Is it taken with 135mm or 100mm, 1/125 or 1/500, you can't tell! standard with the rf halo glass, so it's natural to at least expect something competitive with this rf35/1.8. that's just the normal compromise. Hell, Leica has the Macro-Elmar-M 90mm F4.0 that only does 1:6.7. This week we sat down (virtually) with senior executives of Fujifilm to learn more about the development of the new GFX 100S, plans for future lenses and what kind of a company they want Fujifilm to be. I'd buy this RF 35 over an EF 35 precisely because it has a control ring which can serve as an aperture ring. Some pretty respectable reviewers have thus far expressed this. The easier I make her job, the quicker the turnaround. It's al about the price. All in all, this lens is indeed a landscape photographer’s dream- it’s essentially flawlessly sharp, both wide-open and stopped-down, and it’s rock-solid and weather-sealed, yet it is decently portable compared to some of the competition. Could the changing lighting and/or the semi-reflective glass in the AF area have affected the camera's AF enough to cause the difference in focus between the f1.8 to f2 images and the rest of the images? I will be keeping and using my EF 35 f2 IS until that version is made in RF. I only shoot landscapes at f1.8 in raw and lift shadows 8 stops while shooting a burst at 15 frames a second using eye auto focus mode hand held at night at iso 64000. anything less and you are not a real photographer. In other words I and many others fully acknowledge that you can produce great optics for the emount, and Sony has proven this so far. So, WTH are you talking about?Fuji's plastic-fantastic XF35F1.4 (50F2.1 eqv.) It looks plenty sharp to me, and let's remember the equivalent ef lens is the 35 f2 (I own one and like it, probably my most used lens), not f1.8, so 1.8 is a bonus. The Canon RF 15-35mm f/2.8L IS USM is the company's professional mirrorless wide angle zoom, making it a versatile lens for a variety of applications. Many reviewers did seem to see it, at least not to the point where they brought it up. No pint in speculating on fictitious lenses that Sony hasn’t even whispered about considering to make. Canon EOS M or Fujifilm XF with their respective 22-23mm lenses are better for folks who seek small and light. I never said the lens has no faults, as I didn’t talk about IQ or sharpness or AF or anything like that. High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. We look at why this one statement holds so much promise for the camera's performance. Or is it that you think that every single aspect of them is rubbish? In this guide we've chosen a selection of cameras that make it easy to shoot compelling lifestyle images, ideal for sharing on social media. A real lens is supposed to be free of such aberrations. a big portion of your post history revolves around false claims like that. When I state that no lens is perfect, and I link you an example I think is closest to your preference this is your response. Upon being presented with a credible review contrary to that statement I owned my mistake. The kit doesn’t appear to be limited-edition in any sense, but it does pair the black D-Lux 7 camera with a hand grip, extra battery and paracord hand strap designed in collaboration with COOPH. Would love to see a review and comparison with the Zeiss Batis 40mm CF. For what it's worth, the IQ widget over at The-Digital-Image.com shows that the Sigma 35 ART is only sharper in the center at F/2. But this is not it. Click through for more information. A real life and varied shoot-out between the two would be great. Tokina has a Tokina AT-X Macro 90mm 1:2.5, Even Olympus that made some special OM glass had a 50mm 1:3.5 macro. @MILCman: why do you come into all of these discussion threads about non-Sony equipment just to criticize? The weather and has most definitely taken a turn toward fall here, and our shooting opportunities have followed suit. i don't see any "single data point", whatever that is, but i'm confident that it won't be relevant to the canon lens in question. Not 4 inches (101 mm) but very close. The new flagship phone features a pair of 50MP cameras that can capture one billion colors. now what would be nice is if you "cook" the DLO corrections into RAW output (optionally of course). They can do DLO in-camera (most current models from Canon can), but you'd want to see what the potential performance affects are. A hood isn’t provided with the lens as standard, and that may well be explained by the likelihood of the average user needing or wanting to use it with such an optic. The focus is in fact almost dead center, on the communication dish on the side of the building in the middle distance. When Prince played, no one noticed and objected to the cheap guitar he would often play on stage. You can use the DPreview tool to compare them. Sony made a video to explain the theoretical max aperture their mount can allow for lens designs but that is simply marketing and misleading considering they didn’t talk about IQ and performance. This is not a case for the panels at the communication disks. As a last point: many Sony body owners use EF lenses for their performance. Bear in mind that on a warm day, looking out over several modern buildings (with HVAC vents on the roof) there’s some thermal and atmospheric haze. Insta360 today launched GO 2, its new tiny action camera. Actually, close-up doesn't mean high magnification at all. So, the lens refocused every time. In general I'd frown a bit at 1:2 being described as macro, but in practical terms, at this FL, true 1:1 would be very close to the front element.. so very usable as a never-gives-up-focus prime... IMO, the considerable low cost ($499 or $449 right now) should be listed as a "pro" for this lens. Tamron 35 ? In other words I and many others fully acknowledge that you can produce great optics for the emount, and Sony has proven this so far. I have come across a lot of your comments in canon forums.". Thoughts R Us - Rule #1 on these forums: if someone trash talks a piece of equipment, they have not used it, most likely have never even seen or held it.That's why they trash it; anyone who uses any of the cameras and lenses of today will know that they all are great, with differing strengths and weaknesses.Only someone with an agenda who has never used the camera or lens will do something so foolish as to just dismissively hurl insults.---. For me this lens is an averagely sharp lens. If not then this is weird. If it failed it's not because of use of plastic because the focus ring of the EF 50mm 1.4 is metal. the 35 and the 14-30 with its awful corners at UWA. no weather sealing and no fluorine coating, but the lack of the latter might be a benefit rather than a drawback, given the questionable track record of canon fluorine coatings: https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2018/08/lens-teardowns-and-comparisons-of-the-canon-70-200mm-f2-8-is-ii-and-iii/, https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2017/02/completing-the-teardown-of-the-sony-fe-70-200-f2-8-gm-oss-part-ii/, @lawny13 - this article isn't about sony, so your usual sony-bashing is o/t. I made a comment on one aspect based on other reviewers stating that it appears like the RF lenses do not have significant focus shifts. the beach sample. Canon's only other choice for fast AF that would be effective for video would be a ring USM motor similar to what they used on the EF 35/2 IS, but this would have been more expensive to do with electrical coupling for the mirrorless AF system and would have likely increased weight if not also size. And I don’t know you man. Then you have Tamron, Zeiss, and Sigma with variations of smooth tangent curves. Another overpriced non L Canon lens! All in all not the thriller I was hoping for, but all things considered- price, size, competition- can hardly complain. Even so, it's best to not give them any opportunity. Compared to the rest of Canon’s RF lineup, it’s positively minuscule. But guess what ... there's $350 EF50F1.4USM, which is equivalent to XF35F0.9. Meanwhile, Jordan is stuck in Pentax K-01 video purgatory. And then when called on that, you claim you are being "attacked". Canon 35 IS USM ? The 60mm is 1:1 and the 30mm is 1.25:1. The Control Ring provides excellent feedback, with increments nice and coarse, and the camera responds without any delay. Say... 100 lenses to have some proper statistics. Anything positive to say about the RF system or lenses? How about the required material to be able to interface to the mount? My guess is that the camera chose to focus on the semi-reflective glass in the f 1.8 and f2 images which threw focus off and the white surface for the rest. Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro STM Lens, Black - 2973C002, https://www.dpreview.com/news/4180995169/nikon-s-president-confirms-a-d5-mirrorless-equivalent-is-in-the-works?comment=8302449722, https://www.dpreview.com/news/4180995169/nikon-s-president-confirms-a-d5-mirrorless-equivalent-is-in-the-works?comment=7653666259, https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/1348083745/sony-interview-600mm-f4-200-600mm-launch?comment=8109650780, https://www.dpreview.com/interviews/1348083745/sony-interview-600mm-f4-200-600mm-launch?comment=9416652932, https://www.dpreview.com/articles/4146085092/hands-on-with-new-sony-gm-600mm-f4-and-g-200-600mm-f5-6-6-3?comment=1365566014, https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/61097161, https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6778992695/photos/3903828/, https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-RF-35mm-f-1.8-IS-STM-Macro-Lens.aspx, Sample gallery update: Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS Macro, DPReview TV: Fujifilm XF 70-300mm F4-5.6 review, Review: Nikon NX Studio answers our plea for a free, all-in-one editing app, When fast-ish is fast enough: in praise of F1.8 lenses, Canon RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM sample gallery, Four RF-mount lenses kick off Canon's new full-frame mirrorless system, Leica APO-Summicron-SL 28mm F2 ASPH sample gallery, Tamron 70–300mm F4.5–6.3 Di III RXD sample gallery, Sony a1 review updated with image quality analysis, Review: DJI's FPV drone combines DJI features with the fun of a racing drone, Field review: Panasonic S 70-300mm F4.5-5.6 Macro OIS. You know what has a lot of vignetting? But carry on now.. Nice continuation with the cheap tactics there. @ MILC man: " they could have all been made for e-mount". Thoughts R Us: why do you feel so compelled to come to threads about sony gear that you have never used, just to make false claims about sony?That's either paid work or weird, and everyone has seen it: @yake - your gear list is point and shoot, and you have no pics of anything. We're still working through our full range of tests on the new Sony a1, but with the lab portion complete, we've discovered that despite its extra resolution, the a1's sensor displays a marked improvement over the first-generation full-frame stacked CMOS seen in the a9 and a9 II. don't get your knickers in a knot for basically nothing. 500px offers Pro members a new web-building tool for creating portfolio sites to show off their work beyond the 500px community. As one of the more affordable lenses in the system, Canon’s equipped the RF 35mm with an STM focusing motor, and you can see it in action in my video review above focusing for stills with the EOS R camera. That's why we supply the Raw files, so you can see how they look using your preferred processing workflow. This thing's bokeh looks pretty creamy. If you have any positive opinions on the canon system and lenses then there just might be common ground. The new Nikon lenses are been described in a number of places as pretty good consumer lenses, but not pro quality. If someone says Sony, people jump up and down and wag their little tails in obedience. The ROI is better on me shooting, than retouching. A f4 zoom lens shouldn’t make much of a difference when mount diameter is concerned for example. Head over to DXO and look up as many lenses as you can, and count how many lenses you come across that have absolutely no vignetting. Making it a true macro with a 1:1 magnification, which I am sure is technically possible, would just compound the issue. On a Canln thread, bash Canon, on a Nikon thread bash Canon. If it has a simar price of 50mm f1.8 it would be a gift, I do not care what it costs two or three times more .... By the way 50mm is a pass for the price, I tried it on an A7II and it's quite good, surprisingly sharp, light, without distortions or large optical defects, for $ 150 is a bargain! how could they "show it", when every canikon milc lens that's been made so far has small diameter rear elements, that can fit into the e-mount lens diameter. Here's why you might be better off with a new F1.8 prime instead. Unlike the latter lens, however, this one isn’t weather sealed. One of the first reasons to buy a lens or to select a lens for use is because the focal length or focal length range meets the needs of the subject being photographed.Lenses containing an Ultra-wide-angle zoom focal length range are extremely popular and for a good reason: there are a huge number of subjects best captured with this range. Or is it that you think that every single aspect of them is rubbish? Leica M-Mount lenses have a lot of vignetting. Therefore I choose FF, because there's simply more useless garbage in crop images that take a lot of HDD space to store. I see it as a toss up, with the Canon having slightly more aberrations off centre (look at the specular highlights on the boats on the far right border - one of these lenses as we already know is a no go for astro while the other is pretty good), and this copy of the Nikon being slightly weaker in one specific part of the frame (around the low buildings with green roofs and restaurants opposite of the MOHAI) - I wouldn't be surprised given each company's track record that the Canon has less sample variation. Donna Ferrato uncovers the complicated truths about what it means to be a woman in her new book Holy. The Canon RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM is a sharp, wide-angle macro lens for the RF mirrorless system. Artists create while too many of us, myself included, worry about minute technical details that don't matter at all. One data point that doesn’t speak to the over all real use of the lens. Length / Diameter: approx. What really bugs me about the Nikon 35 Z is the sometimes unforgivably nervous bokeh at least at distance, whereas the Canon, imperfections as it may have with its correctable slight barrel distortion, softness wide open and chromatic aberrations (which the Nikon apparently also shares) shows some super lovely bokeh which really also shines at its close focusing and moderate macro ability. it made no claims about providing Otus-like quality for $500 bucks. Also looking forward to an RF version of the 40mm f2.8 pancake. In Myles Matsuno's 'We're the People' video series, Matsuno highlights different people. Therefore I shoot, and pay a pro to retouch my custom SOOC JPEGs. Just look around at society, we are returning to our animal roots. massive, ugly loCAs ("purple and green Bokeh fringing") are an entirely different thing and inacceptable on a moderately fast prime lens at a very easy focal length of 35mm in 2019 - especially when maker wants to charge more than € 500 for it. Like I said. That's great, but it pays to understand the lens' limitations so you can work around them where possible. Even at f1.8 it is actually capturing a lot of detail. I thought that would have been clear through multiple examples. Therefore I choose FF, because there's simply more useless garbage in crop images that take a lot of HDD space to store. The new ECM-W2BT is a wireless microphone transmitter and receiver that makes it possible to record audio directly in-camera without the need for external cables. 35 - 85 is all I shoot with last 25 years. A lens baby. is a moderately sized, moderately far-reaching and optically-stabilized telephoto zoom lens for full-frame or APS-C L-mount cameras. Close-up can be a portrait or anything shot at relatively close proximity. No pint in speculating on fictitious lenses that Sony hasn’t even whispered about considering to make. @Arun H : funnily enough, the same Canon lens would perform BETTER on the E-mount than on the RF mount, why? Since Sony and other third party manufacturers arent allowed to make a 35mm f/2. And priced at around $500, this lens provides good sharpness and focal length versatility for the buck. But it never happened. In contrast, I think the L lenses look really cheap because of that red ring. A lot of elderly people on this forum are switching away from big and heavy cameras to m4/3.I prefer heavier cameras and lenses for stabilization. And the RF in addition gives you 1:2 macro.It's so funny to read the posts from people who have no experience or knowledge. I think much of the criticism Canon has received over the past 5-6 years is not because their cameras are bad, it's just that they are badly priced when compared to the competition. I still have An old macro from the 1970’s for my old Canon F1. I have come across a lot of your comments in canon forums.". Well they are totally different beasts, starting from price, Zeiss should be sharper, Batis lenses are sharp (I owned and used the 25 f2 FE and 18 f2.8 FE), did't like to much the "bokeh" of Batis, they have an optical formula which is not the best for bokeh, Batis lacks macro capabilities.