jrhoffman75 wrote: EB-1 wrote: IlyaSnopchenko wrote:
The first review of the 45mm lens is in. All I can say is... ew. Was the Canon EF 50mm f/1.2 also that soft at wide apertures? Well, at least this one is 1/3 the price. https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-45mm-F1-2-STM-Lens.aspx
More or less sharp in the center by f/4.0
Cross-frame sharpness kinda gets there by f/8.0. Kinda.
Huge vignetting (which, to be fair, does seem to clear up on stopping down a few stops, unlike many ML lenses).
Distortion is reported to be so bad that the correction can't be turned off.
The other aberrations - you name it, this lens has oodles of these.
Pretty much as expected.
Wow, that 45/1.2 is amazingly aberrant. You can compare the EF 50/1.2 on TDP also.
The RF 50/1.2 looks great compared to both of them.
EBH
Canon is relying on digital correction on some of its lower price lenses. Cut costs by eliminating corrective lens elements.
It's far more than that. Look at the MTF. And why does it need to be like that. There are plenty of fast normal lenses from 3rd parties that are not. Obviously Canon wanted some bad IQ for the neuralgic market since the 3rd party lenses are practically excluded. I really thought it would better than it is, but not great
EBH
Nov 06, 2025 at 09:58 AM
Previous versions of EB-1's message #16923146 « The R6M3 and RF 45 1.2 lens. »
