Nice!! Welcome. Yeah, your first post is hiding at the bottom of page 10. I don't believe anyone can see below garyvot's post but we'll find out. How do you like the RF 35 coming from the EF 35II?
Shane Long posted a good review of the lens yesterday ?si=nx166i9B8AnH685f. It seems to be a good upgrade from the Rf 35mm 1.8, but I am not sure if it is worthwhile over the EF 35mm 1.4 mkii. Honestly, I would have been completely happy if the new 35mm was just a EF 35mm 1.4 mkii with a built-in RF adapter.
artsupreme wrote:
Nice!! Welcome. Yeah, your first post is hiding at the bottom of page 10. I don't believe anyone can see below garyvot's post but we'll find out. How do you like the RF 35 coming from the EF 35II?
Thanks. The RF is oddly small and light and I was skeptical at first, but after using it to cover my first event, it performed great. Fast auto focus and very sharp wide open. I will do a side-by-side test if the EF doesn't sell before I have some free time.
---------------------------------------------
rscheffler wrote:
Nice job with the product photos! Looks like you barely even used the EF 35L II. What spurred the move to the RF?
Thanks. I've been shooting 20-30 weddings a year for the past several years with it, along with numerous other events. I'm just very meticulous with my gear. And the 35 was my last lens needed to complete my EF to all-RF conversion.
Just an FYI for those that expressed concerns about the dedicated aperture ring not working in stills mode.
I saw a video yesterday by Vanessa Joy where she said that the aperture ring works in stills mode on the new R5II. I assume the R1 as well.
So either this was a hardware constraint or software. If software, I would imagine a FW update will resolve the issue.
For me this wasn't an issue but I'm curious if anyone has any thoughts on which caused the restriction?
lighthound wrote:
Just an FYI for those that expressed concerns about the dedicated aperture ring not working in stills mode.
I saw a video yesterday by Vanessa Joy where she said that the aperture ring works in stills mode on the new R5II. I assume the R1 as well.
So either this was a hardware constraint or software. If software, I would imagine a FW update will resolve the issue.
For me this wasn't an issue but I'm curious if anyone has any thoughts on which caused the restriction?
@ 21:50
&ab_channel=VanessaJoy
Pretty sure they've said new bodies are able to use the Aperture ring in photo mode, so seems like a hardware issue. I'm not sure why that would be the case though.
I'm able to get my hands on one of these lenses - but apprehensive given I already have the EF 35L II, EF 85L and the Sony 35 1.4 GM. I spend most of my time at ISO 12800 at f/1.4 indoors at bars/clubs etc and video game events. Brief thoughts on the other three:
* The size of the 35 1.4 GM is fantastic, but the lens takes a hit in build quality (attempted warranty claim but Sony are refusing - AU$2300 to fix it). I can't rely on that as a professional tool. Tack sharp in the centre, but some CA etc and a little distortion. Didn't do too badly with backlit scenarios. Bokeh seems weird.
* The EF 35L first gen lens is small, has minimal transmission loss so I was getting slightly better AF locks in low light vs the II or the Sigma 35 when I had one briefly. I love the character. A bit more CA etc.
* The 35 35L II is a touch soft at full crop on the R5, but not a big deal. Backlit scenarios got worse with flare. Geometry is fantastic. Minimal CA but still a very little amount.
I'm worried about flare, as I spend a lot of time with backlit subjects (computer screens for video game events, etc). High ISO makes profile correction a bad move as it will cause banding of noise; I usually turn off the correction on my 28-70 f/2 and the 35L II. Flare is a huge issue for me on the 28-70.
Build quality is a concern for me, too.
Curious how the bokeh compares with the EF 35L II as well. It's a lot of cash on a lens that gets me a smaller lens but with potentially no other improvements.
I don't mind vignetting as I usually leave it as it is.
I had my 35L mkII stolen a few years ago. I have been waiting for the new lens to come out but it looks kinda disappointing. I decided to buy another 35L mkii and wait for the 1.2 version when it comes.
Thanks for the link. It's been a while since I looked at an OpticalLimits review, and it looks like either the reviewer moved to Sydney or they brought a Sydney local on board. Nice to see samples from the neighbourhood.
Klaus has moved to Sydney a while ago already. In fact the choices (or non-choices) of lenses to be reviewed are largely motivated by the local availability (or non-availability... duh) of gear.
Did you find any info on this? As someone who shoots multiple systems I'd love to see how it compares to the Sony 35mm F1.4 GM. Rendering is crucial to me. I loved my old crop Sony 24mm f1.8 Zeiss from way back and haven't found another lens quite like it since. The Nikon 40mm f2 is decent but I want something better and for one of my higher res bodies like the R5II or an A7CR. Nikon Z8 is too bulky so I'm ruling that out to pair with a 35mm f1.4.
EvilZardoz wrote:
I'm able to get my hands on one of these lenses - but apprehensive given I already have the EF 35L II, EF 85L and the Sony 35 1.4 GM. I spend most of my time at ISO 12800 at f/1.4 indoors at bars/clubs etc and video game events. Brief thoughts on the other three:
* The size of the 35 1.4 GM is fantastic, but the lens takes a hit in build quality (attempted warranty claim but Sony are refusing - AU$2300 to fix it). I can't rely on that as a professional tool. Tack sharp in the centre, but some CA etc and a little distortion. Didn't do too badly with backlit scenarios. Bokeh seems weird.
* The EF 35L first gen lens is small, has minimal transmission loss so I was getting slightly better AF locks in low light vs the II or the Sigma 35 when I had one briefly. I love the character. A bit more CA etc.
* The 35 35L II is a touch soft at full crop on the R5, but not a big deal. Backlit scenarios got worse with flare. Geometry is fantastic. Minimal CA but still a very little amount.
I'm worried about flare, as I spend a lot of time with backlit subjects (computer screens for video game events, etc). High ISO makes profile correction a bad move as it will cause banding of noise; I usually turn off the correction on my 28-70 f/2 and the 35L II. Flare is a huge issue for me on the 28-70.
Build quality is a concern for me, too.
Curious how the bokeh compares with the EF 35L II as well. It's a lot of cash on a lens that gets me a smaller lens but with potentially no other improvements.
I don't mind vignetting as I usually leave it as it is....Show more →
I love using this lens- I find the size and the output really to my liking-
Love the aperture ring and was surprised that I don't mind it not clicking- I do however wish Canon would end on a design and stick with it. I hate that the 35 1.4 has an Aperture ring, then then go to a 50 or 85 and its different-
Annoying but its not worth any more comments-
Canon EOS R5m2RF35mm F1.4 L VCM lens35mmf/1.41/4000s100 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS R5m2RF35mm F1.4 L VCM lens35mmf/1.41/5000s100 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS R5m2RF35mm F1.4 L VCM lens35mmf/5.01/200s100 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS R5m2RF35mm F1.4 L VCM lens35mmf/5.01/500s100 ISO0.0 EV
Looks great! Regarding the aperture ring: it might depend on your gear experience. I believe you have experience with a few recent mirrorless systems? And some of those had aperture rings on the lenses?
On the other hand, someone like me who is a longtime Canon user, I will never use that aperture ring for stills because for decades their lenses had no aperture ring and it's now long ingrained muscle memory. It's faster and instinctive for me to use the dial on the camera. Now, when I switch to my Leica M, sure, I immediately reach for the aperture ring on the lens. Just not for Canon.
This lens has received a lot of bad press, but if you have seen one review you have seen them all. I bought it nonetheless, despite the price in Norway. You only live once. It replaces the Distagon 2/35, which has been a loyal travel companion for many years. This Canon lens has a similar size and weight, while being one stop faster. I also still have the Milvus 35/1.4, which is a very good lens, but not ideal as a travel companion. Besides, I have become dependent on autofocus after I migrated to mirrorless.
About this RF lens.
Sure, there is some distortion and vignetting, and a trace of lateral chromatic aberration, but it is not outrageous. The corrected images are of higher quality than those of many other L lenses.
Yes, I hear the rattling sound when I shake the lens, but not out in the field. There are more important things to pay attention to.
The flare issue mentioned in the German review is a mistake. At least, my experience is different. You can make any lens flare badly if the contrast is high enough.
I don't care about the aperture ring not working with my camera or being clickless. I just don't use it.
What spurred the move to the RF?
