Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners: Canon EOS R Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

Started 2 weeks ago | Discussions

Basil Fawlty • Regular Member • Posts: 237

Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

2 weeks ago

For anyone who actually has the RF 14-35:

1. Does Lightroom now have a correction profile for this lens? I've heard it has quite a bit of barrel distortion and vignetting at the wide end?

2. If LR has a profile now, how well does it work?

3. If you had it to do over, would you still get this lens, or would you get something else (like maybe RF 15-53 or EF 16-35, etc)? Why or why not?

Thanks in advance.

Basil Fawlty's gear list:Basil Fawlty's gear list

Panasonic LX100 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +8 more

Canon RF 14-35mm F4L IS USM

Reply to thread Reply with quote Complain

BobKnDP • Senior Member • Posts: 3,140

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

I don't use LR.

The 14-35 has lots of barrel distortion at the wide end. It also vignets fairly badly in the corners. I imagine that a lot of the vignetting disappears after the barrel distortion is removed by remapping, and the frame is cropped back to a 3:2 aspect ratio.

I assume that LR has profiles for the lens, like Photoshop.

The 14-35 weighs 544g. The 15-35, 840g.

I haven't used the 14-35 a great deal yet, but I think I can live without the extra stop.

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

LennyLevino • Forum Member • Posts: 59

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Also interested. I have the 15-30mm, which has a profile for it in LR. However, even after applying the profile the image will still be distorted, at least at shots under 20mm.

LennyLevino's gear list:LennyLevino's gear list

Canon EOS R6 Canon EF 135mm F2L USM Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM Sigma 40mm F1.4 DG HSM Canon RF 85mm F2 Macro IS STM +3 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

R2D2 • Forum Pro • Posts: 26,531

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Basil Fawlty wrote:

For anyone who actually has the RF 14-35:

1. Does Lightroom now have a correction profile for this lens? I've heard it has quite a bit of barrel distortion and vignetting at the wide end?

2. If LR has a profile now, how well does it work?

3. If you had it to do over, would you still get this lens, or would you get something else (like maybe RF 15-53 or EF 16-35, etc)? Why or why not?

Thanks in advance.

Data point:

I bought the 15-35 f/2.8 because I needed the extra stop for shooting action. Really nice rendering. Zero complaints.

-- hide signature --

Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries

R2D2's gear list:R2D2's gear list

Canon EOS M6 Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Canon EOS R7 +1 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

KariP • Veteran Member • Posts: 6,450

I really own this lens…

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Basil Fawlty wrote:

For anyone who actually has the RF 14-35:

1. Does Lightroom now have a correction profile for this lens? I've heard it has quite a bit of barrel distortion and vignetting at the wide end?

2. If LR has a profile now, how well does it work?

3. If you had it to do over, would you still get this lens, or would you get something else (like maybe RF 15-53 or EF 16-35, etc)? Why or why not?

Thanks in advance.

I use CaptureOne and it has corrections - results are just very good. There is also DPP to use. LR very likely has corrections… no sure.

14-16mm really shows those distortions - in real life it is not a problem. A very usable lens! Images look good and very sharp

The size of the lens is perfect and i carry it with RF24-105L and 70-200f4 - weight of my bag stays portable.

-- hide signature --

Kari
I started SLR film photography in 1968. Now two systems: Fujifilm X-H1 + X-E3 and Canon FF gear 5dMkIV + R6

KariP's gear list:KariP's gear list

Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Fujifilm X-E3 Fujifilm X-H1 Canon EOS R6 Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM +13 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Phylloxera • Regular Member • Posts: 256

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Replaced my excellent EF 16-35/4.0 by an RF 14-35/4.0 (considering size and weight with adapter).

RF 14-35 shows more vignetting in the corners at 14/16mm but corners seem a lilttle bit sharper. At 35 mm the corners are softer.

(I'm using DxO PL6)

Phylloxera's gear list:Phylloxera's gear list

PTGui Pro

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

koenkooi • Contributing Member • Posts: 920

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Basil Fawlty wrote:

For anyone who actually has the RF 14-35:

1. Does Lightroom now have a correction profile for this lens? I've heard it has quite a bit of barrel distortion and vignetting at the wide end?

You can check all supported lenses here: https://helpx.adobe.com/camera-raw/kb/supported-lenses.html

It will list the ACR and LR version where the profile was introduced. For the 14-35mm: yes, there is a profile.

2. If LR has a profile now, how well does it work?

Users on the interwebs report that LR will give you a slightly wider result than DPP4/SOOC-jpeg and that the correction in DxO PL will give you an even wider result. DxO PL also allows an uncropped result for a even wider, but funnily shaped result.

koenkooi's gear list:koenkooi's gear list

Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS M Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM +20 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

CameraCarl • Veteran Member • Posts: 9,193

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

1. Yes.

2. Fine.

3. I'm happy with it and have no regrets having sold my EF 16-35.

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Howard • Contributing Member • Posts: 724

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Hi,

I do not use Lightroom and also do not use profiles that often from any software brand. I replaced the EF-16-35/4 with the 14-35 and my clients are very happy with the results. I almost dropped the 16-35 last year because I found the lens to be very bulky and difficult to handle with the adapter when changing lenses on the fly without having time to put all the gear down and slowly change lenses. The distortion that does occur is easily corrected and I would miss some of the images if I did not have the extra 2 (or more since I really think it is wider than 14 before correction).

Howard

Howard's gear list:Howard's gear list

Canon EOS 6D Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x II Canon EF 70-200mm F4L IS USM +4 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

dmanthree • Forum Pro • Posts: 10,302

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Yes, there is a profile.

It works perfectly.

I'd buy this lens again in a heartbeat. It's excellent.

-- hide signature --

---on the cutting edge---

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

BBR5 • Regular Member • Posts: 212

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to dmanthree • 2 weeks ago

Lightroom's correction is good. It's compared with Canon DPP and DXO results below.

Canon DPP

Lightroom Classic

DXO Deep Prime

If the speed of the 15-35 f/2.8 would be useful for you and you don't mind the extra weight and size, it's probably worth the difference in price.
I prefer smaller and lighter lenses in most cases, so if doing it over again I'd probably consider the 15-30 as well. The drawback of the 15-30 for me is that I occasionally find the focus of the slower lenses somewhat poor in certain low light conditions.

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

José B • Forum Pro • Posts: 20,482

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

I don't own the RF 14-35 as my EF 16-35/4 L IS is excellent with the R6MKII. So I'll just keep the EF.

José B's gear list:José B's gear list

Canon EOS R6 Mark II Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5DS Sony a6500 +16 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Wing2 • Contributing Member • Posts: 512

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Basil Fawlty wrote:

For anyone who actually has the RF 14-35:

1. Does Lightroom now have a correction profile for this lens? I've heard it has quite a bit of barrel distortion and vignetting at the wide end?

Lightroom does have a correction profile for this lens.

2. If LR has a profile now, how well does it work?

Distortion and vignetting is not serious after correction. The RAW file uncorrected does have serious distortion and vignetting. However, if you manually correct the RAW file, you can get as wide as 13mm

3. If you had it to do over, would you still get this lens, or would you get something else (like maybe RF 15-53 or EF 16-35, etc)? Why or why not?

1mm is a lot wider, plus it has better macro and IS and lighter

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Bowenphoto • Junior Member • Posts: 30

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Hi,

I have this lens and use LR as well... I would say the profile seems to work well and I do not even notice it is happening! I would say there is certainly a little more distortion you can see in the 14-16mm range, but realistically there is going to be tons of focal length distortion there anyways so you just have to use it well, and it's always a fun challenge to shoot that wide for that reason!

I came from using the Nikon Z 14-24 2.8, which was a great lens and probably the best of it's kind, but I still love using the Canon Rf 14-35 and appreciate its smaller size, wider range and (to my taste) better build quality. I would buy it again!

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

OP Basil Fawlty • Regular Member • Posts: 237

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Wing2 • 2 weeks ago

Wing2 wrote:

Distortion and vignetting is not serious after correction. The RAW file uncorrected does have serious distortion and vignetting. However, if you manually correct the RAW file, you can get as wide as 13mm

Thanks for your reply! Just curious, from your experience, was you zoom out, at what focal length would you say the uncorrected distortion and vignetting cease to be a problem? In other words, how bad is it at 15mm? 16mm?

Thanks

Basil Fawlty's gear list:Basil Fawlty's gear list

Panasonic LX100 Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 135mm F2L USM +8 more

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Bowenphoto • Junior Member • Posts: 30

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

I would say to me, 17mm seems very safe, 16mm is probably right on the border, 14 and 15 you will start to see more of the distortion. But again, I think it's more than useable, but I do not take a lot of photos of buildings or straight lines. I use it more for waterways, landscapes etc.

All of these are shot at 14mm I believe... hope it helps!

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

CameraCarl • Veteran Member • Posts: 9,193

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to BBR5 • 2 weeks ago

Thank you. This is a very useful comparison.

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Wing2 • Contributing Member • Posts: 512

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Basil Fawlty wrote:

Wing2 wrote:

Distortion and vignetting is not serious after correction. The RAW file uncorrected does have serious distortion and vignetting. However, if you manually correct the RAW file, you can get as wide as 13mm

Thanks for your reply! Just curious, from your experience, was you zoom out, at what focal length would you say the uncorrected distortion and vignetting cease to be a problem? In other words, how bad is it at 15mm? 16mm?

Thanks

Like a lot of RF lens including the 16mm 2.8, 15-35 2.8,24-240, 14-35 4.0 is designed to be working with distortion correction software/firmware to start with.

The theory behind this is distortion and vignetting are now easily correctable by software or firmware but the extreme wide angle and wider zoom range achieved using this method is close to impossible (may be possible at very high cost) to be done using pure optical solution.

I can see distortion and vignetting on uncorrected RAW files from 20mm or below. If you refuse to use any software to do post-processing, you may be better off shooting jpeg (Canon camera's firmware would correct it for you)

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

BobKnDP • Senior Member • Posts: 3,140

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Wing2 • 2 weeks ago

Wing2 wrote:

(snip)

I can see distortion and vignetting on uncorrected RAW files from 20mm or below. If you refuse to use any software to do post-processing, you may be better off shooting jpeg (Canon camera's firmware would correct it for you)

Is there anyone who refuses to do post processing?

I hope that there is no one who regards distortion and vignetting correction as inappropriate in post processing, but OK if the processing is done in-camera. That makes zero sense, at least to me.

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

drsnoopy • Senior Member • Posts: 1,216

Re: Question(s) for RF 14-35 owners

In reply to Basil Fawlty • 2 weeks ago

Basil Fawlty wrote:

Wing2 wrote:

Distortion and vignetting is not serious after correction. The RAW file uncorrected does have serious distortion and vignetting. However, if you manually correct the RAW file, you can get as wide as 13mm

Thanks for your reply! Just curious, from your experience, was you zoom out, at what focal length would you say the uncorrected distortion and vignetting cease to be a problem? In other words, how bad is it at 15mm? 16mm?

Thanks

It’s irrelevant. Just use the profile (DPP, DXO, Adobe) and the distortion is corrected. It is designed to be used with a profile. If that troubles you, buy something else. Or use jpeg.

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

Reply Reply with quote Reply to thread Complain

Keyboard shortcuts:

FForum MMy threads

Latest sample galleries

Fujifilm X-H2 review samples

Nikon Z 28mm F2.8 Sample Gallery

Nikon Z 26mm F2.8 Sample Gallery

OM System M. Zuiko 90mm F3.5 Macro Sample Gallery

See more galleries »

Latest in-depth reviews

Fujifilm's X-H2 is a high-resolution stills and video camera, that sits alongside the high-speed X-H2S at the pinnacle of the company's range of X-mount APS-C mirrorless cameras. We dug into what it does and what it means.

Review: Holy Stone's HS710 and HS175D are drones with a ton of limitations

Holy Stone produces dozens of low-cost drone models aimed at consumers. We look at the HS710 and HS175D to see if they stack up to other sub-250g offerings. Are these secretly great or more like toys?

DPReview TV: Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM Review

It's small, light, cheap and extremely wide but is it any good?

After weeks with a production Fujifilm X-T5, Chris and Jordan have some final thoughts.

The EOS R6 II arrives in one of the most competitive parts of the market, facing off against some very capable competition. We think it rises to the challenge.

Latest buying guides

Above $2500 cameras tend to become increasingly specialized, making it difficult to select a 'best' option. We case our eye over the options costing more than $2500 but less than $4000, to find the best all-rounder.

There are a lot of photo/video cameras that have found a role as B-cameras on professional film productions or even A-cameras for amateur and independent productions. We've combed through the options and selected our two favorite cameras in this class.

What’s the best camera for around $2000? These capable cameras should be solid and well-built, have both the speed and focus to capture fast action and offer professional-level image quality. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing around $2000 and recommended the best.

The best cameras for family and friends photos in 2022

Family moments are precious and sometimes you want to capture that time spent with loved ones or friends in better quality than your phone can manage. We've selected a group of cameras that are easy to keep with you, and that can adapt to take photos wherever and whenever something memorable happens.

Best affordable cameras for sports and action in 2022

What's the best camera for shooting sports and action? Fast continuous shooting, reliable autofocus and great battery life are just three of the most important factors. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting sports and action, and recommended the best.

Check out more buying guides »


Babcock State Park by GoBucks from Creeks Unlimited	Mud Slinger by cjf2 from Mud, mud, glorious mud	The Wheel of Time by etherist from The Story of an Old Wheel	Predator by Som Prasad from A Big Year 2023

19	* Your R System Images - The Finale *
16	*Where to go now thread Canon R*
10	I hadn't even considered the R7 for macro, but ???
6	R6MKII + EF 50/1.2 L, 300/2.8 L IS
5	Does anyone's R7 do this?
5	How to select the Canon R6 Mark II lens?
5	Current sales on RF lens, Canon Rebate annoucing price drop?
5	Possible to save craw without Jpg on R7?
3	Does the R8...
2	R7 Raw files not opening in PS for iPad.
2	How is Canon going to be able to make 400 megapixels out of a 48mp sensor?
2	R8 or used R6?
1	Pre-Capture (R7) vs. Pro-Capture (Olympus/OM)

7	Re: RF 100-500 - trouble with autofocus and birds
6	Hack to Make RF Rear Lens Cap work by feel (like an an EF cap)
4	Great Instruction On the Canon AF System
4	My first few weeks with the R7

	Digital bodies
	Shallow DOF