I Regret Buying This $2,000 Lens

[@mikede2464]

The modern day obsession on technically perfect lens performance and sharpness overkill is a huge negative for photographers who take pictures of people in my experience. They also homogenize the look of photos across photographers which to me is also another negative. I've returned every RF lens I've ever purchased EXCEPT the 100-300 2.8 RF which is the best rendering lens I've ever used across any platform (previously on Sony and Nikon). My RF 35, 50 and 85 all returned for the EF version (the RF 85 1.2 was the worst rendering lens I've ever used to my eye). Yes the AF on RF lenses is excellent- but EF is 90% as fast and the rending is much, much more pleasing to my eye.

[@jordanmitchell1433]

Pretty ridiculous comparison, not gonna lie. I did the same upgrade from the EF 2.8II to the RF 15-35 and the RF is significantly better when it comes to image quality. You just took one photo presumably stopped down, did HDR processing that looks pretty terrible and decided they look comparable, so it must be the same. It’s not.

[@enristory]

I'll add more photos next time! The RF is better in every way... but the point is that the EF 16-35 is still a great lens in 2024/2025 and people shouldn't feel pressured by other reviews to upgrade if they don't have the budget.

[@doktorr23]

The biggest thing for me was, I hate using adapters and adding unnecessary size and weight. Native RF lens with IS is a win. 2nd thing was ef 16-35 is too loud and has a clicking AF sound when using a shotgun mic for video. Deal breaker for me. But again, every one has different needs and there are work arounds

[@enristory]

Thanks for your input! Good point. I think I could have probably put the money to better use but I’m definitely happy using the lens. The feel is great and I feel more confident using it.

[@TheMrKonov]

🤦🏻‍♂️