The Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM is in stock, deliveries to customers start June 27

#62
nhandumuc said:
Bryan's review is up!

www.the-digital-picture.com

Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens Review

Is the Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens right for you? Learn all you need to know in The-Digital-Picture.com's review!
www.the-digital-picture.com www.the-digital-picture.com
Click to expand...
Kinda, it starts with:
The Canon RF 35mm F1.4 L VCM Lens has been announced, and this review will be completed at a high priority upon its arrival.B&H expects to ship this lens on June 27th. In the meantime, here is information about and expectations for this lens.
Click to expand...
and it proceeds with generic information.
 
Upvote 0
#63
Viggo said:
One might say “the competition” when comparing brands, but not really though. People, well most, don’t change systems because of one lens. And the other RF-primes, although expensive, is mostly considered absolutely worth it, so what Sony or Nikon might charge for their similar lenses isn’t all that relevant.
Click to expand...
It might or might not be relevant in terms of your choice of systems, but as a matter of product positioning, pricing, and design, the big three closely matches each other for their professional primes. We have the following prices on B&H today:

Focal LengthCanon RF LNikon Z S-lineSony GM
35mm35 f/1.4L - $1500None (non S-line for $600)35 f/1.4 GM - $1400
50mm50 f/1.2L - $210050 f/1.2 S - $190050 f/1.2 GM - $2000
85mm85 f/1.2L - $260085 f/1.2 S - $280085 f/1.4 GM - $1800
135mm135 f/1.8L - $1900135 f/1.8 Plena - $2500135 f/1.8 GM - $2100

The only standouts that are differ by more than $100-$200 from their competitors are the 85 f/1.4 GM (which is slower than the other two) and the Nikon 135mm f/1.8 Plena (which I consider to have specific design characteristics not found on the other two, somewhat like the 85L DS). Canon is unlikely to design and price a 35mm f/1.4L lens at $2000+ for mirrorless.

They would obviously price a hypothetical f/1.2L higher (maybe ~$2300-$2500 looking at the gap between the Canikon 85 f/1.2s and the Sony f/1.4), but once they decided to build a f/1.4, the pricing etc are basically set.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#66
Viggo said:
Take a look at Distortion comparing it to the EF 35 L II.
Click to expand...
Compare it to the RF 14-35mm @ 14mm. Then compare the latter to the EF 11-24/4 @ 14mm. Then consider that in that second comparison, the two post-processed images have essentially identical image quality in the extreme corners.

Seriously, people need to get over their hangup about digital correction of distortion. It yields similar quality as optical (glass in the lens) correction of the older lenses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#67
neuroanatomist said:
Compare it to the RF 14-35mm @ 14mm. Then compare the latter to the EF 11-24/4 @ 14mm. Then consider that in that second comparison, the two post-processed images have essentially identical image quality in the extreme corners.

Seriously, people need to get over their hangup about digital correction of distortion. It yields similar quality as optical (glass in the lens) correction of the older lenses.
Click to expand...
That last sentence is it through. They’re no better are they? If they did the optical correction the corner performance would be absolutely stellar. I normally never ever correct distortion in Lr because the lens and image loses its pop. If it’s forced correction, can I adjust it back? And if so, the distortion is way too much. No thanks, I prefer stellar optics in stead of digital fakery….
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#68
Viggo said:
That last sentence is it through. They’re no better are they? If they did the optical correction the corner performance would be absolutely stellar.
Click to expand...
The RF version is smaller, much lighter (the EF MkII is 40% heavier), and significantly cheaper.

If they did the optical correction, it would likely match EF version optically as well as in size, weight and cost.

There’s no free lunch. The bottom line is that digital correction is just as effective as optical correction (neither inherently worse nor inherently better), but needs less glass.

Viggo said:
I normally never ever correct distortion in Lr because the lens and image loses its pop. If it’s forced correction, can I adjust it back? And if so, the distortion is way too much. No thanks, I prefer stellar optics in stead of digital fakery….
Click to expand...
That’s your choice. Fortunately, no one is forcing you to buy the lens.

Having carried the massive 11-24/4 on many travels, I’m thrilled with the 10-20/4.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
#69
JTP said:
Here's a few clips - I still gotta edit, but will post more later
Click to expand...
Well, thanks for trying. Sadly, the horrible effects of the massive distortion correction that Canon has forced on poor, hapless users of this sad excuse for an L-series prime lens render the images unusable. Clearly. I mean, clearly.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#71
Damn those photos are awesome. And I agree with everything you said. That's why Jared Polin is one of the few YouTubers I watch for reviews. Takes actual photos you'd take with a lens or camera. Not some chart, or wall, or some purposefully awful shot into the sun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
#72
SHAMwow said:
Damn those photos are awesome. And I agree with everything you said. That's why Jared Polin is one of the few YouTubers I watch for reviews. Takes actual photos you'd take with a lens or camera. Not some chart, or wall, or some purposefully awful shot into the sun.
Click to expand...
Is there a link to JP's review of the RF 35mm f/1.4?
 
Upvote 0
#73
Viggo said:
That last sentence is it through. They’re no better are they? If they did the optical correction the corner performance would be absolutely stellar. I normally never ever correct distortion in Lr because the lens and image loses its pop. If it’s forced correction, can I adjust it back? And if so, the distortion is way too much. No thanks, I prefer stellar optics in stead of digital fakery….
Click to expand...
I agree with you, Viggo. Craftsmanship means something to some lens buyers. If digital correction is good enough, then a smartphone camera is good enough too, and it saves a lot of weight!

My concern is that digital corrections will lead to further cutting of corners regarding engineering, materials, and, eventually IQ.

One reason I got rid of the EF 35mm f/1.4, the first version, was purple fringing. It was horrible on my copy. Sigma was better, but, in my opinion too harsh, contrasty.

Fell in love with the EF 35mm f/1.4 II and thought the RF would equal it optically, thus giving peace of mind about needing to someday replace the EF. Still hoping, but vainly, I suspect, for a 35mm to equal the optical quality of the RF 50mm f/1.2 and 85mm f/1.2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
#74
I'm not an MTF charts guy, but I also am hesitant to embrace lenses that are starting to lean more and more into digital correction and AI (more closed-source, proprietary software; waiting for R5 camera profiles was a debacle that soured me). For premium prices, I expect premium glass/optics whether I use it for weddings, traveling, or charts and diagrams on my wall. I have been holding out for a 35mm for several years now. Admittedly, the wedding photos above are some of the best examples that I have seen yet, but they are but one use case. I have no problem if this camera scratches the itch of other Canon shooters. I am not sure though I understand the need to disparage reviewers who have a different (but I think fair) take on this lens. And I neither want to be an apologist for Canon or give in to a sunk cost mentality.

That's not to say I have completely written this lens off. I have not personally tried it yet. I'm sure at some point I will, and I too may decide that it is satisfactory for me. But as it stands, (particularly the gearing of it toward video features that will not benefit me, and the deepening reliance on digital correction and AI), I will hold my fire to see if that 1.2 photography-centric 35mm is on the horizon.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Canon Rumors
Stock Notice: Canon RF 24 f/1.4L VCM and RF 50 f/1.4L VCM
Replies
22
Views
1K
KirkD
K
Canon Rumors
Stock Notice: Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L IS VCM
Replies
10
Views
684
koenkooi
koenkooi
Richard CR
Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM Review
Replies
56
Views
6K
YuengLinger
YuengLinger
Canon Rumors
The RF 35 f/1.4L VCM aperture ring will work for photo work on Canon’s next generation cameras
Replies
44
Views
4K
padam
P
Canon Rumors
Shortage of Canon RF f/35mm F1.4L VCM and EL-1
Replies
9
Views
1K
YuengLinger
YuengLinger
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Media
Menu