# RF Wide Options...........



## JPAZ (Jan 17, 2021)

I have an EF 14 f/2.8 mii and an EF 16-35 f/4. I use the 14 for rare astro stuff (Milky Way, Star Trails) and some landscapes and the 16-35 as part of a triad for travel (travel? Well, up until about 9 months ago, I used to travel. But these days, don't get out so much ). They work well with EF-RF adapters. But, I am thinking about my future in RF land and am trying to trim down my stable of lenses.

Were I to sell the 14 and 16-35 and then get an RF 15-35 f/2.8, I'd think this one zoom could take the place of the two EF lenses I have now. I know the lens is a bit bigger than the 16-35, but it won't need an adapter and is faster. Anyone try the RF for astro? Reviewers suggest the RF is same or maybe even corner sharper than the EF. Anyone else make this kind of change?

I know these are decisions for which there is no right answer and would depend on one's style and usage but I value any thoughts. Thanks.


----------



## jeanluc (Jan 21, 2021)

I have had the EF 16-35 F2.8L III, the F4 16-35 you have and the 15-35 RF. I like all three. The performance of the 15-35 is almost exactly the same as the F2.8 16-35 LIII, including for night shots. The EF lenses work perfectly on my R and R5. I got the 15-35 mainly for the extra 1mm, since I mainly shoot landscapes, but also to ditch the adapters. That is also why I sold the EF 24-70L II and got the RF version. They also have IS, unlike the EF versions (although your F4 does).


----------



## NJFanta (Jan 23, 2021)

In a regular dslr I was shooting with a 15mm fisheye and the 17-40 and I used both up until a month ago, when I finally purchased the RF 15-35 and I quickly sold the fisheye and 17-40. Not having to use the adapters just makes my life so much easier! Also, I felt as though the 15-35 replaced both lenses. I now use it for weddings, real estate and landscapes/night stuff. It's extremely sharp, no adapter, less in my bag, and it's a killer lens. The night photos are crisp and sharp, 15% better than what I was using. I have also owned the 16-35 f4 and really did not care for how slow it was and for the $$ the 17-40 was almost, just as good. 

If you can afford the RF 15-35, it's well worth it!


----------



## JPAZ (Jan 24, 2021)

Just put my EF 14 f/2.8 ii and EF 16-35 f/4 up for sale. Depending on the price I can get, I might just go ahead with the RF 15-35 f/2.8 to replace them. Depends on the $.


----------



## SteveC (Jan 25, 2021)

JPAZ said:


> Just put my EF 14 f/2.8 ii and EF 16-35 f/4 up for sale. Depending on the price I can get, I might just go ahead with the RF 15-35 f/2.8 to replace them. Depends on the $.



I had no full frame wideangle, and was in a brick and mortar the day after I got my R5, looking to get either the 16-35 f/4 or f/2.8...I ended up walking out with an RF 15-35 f/2.8, a financial sucking chest wound...and no regrets.

Those two days were _expensive_.


----------



## JPAZ (Jan 26, 2021)

All,

Sold the two lenses. While I wish I had gotten more (sadly saw the original new price paid when I was boxing them up  ), I still think it is the right move for me and 6 months "same as cash" makes the additional outlay less painful. Good news, bad news is that I think I am done for a while in terms of photography purchases.


----------



## JPAZ (Jan 30, 2021)

RF 15-25 f/2.8 just arrived. First impressions after some indoor and outdoor snaps (although well documented by others):


Just slightly heavier and longer than RF 24-105 f/4 but not by much and it "feels" OK on the camera
New uses for the 82mm filters I already have from the EF 24-70
Seems the 15mm now vs 14mm option I had will not be a big issue.
The 15mm, however, does seem more useful than the 16mm wide end of zoom I had
The f/2.8 vs the old f/4.0 on the zoom will be useful
The IS works well
Focus seems immediate and accurate on the R5
The very corners at 15mm are a bit distorted but I expected than and it won't be an issue

I think I made the right choice. Farewell 14 f/2.8 and 16-35 f/4. 

Now, I am going to calm down and don't anticipate any new lenses for a while  

JPAZ


----------



## JPAZ (Nov 28, 2021)

I don't do much astro but when I do, the RF 15-35 is wide enough for me. The only drawback is when the camera powers down between shots, the focus "resets" and then I need to refocus (not always easy in the dark) due, I think, to focus by wire even in manual mode. Sometimes makes me wish I'd kept the EF 14mm/2.8 because I could gaffer the the focus ring once I had the composition set up before dark.


----------

