Does the new RF 50mm make the (heavy and expensive) RF 35mm redundant?

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
Eddie Rizk Contributing Member • Posts: 780
Re: Does the new RF 50mm make the (heavy and expensive) RF 35mm redundant?

davidwien wrote:

Eddie Rizk wrote:

Some people, actually a lot of people, love the 50 mm length and use it all the time.

The price and size of the RF 50mm are both attractive, and I cannot recall a time when I didnt have a 50mm lens for FF; but I find it impossible to remember when I last chose to use it. Even when I use a zoom lens, I do not find myself setting it to 50mm. I read that this focal length gives the same angle of view as the human eye; but I dont find it provides a very interesting or useful perspective for photos.

No disrespect meant to those who disagree with me!


I had the equivalent, when I bought the EF 35 F2 for my 60D.  It was my only "fast" lens, and I took some decent shots with it.  Then I got the 6D and liked the lens so much better.  That little bit of depth exaggeration really makes things look more interesting, as does the little bit of compression of the 85.  I haven't looked at a 50 since.

-- hide signature --

That's my opinion, and it's worth what you paid for it.
Eddie Rizk
The race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet.
Formerly "Ed Rizk"
My email was hacked and unrecoverable along with all associated accounts, so I got permission to create a new one.

 Eddie Rizk's gear list:Eddie Rizk's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS R Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon TS-E 17mm f/4L Canon EF 24-70mm F4L IS USM +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow