DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM

Started Feb 20, 2022 | Discussions
dil
dil Forum Member • Posts: 80
Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
1

Klaus Schroiff reviewed the Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM: https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1136-canonrf16f28

SteveinLouisville
SteveinLouisville Senior Member • Posts: 1,586
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM

Link-y no work.

 SteveinLouisville's gear list:SteveinLouisville's gear list
Canon EOS RP Canon EOS R7 Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM Canon EF-S 24mm F2.8 STM +9 more
Sittatunga Veteran Member • Posts: 5,406
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
1

SteveinLouisville wrote:

Link-y no work.

Try this one

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1136-canonrf16f28

I'm not sure about all his comments because I have found on occasion that the corners can be as sharp on the EOS R as those from the 16-35mm f/4.  I think there could be some field curvature helping there though.  It's better than, but more comparable with the EF-M 11-22mm overall, apart from the zoom ratio and the IS.

TukTuk
TukTuk Contributing Member • Posts: 528
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
4

Sittatunga wrote:

I'm not sure about all his comments because I have found on occasion that the corners can be as sharp on the EOS R as those from the 16-35mm f/4.

you mean when 16-35/4 is OOF ?

thunder storm Forum Pro • Posts: 10,139
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
1

I'm always wondering:

- what's center?

- what's near center?

- what's border

- what's extreme?

Did anyone find a definition or something?

Looking at the samples the lens is o.k. at f/5.6 between one quarter and 3 quarters horizontally. I think that's usable. This image shows you can do fun things with it:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Canon-RF-16mm-f28-STM/i-ZSWDcXG/0/7c965445/O/206A5097.jpg

The first and the last quarter are suffering from a whole lot of chromatic aberrations and softness, but this won't be a problem for every picture. I'm not changing my 480 grams Tamron 17-35mm though, as the Tamron clearly does a better job, and it zooms. And my used copy was more affordable than a new RF 16mm....

What optical limits is missing about 45Mp is it's better to do corrections at 45Mp and do down sampling to 20Mp after the corrections than doing corrections on 20Mp sensor output.

-- hide signature --

45 is more than enough, but 500.000 isn't

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Sony a7 IV Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM +24 more
tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 17,522
Looks REALLY good for $299 and 165g
7

It's not perfect, but the flaws are minor. And let's remember that this is a tiny 165g lens that costs $300. More lenses like this in the system please!

Ephemeris
Ephemeris Senior Member • Posts: 1,186
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
1

Ken has a review. I'd think the 165g weight would be a great positive.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/16mm.htm

tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 17,522
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
2

Sittatunga wrote:

SteveinLouisville wrote:

Link-y no work.

Try this one

https://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/1136-canonrf16f28

I'm not sure about all his comments because I have found on occasion that the corners can be as sharp on the EOS R as those from the 16-35mm f/4. I think there could be some field curvature helping there though. It's better than, but more comparable with the EF-M 11-22mm overall, apart from the zoom ratio and the IS.

You can easily see the flaws in this image:

https://photos.smugmug.com/Canon-RF-16mm-f28-STM/i-hbR3Hdg/0/e4d1d6cb/O/206A5089.jpg

At 100%, the buildings along the right side are not as sharp as the ones in the middle.  And you can clearly see purple fringe around the white areas.

drsnoopy Senior Member • Posts: 1,216
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
3

Shoot at f5.6 and print at A3 - I find the corners are acceptably sharp.  What’s not to like?

 drsnoopy's gear list:drsnoopy's gear list
Canon EOS RP Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R10 Canon EF 100mm F2.8L Macro IS USM Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro +10 more
Sittatunga Veteran Member • Posts: 5,406
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM

TukTuk wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

I'm not sure about all his comments because I have found on occasion that the corners can be as sharp on the EOS R as those from the 16-35mm f/4.

you mean when 16-35/4 is OOF ?

Effectively, when both are in focus at the middle of the picture and the (considerably closer) ground at the bottom corner of the picture is more in focus with the prime lens than the zoom.

Alastair Norcross
Alastair Norcross Veteran Member • Posts: 9,874
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
2

What converter was used? I have found this lens to perform a lot better with DXO PL5 than with Lightroom. The difference in sharpness at the edges and corners is quite pronounced. PL5 also gives you a lot more control over distortion correction, if you have ViewPoint installed as well.

-- hide signature --

As the length of a thread approaches 150, the probability that someone will make the obvious "it's not the camera, it's the photographer" remark approaches 1.
Alastair
http://anorcross.smugmug.com
Equipment in profile

 Alastair Norcross's gear list:Alastair Norcross's gear list
Canon G7 X II Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R7 Canon EOS R6 Mark II Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro +24 more
mhasman Regular Member • Posts: 325
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
1

No questions, for that money this lens is great addition to my primary 35mm/1.8 - even if I am gonna use it rarely... even if I /might/ sale my Canon FF set for x100v

 mhasman's gear list:mhasman's gear list
Canon EOS R Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Fujifilm FinePix X100 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM
Karl_Guttag Senior Member • Posts: 1,884
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
9

Ephemeris wrote:

Ken has a review. I'd think the 165g weight would be a great positive.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/16mm.htm

While I like Ken Rockwell's reviews in general, I think he it too generous most of the time and perhaps overly generous with the RF16mm.

Conversely, while technically accurate, Optical Limit's review seems too harsh in their closing comments.

The RF16mm is a consumer lens. The lens is very sharp in the center. It does do fairly extreme distortion correction, particularly in the outer 3rd of the image. In most real-world pictures, the problems in the corners will not be that noticeable unless you have a sharp eye.

The lens serves as a "very wide lens" that complement the 24-xxx zoom lenses for amateurs due to cost and weight or is a "throw in the bag just in case lens" for more serious photographers.

The lens is "good enough" for what it can do if you understand the limitations.

 Karl_Guttag's gear list:Karl_Guttag's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 24-240mm F4-6.3 +14 more
tomasith Forum Member • Posts: 72
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
2

And Canon advertised the RF mount as one being able to deliver super-quality optics...

Higgins2002
Higgins2002 Contributing Member • Posts: 913
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
3

tomasith wrote:

And Canon advertised the RF mount as one being able to deliver super-quality optics...

Exactly, they advertise that making a bigger mount then it is easier to build quality lenses.

What are we seeing in the RF lenses .... The worst vignetting in lenses that Canon ever made, add to that heavy distorsion and a very high price tag for L lenses.

Some people do smooth out these flaws by saying this 16mm is 13 so you don't loose any fov when doing distorion and vignetting corrections.

What about the supposed "13mm" 45 mp image that you crop, straighten and upscale for a 45mp output how does that compare to a well behaved 16mm lens?

Stiching images for panorama is a tuff challenge when you have massive vignetting even stopped down

 Higgins2002's gear list:Higgins2002's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R7 Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM +2 more
MannyV
MannyV Senior Member • Posts: 1,055
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM

Higgins2002 wrote:

tomasith wrote:

And Canon advertised the RF mount as one being able to deliver super-quality optics...

Exactly, they advertise that making a bigger mount then it is easier to build quality lenses.

What are we seeing in the RF lenses .... The worst vignetting in lenses that Canon ever made, add to that heavy distorsion and a very high price tag for L lenses.

Some people do smooth out these flaws by saying this 16mm is 13 so you don't loose any fov when doing distorion and vignetting corrections.

What about the supposed "13mm" 45 mp image that you crop, straighten and upscale for a 45mp output how does that compare to a well behaved 16mm lens?

Stiching images for panorama is a tuff challenge when you have massive vignetting even stopped down

I love RF mount. It is indeed a lot wider than 16mm. Not sure why the review site failed to mention that. While I am not in love with this lens. It has its purpose.😘

-- hide signature --

Manny
Still draft and working towards it - https://www.digitalphoto.work

Freedolin Contributing Member • Posts: 550
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
1

thunder storm wrote:

I'm always wondering:

- what's center?

- what's near center?

- what's border

- what's extreme?

Did anyone find a definition or something?

It's described in out lens test FAQ (which, admittedly, needs to be updated in some parts, yes):

https://www.opticallimits.com/lens-test-faq

cocoanud
cocoanud Contributing Member • Posts: 699
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
3

Higgins2002 wrote:

tomasith wrote:

And Canon advertised the RF mount as one being able to deliver super-quality optics...

Exactly, they advertise that making a bigger mount then it is easier to build quality lenses.

What are we seeing in the RF lenses .... The worst vignetting in lenses that Canon ever made, add to that heavy distorsion and a very high price tag for L lenses.

Some people do smooth out these flaws by saying this 16mm is 13 so you don't loose any fov when doing distorion and vignetting corrections.

What about the supposed "13mm" 45 mp image that you crop, straighten and upscale for a 45mp output how does that compare to a well behaved 16mm lens?

Stiching images for panorama is a tuff challenge when you have massive vignetting even stopped down

The peculiar situation with this specific lens is that there is nothing else from Nikon or Sony to even compare to. The closest they have are 20mm f/1.8 which are almost 3x the price of this lens.

If one is going to shoot with a 45 mp body, they should already hopefully know better

For the price and the AoV this lens can offer paired with DxO RAW conversion, this is one of the best value lenses available for people who want/need a UWA.

-- hide signature --

C

 cocoanud's gear list:cocoanud's gear list
Canon EOS R6 Canon EF 100-400mm F4.5-5.6L IS II Canon EF 70-200 F4 II Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Samyang AF 85mm F1.4 RF +3 more
Sittatunga Veteran Member • Posts: 5,406
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
1

Karl_Guttag wrote:

Ephemeris wrote:

Ken has a review. I'd think the 165g weight would be a great positive.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/canon/eos-r/lenses/16mm.htm

While I like Ken Rockwell's reviews in general, I think he it too generous most of the time and perhaps overly generous with the RF16mm.

Conversely, while technically accurate, Optical Limit's review seems too harsh in their closing comments

R Ken is a photographer and gear enthusiast, Klaus Schroiff measures lens performance and defects to an extremely high standard. It's not that surprising they come to very different conclusions. A lot of the Optical Limits reviews show lenses producing much better corner resolution with the 30Mp EOS R than with the 45Mp EOS R5 and I don't think they've adequately explored why.

The RF16mm is a consumer lens. The lens is very sharp in the center. It does do fairly extreme distortion correction, particularly in the outer 3rd of the image. In most real-world pictures, the problems in the corners will not be that noticeable unless you have a sharp eye.

The lens serves as a "very wide lens" that complement the 24-xxx zoom lenses for amateurs due to cost and weight or is a "throw in the bag just in case lens" for more serious photographers.

The lens is "good enough" for what it can do if you understand the limitations.

Quite. And it's really a new thing without parallel. The dismissals of this lens come from people who have either missed its point or who are comparing it with lenses that are three or four times its price and size or who haven't actually used it.

davidwien Contributing Member • Posts: 572
Re: Optical Limits reviewed Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM
8

Karl_Guttag wrote:

The lens is "good enough" for what it can do if you understand the limitations.

Speaking as someone who can only afford photographic gear that has limitations, I find the RF16 excellent value for the money, together with the RF35 f/1.8 and the RF24-240 lenses, which have all been trashed by people here and elsewhere!

David

 davidwien's gear list:davidwien's gear list
Sony RX100 VA Canon EOS RP Canon EOS R6 Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS USM +6 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads