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

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
JackHa2006 Junior Member • Posts: 34
Re: Does the new RF 50mm make the (heavy and expensive) RF 35mm redundant?

tkbslc wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

thunder storm wrote:

In other words: it's so affordable it's not very useful as a portrait lens for rule of third compositions. In fact it's so affordable it's not useful as a portrait lens at all as the bokeh is really poor.

A bit over the top, wouldn't you say?

If the EF version could take portraits, then the RF surely can.

https://www.flickr.com/search/?text=Canon%20EF%2050mm%201.8%20portrait&view_all=1

Chances are the bokeh of the RF lens is worse compared to the EF lens.

Based on what?

If you don't need bokeh, there's no need to use a prime at all, so..... that's what i call "not useful".

You are just full of absurd arguments today.

It's subjective and you have to look at pictures on both f1.2 and f1.8 to decide which one is better value for you. For me I was considering both and then I saw sample images of the f1.8 on Youtube from Canon Explorers of Light at 1080p and I did not like the f1.8 bokeh.  I went to purchase the f1.2.

 JackHa2006's gear list:JackHa2006's gear list
Canon G9 X Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 10D Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS R6 +7 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow