RF 16 mm f/2.8 or 35 mm f/1.8 for EOS RP user ?

ggasquecc wrote:

Hi there,

I've been using a canon EOS RP since 6 months and I'm very happy with it. I bought it as part of an offer with RF 24-105 STM, RF 50 mm STM and a spare battery. Photography is one of my passion but I'm far to be a "pro" and I'm not ready to spent k€ in gears.

I really enjoy using the RP and I'm thinking of buying a new lens. I spent a lot of time reading reviews and forums, trying to figure out what the best lens is for my needs.

I ended up choosing two prime lenses: the Canon RF 16 mm f/2.8 and the Canon RF 35 mm f/1.8. I want a good quality lens for indoor shooting (mainly portraits of my family or friends) and the RF 50 mm is not wide enough for that. So 35 mm seems perfect for me. But it is 35 mm, a focal length already "covered" by my 24-105. Is the quality gap between 24-105 STM and 35 mm really worth it ?

Quality gap is f1.8 vs f4.5 at that focal length.  So yes, that is a HUGE difference.   Big DOF control change and almost 3 stops of ISO (and noise) difference.   However, 35 and 50 are fairly close.  Compare those on your 24-105mm and see if you think it will make sense to have both a 35 and a 50.   I have both 35 and 50mm f1.8, and they often feel redundant.

On the other side, although it is not a portrait lens, the RF 16 mm will open up new possibilities to me (I've never used such a wide angle), such as landscape or astrophotography.

That is true.  You just have to decide what matters more to you.

So please, based on your experience which one would you choose ?

Doesn't matter what lens I would choose, because you have to use them and you probably have a different photographic style and needs than I do.  They are very different focal lengths, so you should pick based on that alone, really.

You may consider picking up a flash for indoor photos.  Bounced flash is a game changer for indoor photography.   In your case, if I had to choose something for you, I would pick up a flash.