Total winner. No-brainer RF lens

[LeicaBOSS]

Canon hit a home run here. It's a must-have if you're into the RF system.

For a "non-L" lens, the weight, tight tolerances and substantial feel are very welcome. The focus and function ring are snug, precise and reassuring.

While not a 1:1 ratio - the macro function is useful for all-purpose photography and the performance at close, non-macro distances is fantastic and a bit of a hidden "feature" of the lens. By comparison, the old EF 35mm f/2 was a bit weak at the minimum focus distance.

Performance? I'm sure others will shoot brick walls and test charts and show you MTF graphs, so I won't. What I will say is that the optics are substantially better than the price point. It's neutral, balances sharpness and contrast well, deals with flare nicely, and renders font and back out of focus areas in a pleasing way.

Taking digital corrections off, you'll notice quite a bit of falloff in the corners. I like it for things I'm doing at f/1.8 but it's correctable easy enough.

It's in some ways milquetoast. It just does what you ask it to. A home run in my book - and leaving me not caring one bit about whatever 35L they cook up for the system.












100% Crop











--
From time to time, I point my camera at the right things. This is generally when I forget everything I've learned.

 

[Rawpaul]

I totaly agree , it,s a beautifull lens especialy for it,s price point.

Qulity images by the way …. they show what the lens is capable off

 

[LensSodomist]

I've had all the wide, and normal focal length Canon non-L primes at one time or another, and I've never kept one or liked one. They are all junk, and their build is often mediocre.

But this RF 35mm f1.8 STM IS, is fantastic!

And this coming from an owner of the EF 35L f1.4 prime.

I just ordered my RF 35 last night...$349 at a---rama, using the points I accrued there. I want the small size, the lightweight, and the IS that the L does not provide me (yet).

 

[Canochrome]

That model railroad setup might be a good candidate to try focus stacking with.

 

[Hoka Hey]

Great description of an excellent lens.

Joe

 

[LMOE]

It's a 'meh' lens. Nice, but has its issues. No better, no worse than other similar primes. Priced right at $450-$500 USD. I think many are overly excited about this lens at is the only one that is small and a good "fit" with the current R series bodies. Shame there are no decent R bodies - yet.

 

[LensSodomist]

It's a 'meh' lens. Nice, but has its issues. No better, no worse than other similar primes. Priced right at $450-$500 USD. I think many are overly excited about this lens at is the only one that is small and a good "fit" with the current R series bodies. Shame there are no decent R bodies - yet.

What other non-L wide/mid prime has these attributes?:

1. Fairly sharp wide open.
2. IS
3. Nearly as good as Canon 35L f1.4 Mark I
4. Very good edge-to-edge sharpness across all f-stops
5. L like rendition
6. L like bokeh
7. It's better than the EF 50L in most cases

I've owned all the EF non-L wide/mid primes and this one stands out head and shoulders.

Decent R body? Any body that works with the RF 50L f1.2 and RF 28-70L f2 is a fantastic body. Its the lenses, hello!?!?

 

[CanonshooterRF212]

It’s a nice lens, a decent value at $450 for sure considering it doesn’t come with a hood, and is made in Taiwan instead of Japan.

Ill get shouted at by hoka, but it still exhibits some pretty bad CA, even for the price point.

I just really like the weight/size/IS. It’s a nice fit on an R for a walk about/random video type of prime.

 

[Hoka Hey]

It’s a nice lens, a decent value at $450 for sure considering it doesn’t come with a hood, and is made in Taiwan instead of Japan.

Ill get shouted at by hoka, but it still exhibits some pretty bad CA, even for the price point.

HaHaHa!!! You made my day PGSanta!!!

I just really like the weight/size/IS. It’s a nice fit on an R for a walk about/random video type of prime.

It has a little CA that is easy to clean up in post. I did check my 35 1.4 L ii and it does have less CA, but it's not as much fun to carry around to shoot with due to its size and weight.

This is one of my favorite lenses due to sharpness, color rendition and size. It's the lens that always goes back on my R at the end of the day.

Joe

 

[J A C S]

You posted closeups. If this is what you need it for, fine.

I downloaded a bunch of images from IR taken with this lens and the RP. What I see there is mediocre, at best. I cannot believe that Canon would make such a lens at whatever price point. Strong PF, double line bokeh, you name it.

Loading…

www.imaging-resource.com

 

[Glenn Haley]

There's a Video test of the RF 35mm on YouTube that shows the IS is not very good. I hope your new lens is better;

 

[LeicaBOSS]

So, anyway - I'm glad this review posting went completely off the rails with intense, pro-level pixel peeping and theatrics. More below - a few shots while running around with two toddlers in Central Park.

Understanding where a lens is at its worst is important because it allows you to make simple adjustments in the field to avoid trouble.

The bottom line on this lens is that you will not find a new lens under $500 that performs like this one. You will not find one at $1,000. Outside the 35L II, and perhaps some of the Zeiss offerings - this is a brilliant showing.

Below. If you need to take daylight landscapes like this at f/1.8 - which is usually stupid - here is the result. The lower right corner is the worst of it. You can also see the peripheral vignetting (software correction was turned off)

Takeaway: I'm very surprised how the edge detail held together. This is wide open, after all. I know my Leica 35/2 wouldn't fare better from a technical perspective.






Wide open landscape in broad daylight. Like a boss!



Below: Torture test. too much scene contrast to be reasonable. Wide open. Snips are at 100%. I'm not a corner peeper, but that's more detail than expected for a $400 at f/1.8

Takeaway. Surprisingly better than expected for such bad light. Corners resolved more detail than expected wide open in this circumstance.





Here's an attempt at making the worst possible bokeh - mid-distance subject with a messy out of focus background - especially in the corners.

Takeaway: Only the best (read >4-8x more expensive) 35mm lenses would make this beautiful if you pixel peep the blur in the corners. It's far less nervous and unseemly than suggested. Having owned the Sigma ART - this is much easier to deal with.




Pixel peep the bokeh in the corners if you need to complain about something



A little more pixel peeping. I find that slightly-stopped-down blur tends to be the nastiest. Here's some at 100%.

Takeaway: If you must pixel peep backgrounds - this is not an epic world-class result. It's far better than the price tag, though.




Wide open with a busy background, stopped down just a wee bit.



Below: You can peep this giant, stopped down image in ugly, hard sun. There's almost too much detail. I'd probably soften it up in post. But that's me.




Peep my pixels.



Conclusion:

This lens offers too much goodness for the price tag. Including:

• Good contrast, neutral color, loads of resolving power at all apertures
• You can get your corner detail (if you want it) stopped down, and more than you'd expect when open
• Image stabilization for stills is useful
• Close focus ability expands the lens's usefulness
• The lens performs well in harsh situations where cheap lenses usually fall apart
• You can't get this kind of performance for even twice as much $$
• It's small, light, and still feels reassuring

There are drawbacks:

• Pretty substantial vignetting
• You'll see CAs, especially open with contrast
• (GOOD NEWS - above are the easiest issues to correct)
• Transitional out of focus areas and front-bokeh is pedestrian and can be unattractive
• You'll get some smearing and nervous bokeh with very busy backgrounds

--
From time to time, I point my camera at the right things. This is generally when I forget everything I've learned.

 

[J A C S]

So, anyway - I'm glad this review posting went completely off the rails with intense, pro-level pixel peeping and theatrics.

Wrong, the PF and the smearing are well visible at lower resolutions.

More below - a few shots while running around with two toddlers in Central Park.

Understanding where a lens is at its worst is important because it allows you to make simple adjustments in the field to avoid trouble.

The bottom line on this lens is that you will not find a new lens under $500 that performs like this one. You will not find one at $1,000. Outside the 35L II, and perhaps some of the Zeiss offerings - this is a brilliant showing.

It is a winner in its class, consisting of one lens.

Below. If you need to take daylight landscapes like this at f/1.8 - which is usually stupid - here is the result. The lower right corner is the worst of it. You can also see the peripheral vignetting (software correction was turned off)

Takeaway: I'm very surprised how the edge detail held together. This is wide open, after all. I know my Leica 35/2 wouldn't fare better from a technical perspective.


Wide open landscape in broad daylight. Like a boss!

Below: Torture test. too much scene contrast to be reasonable. Wide open. Snips are at 100%. I'm not a corner peeper, but that's more detail than expected for a $400 at f/1.8

Takeaway. Surprisingly better than expected for such bad light. Corners resolved more detail than expected wide open in this circumstance.

Not bad for a downsized image, indeed. BTW, the focus is almost at infinity, and the PF in the other shots were in the OOF part. Even here, the small branches changed their color completely - they are purple now.

Here's an attempt at making the worst possible bokeh - mid-distance subject with a messy out of focus background - especially in the corners.

Takeaway: Only the best (read >4-8x more expensive) 35mm lenses would make this beautiful if you pixel peep the blur in the corners. It's far less nervous and unseemly than suggested. Having owned the Sigma ART - this is much easier to deal with.

Well, the Sigma lenses have busy bokeh as well.

Pixel peep the bokeh in the corners if you need to complain about something

Hard to pixel peep a downsized image but it was never about pixel peeping. I displayed your image full screen and the upper half ruins it for me.

A little more pixel peeping. I find that slightly-stopped-down blur tends to be the nastiest. Here's some at 100%.

Takeaway: If you must pixel peep backgrounds - this is not an epic world-class result. It's far better than the price tag, though.

Actually, the pixel peeping makes it look better. Even at this tiny resolution on the left, the bokeh looks really bad.

Wide open with a busy background, stopped down just a wee bit.

Below: You can peep this giant, stopped down image in ugly, hard sun. There's almost too much detail. I'd probably soften it up in post. But that's me.

It is a fine f/8 lens, indeed.

Peep my pixels.

 

[forpetessake]

Looks a bit softer than the EF 35/2, but it also can be a strong AA filter.

Loading…

www.the-digital-picture.com

 

[Hoka Hey]

Looks a bit softer than the EF 35/2, but it also can be a strong AA filter.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...meraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Different camera resolutions. Try some of the other camera options with the f2.

 

[LeicaBOSS]

Looks a bit softer than the EF 35/2, but it also can be a strong AA filter.

https://www.the-digital-picture.com...meraComp=979&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0

Different camera resolutions. Try some of the other camera options with the f2.

 

[diness]

It's a 'meh' lens. Nice, but has its issues. No better, no worse than other similar primes. Priced right at $450-$500 USD. I think many are overly excited about this lens at is the only one that is small and a good "fit" with the current R series bodies. Shame there are no decent R bodies - yet.

What other non-L wide/mid prime has these attributes?:

1. Fairly sharp wide open.
2. IS
3. Nearly as good as Canon 35L f1.4 Mark I
4. Very good edge-to-edge sharpness across all f-stops
5. L like rendition
6. L like bokeh
7. It's better than the EF 50L in most cases

I've owned all the EF non-L wide/mid primes and this one stands out head and shoulders.

I think you're right that this poster has never used the lens, but the other lens that stands out as having all the things you suggested is the EF 35mm f2 is. Have you owned that one? Do you find the RF to be better? I'm legitimately asking the question, no sarcasm.