Since I have this lens in hand, I thought I'd throw my hat in the ring with some quick testing samples for you to discuss. Though there is no profile yet for this lens, I wanted to share some interesting findings that may shed some light...
The below link has a series of images taken in my office from my research.
They are all labeled to easily understand what I was doing. lol
Images 1-4 are images shot with my iPhone from behind the camera so you can see my process and my findings.
Image 1 is just my proof of the lens/camera combo. Canon R5 + RF 14-35 f/4.
Images 2 and 3 (this is where it gets interesting) if you noticed to the right of my lcd screen I circled in red...there is my office door hinge. Well, half the hinge, the part that is screwed to the door itself.
Image 4 just show both the hinge and lcd in the same shot for reference.
Now when looking in my lcd, I can only see the door hinge that's screwed to the door and the extreme right of the lcd is the space between the door and door frame.
In reviewing the RAW and JPG images...you'll see in the JPG that this is still true because of the lens correction that the camera is doing.
When looking at that same RAW file, the extreme right is no longer the space between the door and frame but now you can see the door frame, which you couldn't in the JPG.
To me, looking at the RAW images, these RAWs look wider than 14mm, and the applied lens correction we see with the JPG is a "truer" 14mm. I may be wrong with this theory but I've shot on a few 14mm, and it just seems...wider? Idk. I may be wrong.
I don't know if this makes sense or if I'm onto anything here, but I hope this help in the conversation until we get a profile.
Since I have this lens in hand, I thought I'd throw my hat in the ring with some quick testing samples for you to discuss. Though there is no profile yet for this lens, I wanted to share some interesting findings that may shed some light...
The below link has a series of images taken in my office from my research.
They are all labeled to easily understand what I was doing. lol
Images 1-4 are images shot with my iPhone from behind the camera so you can see my process and my findings.
Image 1 is just my proof of the lens/camera combo. Canon R5 + RF 14-35 f/4.
Images 2 and 3 (this is where it gets interesting) if you noticed to the right of my lcd screen I circled in red...there is my office door hinge. Well, half the hinge, the part that is screwed to the door itself.
Image 4 just show both the hinge and lcd in the same shot for reference.
Now when looking in my lcd, I can only see the door hinge that's screwed to the door and the extreme right of the lcd is the space between the door and door frame.
In reviewing the RAW and JPG images...you'll see in the JPG that this is still true because of the lens correction that the camera is doing.
When looking at that same RAW file, the extreme right is no longer the space between the door and frame but now you can see the door frame, which you couldn't in the JPG.
To me, looking at the RAW images, these RAWs look wider than 14mm, and the applied lens correction we see with the JPG is a "truer" 14mm. I may be wrong with this theory but I've shot on a few 14mm, and it just seems...wider? Idk. I may be wrong.
I don't know if this makes sense or if I'm onto anything here, but I hope this help in the conversation until we get a profile.
