Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site

New Feature: SMS Notification alert

New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

2 3 end

Archive 2021 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

brainchill
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Someone posted a video of a real walk around with the new 16mm RF lens on youtube and I an see now why nobody was allowed to share images from it before we all got our preorders in .. lol.

The amount of barrel distortion that is coming out of this lens is absurd .... outside the center third of the frame it might as well be a fisheye.

Oct 16, 2021 at 02:38 AM

WaterfallJumper
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

I've seen other videos that looked fine. I'm sure with corrections, it will be a cheap, useful lens for people like me who want ultra-wide shots, but can't afford a 15-35 or other, similar lenses.

Edited on Oct 16, 2021 at 09:19 AM · View previous versions

Oct 16, 2021 at 08:46 AM

garyvot
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

brainchill wrote:
The amount of barrel distortion that is coming out of this lens is absurd .... outside the center third of the frame it might as well be a fisheye.

You do know that it is designed this way on purpose, right? This lens (like the 24-240 and 14-35) is meant to be used with digital corrections in-camera or in post. In fact, this lens likely produces a wider field of view than 16mm when left uncorrected.

Historically, lens designers have tried to minimize distortion through optical corrections, and we could judge their efforts as being better or worse. The approach used here intentionally allows greater distortion as a tradeoff for a compactness and light weight.

So I don't think we should judge distortion as an optical "flaw" in a lens like this. We are meant to evaluate it as a system, after both optical and digital corrections are taken into consideration.

If the corners end up being soft after corrections are applied even when stopped down to ideal apertures, then I think we have something to complain about. That is one potential drawback to this kind of design.

But for many, the size, weight and cost advantages will be compelling, and also make this lens more attractive for use on a future APS-C body.

Oct 16, 2021 at 09:15 AM

Jman13
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

brainchill wrote:
Someone posted a video of a real walk around with the new 16mm RF lens on youtube and I an see now why nobody was allowed to share images from it before we all got our preorders in .. lol.

The amount of barrel distortion that is coming out of this lens is absurd .... outside the center third of the frame it might as well be a fisheye.

Of course it's designed with digital distortion correction in mind...it's a full frame ultra-wide lens that is the size of a nifty fifty and costs $299. If you were expecting Zeiss level optical correction, you're dreaming. I've looked at a lot of samples over the last few days: yes, the distortion correction will cost you some edge resolution....however the lens looks sharp enough that when stopped down it will provide very good images, even to the edges (not amazing, but pretty good). For a super cheap, extremely small UWA lens, that's outstanding.

What were you expecting?

Oct 16, 2021 at 09:27 AM

Photonadave
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

OK, there is almost no useful information presented in this video presentation!

Note that the first half of the video including where the presenter starts walking around he says that he is showing us GoPro footage and I can see that it is quite distorted looking. Why he is bothering to showing us this is unclear. Later on he shows similar footage taken after he announces that he is switching to the R5 with the new RF 16mm lens mounted that then looks far less distorted and normal looking for this type of lens. I can't tell much else from this presentation about this lens aside from its physical size comparison to the Canon RF 50mm F/1.8 STM and that it indeed mounts onto an R5.

Oct 16, 2021 at 12:16 PM

mdvaden
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

brainchill wrote:
Someone posted a video of a real walk around with the new 16mm RF lens on youtube and I an see now why nobody was allowed to share images from it before we all got our preorders in .. lol.

That video may undermine that point somewhat.

I saw images from the RF 16 before buying, a couple days ago on Canon Rumors forum and immediately sought a copy to purchase. It already shipped. But the photos were the deciding factor for me.

Next, in that video, I was surprised there wasn't more distortion when he switched to the R5 and RF 16mm close to the 6:50 point.

Oct 16, 2021 at 07:08 PM

brainchill
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

I don't "Expect" it to be perfect, but I do expect it to be better than your average third party samyang lens, and if the video footage is any indicator, this is quite clearly not, even almost, the case.

Oct 16, 2021 at 09:13 PM

jaredmizanin
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Just want to reiterate what photonadave said- most of the vlogging was done with a GoPro. Switch to 6:50 to see it done with the 16mm lens. Don't confuse the distortion with the GoPro for that of the 16mm.

Oct 16, 2021 at 09:31 PM

Optics Patent
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

I bought a $80,000 Mercedes but when I turn off the the computer controls it skids and is dangerous! Don’t buy this brand!

Oct 16, 2021 at 09:36 PM

mdvaden
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

brainchill wrote:
I don't "Expect" it to be perfect, but I do expect it to be better than your average third party samyang lens, and if the video footage is any indicator, this is quite clearly not, even almost, the case.

I'm mainly seeing nice images and decent video from a 16mm that I find no equal for among 3rd party lenses.

But feel free to "expect" and be sure to tell folks when you find an auto-focus Rokinon or Sigma that's 165 grams with a control ring and around $299

Oct 16, 2021 at 10:13 PM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Yeah the distortion is pretty much gone once he uses the R5 + 16mm later in the video. He is using the GoPro earlier in the video.

Distortion looks to be controlled in the unedited raws he posts. Which definitely aren't perfect but definitely show some promise. Not sure how much is in camera but it doesn't look like it's 100% corrected either. So it may not be corrected in camera if pp in ps or something

Sunstars look like they might be pretty good and flare isn't bad at all. Definitely merits further investigation imo.

Oct 16, 2021 at 10:42 PM

brad-man
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

This video from another thread shows control of the distortion:

Oct 16, 2021 at 11:15 PM

jedibrain
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Looks pretty good. I'd like to see Gordon Laing do a review in his typical fashion. Or Fro.

I've got an EF mount Rokinon 14mm f2.8 that I use mainly for astro. Manual focus only of course. I was thinking of this 16mm as an upgrade possibly.

We all knew 'computational' photography was coming, and we are really seeing it with the lens corrections done in camera with these lenses. I use DXO PL4 and it has excellent lens correction profiles as well. Very good thing for the consumer on a budget.

Brian

Oct 17, 2021 at 10:21 AM

AmbientMike
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

I'm used to excellent $300 uwa. The 18mm Vivitar and maybe 17/3.5 MF Tokinaa used to be a lot less, 17mm af Tokina and Tamron adaptall-2 maybe a bit more.

It's been a long time ago and there's been inflation but with modern manufacturing techniques and no retrofocus design necessary maybe they can make an excellent uwa for $300.

Might need some computational imaging but the distortion doesn't look that bad, especially considering 3-4% is pretty standard even on good lenses anymore including L.

Oct 18, 2021 at 10:52 AM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Just got mine this morning from Amazon and did a quick test against the EF 16-35 f4/L at 16mm. I used default jpg L setting on my RP.

First thing I noticed is that the 16/2.8 has a narrower angle of view than the 16-35. It is more like 17mm on the 16-35.

The good new is that at f2.8, the RF lens is already approaching its maximum sharpness, but the bad news is that it is not a sharp lens and stopping down does not improve the sharpness much. The corners are marshy even stopping down to f22. It does not get critically sharp at any stop compared to the EF lens. In other words, the EF lens at f4 beats the RF lens at any aperture comfortably.

I like the compactness of the lens but I am quite disappointed with the sharpness. I will return the lens to Amazon on tomorrow.

Oct 19, 2021 at 01:46 PM

jedibrain
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Its worth pointing out that the EF 16-35 F4 L is an L, and 4-5x the cost. At that, it should be considerably better.

Brian

Oct 19, 2021 at 02:09 PM

Jman13
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Cinstance wrote:
Just got mine this morning from Amazon and did a quick test against the EF 16-35 f4/L at 16mm. I used default jpg L setting on my RP.

First thing I noticed is that the 16/2.8 has a narrower angle of view than the 16-35. It is more like 17mm on the 16-35.

The good new is that at f2.8, the RF lens is already approaching its maximum sharpness, but the bad news is that it is not a sharp lens and stopping down does not improve the sharpness much. The corners are marshy even stopping down to f22. It does not...Show more →

A few things: first, at f/22, all lenses are pretty mushy...you're well into diffraction at f/22. But yes, it's not critically sharp at the edges, even at f/5.6 or f/8, but I've found it to be ok there...just not great. Yes, you're L zoom is (and should be) considerably sharper.

If you're viewing it as a replacement for that, then yes, you're likely better off returning it. I got one for those times I want to go out with a very light kit, but still want to be able to shoot ultrawide when needed, and for that, this will work perfectly. It will not be replacing my Sigma 14-24mm for serious landscape and architectural work.

Oct 19, 2021 at 02:29 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Jman13 wrote:
A few things: first, at f/22, all lenses are pretty mushy...you're well into diffraction at f/22. But yes, it's not critically sharp at the edges, even at f/5.6 or f/8, but I've found it to be ok there...just not great. Yes, you're L zoom is (and should be) considerably sharper.

If you're viewing it as a replacement for that, then yes, you're likely better off returning it. I got one for those times I want to go out with a very light kit, but still want to be able to shoot ultrawide when needed, and for that, this will work...Show more →

Yeah, I pretty much understand the concept that anything gets marshy at f22

Oct 19, 2021 at 02:39 PM

brad-man
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

Cinstance wrote:
Yeah, I pretty much understand the concept that anything gets marshy at f22

, but what I was trying to say is that even stopping down to the minimum aperture (to minimize other type of aberrations other than diffraction) does not help the marshy corners. It is marshy at all apertures.

The EF 16-35/4 L is one of the lowest priced L lens, and it is a zoom lens. I think I am pretty reasonable to expect a $300 prime lens to at least perform close to a Zoom lens after stopping down beyond f8.

If your priority is IQ only, then this is not the lens for you. Speaking for myself, the ratio of IQ to size is the attractive feature of this lens. In my normal shooting I have a standard zoom on my camera and if I have a second and/or third lens, it is usually a telephoto zoom or a quick prime. I rarely carry an UWA zoom unless I have a specific need for one. This lens will allow me to bring a UWA lens with very little size/weight penalty. I find that very convenient. This is all just supposition on my part as mine hasn't shipped yet.

Oct 19, 2021 at 06:11 PM

Cinstance
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · Canon RF 16mm review video ..

brad-man wrote:
If your priority is IQ only, then this is not the lens for you. Speaking for myself, the ratio of IQ to size is the attractive feature of this lens. In my normal shooting I have a standard zoom on my camera and if I have a second and/or third lens, it is usually a telephoto zoom or a quick prime. I rarely carry an UWA zoom unless I have a specific need for one. This lens will allow me to bring a UWA lens with very little size/weight penalty. I find that very convenient. This is all just supposition...Show more →

My priority is absolutely not just IQ otherwise I wouldn't even have tried the lens. I understand your thought because it is exactly what I had when placing the order. I wouldn't mind sacrificing some IQ over portability as long as the IQ is acceptable, but that is not the case. If it is not even critically sharp on a RP, how can I expect it to be useable on a R5 or even higher MP count cameras I am going to purchase in the near future.

Maybe I'd just got a lemon, and your copy will perform better. So please do report back when yours arrives.

Oct 19, 2021 at 07:38 PM

1 2 3 end
FM Forums \| Canon Forum \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 end

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.