So I finally pulled the trigger on the R5 a few months ago and I am loving the resolution but my old EF 17-40 with the adapter is just not cutting it anymore... it feels a bit soft on this high megapixel sensor. I have been looking at the RF 15-35mm f2.8 and the RF 14-35mm f4 and I am honestly so torn. I mostly shoot landscapes here in the PNW (lots of hiking in the rain so weather sealing is a must) and I do some side gigs for real estate. Most reviews say the 15-35 is the gold standard but it is such a brick to carry around all day. Then I saw some people saying the 14-35 is actually sharper in the corners despite being cheaper? But then I read about this massive vignetting and distortion that the camera has to fix with software because the lens doesnt actually cover the whole sensor at 14mm... that sounds kinda sketchy for a $1500 lens. I have about $2100 saved up and I need to get this sorted before my trip to the coast next month. Is the f2.8 worth the extra weight and cash for the R5 or is the 14mm really the way to go for architecture? Im just worried the software crop on the 14-35 is gonna ruin the image quality.
I had issues with the Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM corners being a total mess before software kicks in. Definitely not as good as expected for $1500.
- 14-35mm: sketchy distortion at the wide end.
- 15-35mm: massive brick, but the optics are actually solid. Unfortunately, you just gotta carry the heavy Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM if you want professional results on that R5 sensor.
Building on the earlier suggestion, think about the total cost. The Canon RF 14-35mm f/4 L IS USM is often $1,100 refurbished, leaving you plenty of cash for your trip.
- Savings: you keep nearly $1,000 for filters or travel.
- Real Estate: you wont shoot wide open for gigs anyway.
- Practicality: 77mm filters are way cheaper. Software correction isnt a dealbreaker... the R5 sensor is more than capable of handling those crops.
Saving this thread
Stumbled on this today and honestly, in my experience, zooms are always a bit of a compromise for high-res sensors like the R5. I agree that the 15-35mm is the better zoom for reliability, but have you looked into going with a wide prime instead?
- Fixed lenses are usually more robust and have fewer points of failure for hiking.
- You get real optical performance without the heavy software cropping.
- They tend to be much lighter than the f/2.8 zoom bricks. Simple is usually safer when you're dealing with the elements on the coast.
