p.5 #2 · New: Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 L IS STM Lens - $2299
OpticalLimits has reviewed this lens, and it looks fine... when auto-corrected of course. Not so much without that... ZOMG @ 9% distortion and 12 stops of vignetting in an L lens. But I guess that's the new normal, and the 14-35 is probably not that different? (PZ/OL has not tested it yet).
I would say this would have been a lens worth considering the RF system for, if not for the Laowa AF 10mm f/2.8 that kind of removes that itch for Nikon and Sony owners.
p.5 #3 · New: Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 L IS STM Lens - $2299
IlyaSnopchenko wrote:
OpticalLimits has reviewed this lens, and it looks fine... when auto-corrected of course. Not so much without that... ZOMG @ 9% distortion and 12 stops of vignetting in an L lens. But I guess that's the new normal, and the 14-35 is probably not that different? (PZ/OL has not tested it yet).
I would say this would have been a lens worth considering the RF system for, if not for the Laowa AF 10mm f/2.8 that kind of removes that itch for Nikon and Sony owners.
Interesting review indeed, thanks for linking to it. Comparing to other "compensated" lenses (24-240, 14-35) I don't see the author telling us if at the 10mm uncorrected focal length we are indeed looking at 10mm or could it be e.g., 9mm? The 24-240 at wide is actually 22mm or 23mm, the 14-35 at 14mm is actually 13mm, the correction software cropping within that area to get an adjusted focal length as displayed on the lens (24mm, 14mm). The additional area would be needed to harvest pixels, and this is an area showing its worst distortions and vignetting in the edges, but these are not part of the cropped area. Just curious
Otherwisel a good review even if a bit harsh in the rating. I would like to know the author's view comparing this to the EF 11 - 24mm L, which did all the heavy image correction lifting using traditional optics. Result: a huge and heavy lens that was difficult to justify in a travel bag compared to EF 14mm 2.8 or the EF 16-35 L IS f:4 (I owned all three at various times). This 10-20mm zoom revolutionizes the UAW segment because as the author notes it is useful over its entire range when paired with the 24-105 or 24-70, and most importantly it is compact and light. One would probably not use the 10-15mm range that often for all the good reasons given by the author, but when you need them they are there. I have tried a few years ago a 2-camera 14-35 + 70-200 f:4 combination to walk around with, if I can ever afford the 10-20 this would become 10-20 + 24-105.
p.5 #4 · New: Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 L IS STM Lens - $2299
It doesn't make any sense to measure vignetting before correcting for distortion, because those black corners are outside the 10 mm FOV. But hey, if you want attention why not scream that a lens has 12 stops vignetting outside the image it is meant to project
p.5 #5 · New: Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 L IS STM Lens - $2299
If it had been impossible to see without some kind of trickery (like, for example, partially extending a collapsible lens and then unscrewing it so that the camera doesn't detect it and cry havoc), maybe. But disabling distortion and vignetting auto-correction is simply done with a menu item, is it not?
By the way, the 11-24 fared a lot - A LOT - worse at the widest setting in Klaus' testing way back when he was evaluating it on a 5DSR.
p.5 #6 · New: Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 L IS STM Lens - $2299
What you see in the viewfinder or the LCD when taking the picture is always the corrected image, so the 12 stops vignetting is always outside what you compose and frame for. To see the uncorrected image, you need to open the raw file and not use correction. Correct me if I am wrong.
Jun 26, 2024 at 10:05 AM
AmbientMike Offline • • • • • • [X]
p.5 #7 · New: Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 L IS STM Lens - $2299
Distortion is about the same as 16-35/4 & 20-70 Sony, ~9%
I don't like it, but everyone's doing it. So no point in complaining about Canon, really
p.5 #8 · New: Canon RF 10-20mm f/4 L IS STM Lens - $2299
IlyaSnopchenko wrote:
If it had been impossible to see without some kind of trickery (like, for example, partially extending a collapsible lens and then unscrewing it so that the camera doesn't detect it and cry havoc), maybe. But disabling distortion and vignetting auto-correction is simply done with a menu item, is it not? [...]
For lenses that need heavy corrections (24-240, 24-105STM, 14-35L, 16STM and this one), you can't disable the corrections in the camera.
In non-Canon RAW converters like LightRoom, Capture One, etc you can choose to enable corrections or not for CR3 files. DPP4 forces them on, you don't get to disable them there.
To phrase it a bit differently: RAW images are not affected in any way by corrections being enabled or not in the body, your RAW converter of choice might be opinionated.
