I preordered the R5 4 years ago after selling my 5Div and have no regrets and no plans to upgrade. I started with one RF lens and adapted the rest until it was worthwhile for me to migrate.
I shoot astro with a Samyang 14mm 2.4, Sigma EF 20mm 1.4 and Sigma 28mm EF 1.4. Wider and narrower do not interest me, but thanks for mentioning! Of those which fall in my preferred range, they have mediocre resolution wide open and/or distinct coma. Again, thank you for your research!
The Canon EF 70-300 II with the RF adapter is about the same size, 1/3-stop faster through the range (granted, not significant), and $70 cheaper including the cost of the adapter (or $200 cheaper if you already have the adapter).
And this lens is optically acceptable, nothing more. Why should I buy an R5 II and, just to save a few bucks, buy a lens which would not even put a 12MP sensor to shame? Just like mounting cheap Nankyang tires on a corvette...
I can imagine that the big gaps in Canon's APS-C RF line-up give Sigma the opportunity to make a first move and come later with FF lenses.
No idea. I was never interested in Tamrons. In my Nikon times, I found it quite disturbing, after 6 Minolta years. I could never use Nikons and Canons at the same time. It would make me mad.
Unless you have to slam the brakes on in city trafic, in order not to kill a child...
If you don’t see the sarcasm of my rhetorical question then it isn't worth my time trying to explain it to you.
I've been too long in car R&D to accept such arguments. It is simply silly to save money on tires, since better tires DO reduce braking distances.
I sometimes use a Nikon body, since my wife has a big Nikon gear, but that causes indeed trouble in my motor memory. One example is that Nikon has located the two main control wheels at the front top and backside top positions of the grip side. If you are used to that, it is quite smart, but if you are used to Canon, your thumb is always seeking a wheel at the wrong position. With the menus it is easier, since Nikon rotated their menu system basically by 90 degrees compared with Canon.No idea. I was never interested in Tamrons. In my Nikon times, I found it quite disturbing, after 6 Minolta years. I could never use Nikons and Canons at the same time. It would make me mad.
But we shouldn't forget that in the seventies and eighties, Nikon was THE professional camera. Nikon F2 :
I agree, spending most money for good lenses over camera bodies is the smarter approach today. Times in which you bought an expensive camera once for your whole life, be it a Leica ore Nikon, are over since decades.
