive roads are fine.
Thanks Beth


Go up to Jerome while you are there.
Go to
Dec 6, 2021 14:35:30   #
PHRubin wrote:
It depends on your needs. I would find it a little wide for general use.


Thank you.
What lens would be good for both wide and close up?
Go to
Dec 6, 2021 09:47:53   #
CHG_CANON wrote:
If I had an EOS R body with an RF mount, this is the lens I'd own. You might want to double-check your current equipment and make sure this lens is applicable to your camera(s).


I have the EOS R6 mirrorless.
Go to
Dec 6, 2021 09:47:04   #
I have the EOS R6 mirrorless.
Go to
Dec 6, 2021 09:18:58   #
What do you think about this lens as an all around lens?


(Download)
Go to
Nov 22, 2021 09:53:35   #
Start reading all of the fine print that you agree to without reading!
Go to
Nov 15, 2021 10:11:00   #
Nasty response! The only thing useless is your sorry remark!
Go to
Nov 15, 2021 09:25:05   #
I use both. I never have flare and the filter protects my expensive glass.


(Download)
Go to
Oct 18, 2021 09:27:06   #
I still use ProShow Producer and Movavi Slideshow Maker 7
Go to
Sep 9, 2021 17:54:36   #
The original. The replacement sky is to bright for the dark water.
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 next>>
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.