My initial Canon RF 35mm f1.4L VCM review vs EF 35mm f1.4L II vs RF 35mm f1.8 STM Order the RF 35mm f1.4L from B&H: bhpho.to/3KxCnf6 or WEX UK: tidd.ly/4c73067 Sell your used gear to MPB at: bit.ly/3ULU9yL Buy used gear from MPB at: prf.hn/l/YLqwRAP Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop Gordon’s retro gear channel: ua-cam.com/users/dinobytes Equipment used for producing my videos DJI Osmo Pocket 3: click.dji.com/AIOhqT-LWUFDq-bGk8hD4Q?pm=link Panasonic Lumix S5 II: amzn.to/3Hf5IcI Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5 Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV 00:00 - RF 35mm f1.4L and rivals 01:10 - RF 35mm f1.4L size and weight 02:57 - RF 35mm f1.4L controls 05:02 - RF 35mm f1.4L focusing 05:54 - RF 35mm f1.4L portrait quality 06:15 - RF 35mm f1.4L sharpness vs EF 35mm f1.4L II 09:02 - RF 35mm f1.4L focus breathing 10:02 - RF 35mm f1.4L samples and verdict so far 10:34 - Speedlite EL-10 teaser Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
@@cameralabs It would seem that the lens is relying very heavily on digital correction.. the Raw files with corrections turned off have massive distortion and vignetting.. the MDF charts are also showing the EF version to have better resolution.. a sort of mixed bag it would seem.
@@justinholding02 all new mirrorless lenses employ profiles as part of the design. These generally correct geometric distortion and vignetting. Depending on the design, some start off with more aberrations to correct than others, but be in no doubt, the profiles are part of the complete design. Turning them off is akin to removing a physical lens element. The lens is not designed to be used without them. Now there are some cons to using digital corrections, (such as potentially reduced resolution due to geometric wrangling and increased noise in the corners), but buyers and reviewers should be testing and evaluating performance as the unit was intended to be used: with the profile enabled. The only real issue is in an early review when the profile may not work or be available on all RAW converters. I see so much misinformation being spread on early reviews.
@@cameralabsall of this is very true. But Canon have introduced some really stunning lenses since the launch of the R series, an example is the 85mm 1.2 which is optically almost perfect.. so i was a bit disappointed when i saw the behaviour of this new 35mm.. and i wish i had kept my EF version.
Yep it’s what I set it to. But from engineering perspective it would have been just as easy to have de-click function and just this ring. It’s an odd design decision
@@benjaminmesa1089 Das ist mir vollkommen egal! Wenn ich ein Objektiv kaufe möchte ich es vollständig nutzen können! Wenn eine R5 Mark I den Blendenring für Fotos nicht nutzen kann ist das für mich ein Ausschlusskriterium! Sollte Canon doch noch eine Firmware veröffentlichen die diese Einschränkung aufhebt werde ich meine Entscheidung überdenken!
@@tejasvaniya2664or we choose to spend our money on other things rather than p%sing it up the wall each week with nothing show for it other than hangover the next day.
Yeah. Glad Canon is finally going with 1.4 primes. 35, 50 (releasing this month) and hopefully 85 soon. I'd happily trade one stop from 1.2 for something light, compact and affordable.
Thats because this lens is terrible for photography…this is a videographer lens. Why does the aperture ring not engage for stills photography…this lens is blasphemy
@@hikertrashfilms Terrible??? or that one feature is not as good for photography? If you leave it on automatic and control with the camera body it functions just like the vast majority of camera lenses.
@@Gooserobber dude I shoot nothing but stacks and primes…to put an aperture ring on a 35mm lens and disable that function for stills is crazy. They have to fix this with a firmware update. I use the ring all the time for stills on my A1/20G/50GM/135GM Holy Trinity. Is it April 1st? Canon cannot be serious….
@@hikertrashfilms You are making the biggest mountain out of the smallest molehill. Its an EXTRA FEATURE that basically 90% of other lenses dont have. disabling it for photography just makes it on level ground with all other lenses without aperture rings. it in no way makes the lens WORSE than if it didnt have it. you said it makes the lens TERRIBLE for photography, when it was proven in this video that it is sharper, lighter, and smaller, than the venerable EF 35mm 1.4 L..... this lens is going to be FANTASTIC, especially for the price. You are straight up lying or delusional to think that an aperture ring that wont work well for photography as an added benefit somehow takes AWAY from this lens.
Wow, no review of new Sigma (I was a little worried), but exclusive review, or at least first looks, of new Canon! Seriously, apparently no one else (at least among big names) made one yet? Congrats Gordon! And of course you did a stellar job, thank you for your work
Thanks! Yes, Sigma forgot me for the 28-45 pre-brief, but that's fine, I don't need to make a rant video about it! I do have it now though and it'll give me longer to do a more considered review of it.
@@cameralabs same here! I actually expected the trio to be out already which would be the 50mm, 35mm, 24mm. I am excited though for what is to come, I just switched from sony back to canon. I work mainly in video so I was nervous but I believe Canon will once again go back up on the creator side.
Nice review! I’d love to see a detailed shootout vs. the latest Tamron and Sigma 35mm f/1.4 primes for EF mount. Especially the sharpness, bokeh quality, and bokeh ball shape. The 3rd party primes look to be half the price of the RF, and both tested very well for many reviewers awhile back.
I've done extensive hand-holding tests with the RFs on the R5 and really see no reason to have the in-lens IS. I'm glad they left it out and gave us something a bit smaller, cheaper, more reliable, lighter, and hugely less astigmatic. On the other hand I didn't need the aperture ring; I use the control ring for aperture and wouldn't switch my muscle memory just for this one lens.
@@michelecintramika8482 > If this remains in the versions for sales, Sony will still be a better option. Photography is about taking photographs, not figuring out which brand's lens slightly out-performs the other. If you told me there's a case where the Canon literally isn't sharp enough to do the job, I'd call you a liar to your face. And I'd say the same if you were whining about Sony or Nikon. They're all good enough that the weak link is the photographer. It's just a question of getting the photographer to spend less time comparing specs and more time actually shooting.
@lqr824 I feel sleepy reading your outdated rhetoric. We are here debating about the lens and not about the skill of the photographer. And we're talking about strengths and weaknesses of a lens launch. Which is totally normal. And this RF 35mm f1.4, in a test that I saw and downloaded the file, the eyes of the photographed were very soft. Looking like the same problem as the EF 85mm f1.4. It has nothing to do with Sharpness. It has to do with optical defects. The same defect presented in EF 85mm f1.4. It is an OPTIC DEFECT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SHARPNESS.
@@michelecintramika8482 no, it is debating specs between manufacturers that is outdated. It's a phase some go through and some never grow out of. Some turn into actual photographers, though, and never go back to this spec comparison again.
I'd be so interested to see how this compares to the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM as I am still deciding which system. From what I know, the GM has a lot of focus breathing but the Canon has sizeable barrel distortion. I know the Sony lens is very sharp to the corners and I think it's cheaper, I guess we'll have to wait for more analysis.
Thank you Gordon, always my go-to lens reviewer person, so practical, honest and to the point! Just preordered! I am pleasantly surprised by the price, nice job Canon!
@@98JamesNixon Yeah! I’d rather it be slightly heavier and bigger and have IS. If it was a heavy f1.2 version, i could understand why they’d leave it out 🤷♂️
I'd like to see that because I had the 35 Art, but really he compared it to the 35 L II which if I remember already slightly outperforms the Art lens so you can infer from that
Nice lens just wander how is bokeh looks on full length portraits hopefully soft and creamy 😋 Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art is my most used lens on the wedding day probably 65% of pictures captured on the day. Remaining images are shot on 85mm f1.4 IS L and 16-35mm so 35mm is very important lens for me.
5:43 the image resulting from this lens is quite interesting .... nice bokeh but natural transitions and clear and sharp focused face but again looking natural
Nice! A friend of mine used to own the ef 35mm 1.4 mark I and on one occasion I got to play with it and found it such a lovely lens and such a practical focal length, I almost didn't want to give it back!
67mm diameter - more vignetting. As Canon RF lenses suffering from heavy corners shading: RF 15-35 has -5! stops of shading; RF 50/1,2 has -4 stops of shading; RF 70-200/2,8 (at 200mm) has -3 stops of shading. What RF 35/1,4L has in the mid frame and in the corners? Interesting to compare with Tamron SP 35/1,4 (at this moment the best 35mm on the market).
Selten so gelacht! Nur als Beispiel das RF 50 1.2 L USM hat maximal 1 Blendenstufe bei der Vignettierung! Alle weiteren Behauptungen sind ein Schmarrn! Diagnose Hirnfurz!
wonder if it is as nice with colors and sharpness as the old ef 50 1.2? That was incredible. If this is as good as that, great. Guess with R5 dont need image stabilization, using it for street.
@@awtransform are the people complaining about distortion using the lens profiles? If they're shooting RAW and converting without a profile, there'll be distortion on most lenses made in the last few years, as they rely on software correction.
@@cameralabs Daran werden sich viele erst gewöhnen müssen! Es zählt das Endergebnis! Die Kritiker haben meiner Überzeugung nach gar kein Interesse am Erwerb dieser Hybriden oder es fehlen einfach die finanziellen Mittel! Es muss ermüdend für sie sein immer die gleichen Dinge zu lesen und dann auch noch eine Antwort zu geben! Ich bewundere Ihre Ruhe und Sachlichkeit!
@@ER-gn8io thanks for your calm comment! I agree, the end result is most important and if it meets a certain standard, then that's fine. Obviously there could be issues and I'll report them when I fully test it, but the end result is what interests me.
There might be some problem with your copy of the EF 35L2, I remember it to be much better than in the video in the corners. Anyway, this new RF35L does look good, but it does seem like again relying on in body correction like many other RF lenses
The funny thing is, if I showed you my EF results alone, you'd think it was amazing. It's only when you put something next to a different product that you see the differences
Gordon, I have this lens now. It is sharp but the amount of chromatic abbreviation is high for a lens at this price point. Even with the lens profile enabled in Adobe Camera Raw I have to add +4 to get rid of the last of the purple fringe. Yes, it’s weather sealed and, yes, it is well made but I’m having some buyer’s remorse over the purchase. 😱
@@cameralabs I preordered it when it was announced and it started shipping last week. I’ve only shot with it a couple of times. The sharpness is good and, at least with my copy, is sharper into the corners than the older EF version. If I open a raw file in Canon’s DPP app, they manage to remove the CA. The Adobe lens profile doesn’t quite get rid of it. If you open it up in something like Lumiar Neo it’s pretty bad. That’s not the kind of “lens character” I like. 🤦🏻♂️
Mine arrived today. Upon unboxing I instantly noticed a kind of loose part/glas component inside the lens which slightly moves when you turn the lens upside/down. As soon as the lens is connected to the cam and powered everything inside is fix. May I ask if your lens also has this "issue"? I wonder because i never had this issue on any Canon L Lens with fixed focal length, especially not on the predecessor (EF 35mm L)
The new lens performs quite well, easily surpassing the previous EF L & STM versions. Would prefer being able to use the aperture ring for photos and it's puzzling that feature was left out. Thank you for the great review Gordon.
Do you think there's room for a hybrid-focused RF F/1.4 series from Canon, where there may be an 18mm, 24mm, 35mm, 55mm, 85mm, and 100mm? Maybe they can be identical size, similar weight, focusing system, and all have the stepless aperture ring. It could be in the vein of Samyang's V-AF series or Panasonic's F/1.8 series?
Unrelated, but I wanted to share something with you. I was looking for a higher-end "vintage" camera with a decent resolution and a CCD sensor, when I found the Sony A100. I went on eBay and found a near mint-condition Sony A100 with a battery, charger, and card for under $100! I saw the video you made with the A100, and it seems like an amazing camera. The CCD sensor should give a pleasing look to the photos. I have a nice video camera, but I'm excited to get a photo camera, especially an older one for the character.
@@cameralabs Thanks for the suggestions! One small correction on my end; it doesn't look like the camera actually includes the CF card, but it does include the battery and charger. I will look into those cameras and your reviews. Thanks again!
I have both Sony and canon bodies and I really like aperture rings on Sony. It is just stupid not to make it clickable after adding it in… just totally weird
this lens really looks premium, but ... in my case I have the canon R6II with the 24-105mm F4 kit lens, with IS, and I use it exclusively for video. I am looking for a lens with maybe a higher aperture, good image quality, responsive autofocus, preferably with stabilisation, small and light for video on gimbal. The high end zoom lenses are enormous and not practical for gimbal (and expensive). The small STM prime lenses are compact and light, they have IS and some are macro, image is OK but the autofocus seems a bit clunky (I record dance and movement, noise is not a problem but responsiveness is a must).
@@michelecintramika8482 I was hesitating between sony and canon .... Sony has all the right video features and plenty of lenses. I chose canon because I like the resulting image better, I don't regret, but still it is appalling the lack of lenses and limited video capabilities
I knew this waw coming. Im sure a 24L exists as well. Unfortunately for Canon its too little too late for many of us long time Canon shooters. I've already switched to Sony and not doing a switch again. What a pain it was selling my Canon gear.
Has anybody ever had a client say, "I sure wish you would take my photograph with an f/1.4 lens..." I don't know. After the years of shooting photographs, I find it boils down to lighting, framing, and having a great location to get a decent photograph. I recently switched to a Canon ecosystem from Nikon as for mirrorless, the AF of canon won me over. I picked up a 35mm f/1.8 lens a few weeks ago. It does a nice job. Maybe this lens will be the Holy Grail, at least until the f/1.2 version comes out, or maybe even the f/1.1 version. Yeah, I think I can contain myself. At least this lens is cheaper than the video lens that Canon released to go with the EOS C400. The new 17-120 mm lens retails for a hair over $23,000 (USD).
I’ve wanted to try a canon body for years now but this lens situation is unbelievable. As a photographer a non clicking aperture ring is a deal breaker.
@@VynZography No. If that's something you need. (I'm guessing it being on the top plate, viewfinder, and screen isn't what you're looking for.) But for Canon you'd have to go back decades to find a Canon lens that was built with an aperture ring at all. I don't even know if there's a single EF lens that has an aperture ring and you'd have to go back to Canon's FD mount. I'm not as familiar with Sony or Nikon lenses but they don't appear to have aperture rings either from what I can see. You shoot Fuji then? (Lecia?) If that's something that's a dealbreaker for you, it's probabaly never going to happen.
@@gerrya2133 Hi. I also don’t know of another canon lens with an aperture ring either. All my Panasonic and Sony lenses have it this is exactly why I’m won’t be jumping to canon any time soon. Pity because the R5ii looks soooo good!
What a silly idea : an aperture ring that you cannot use! (that is if you are a photographer of course... 🫣). And as always, very good review Gordon! 👍🏻 Keep up the good work 😊
Hi! Thanks for the review! I really like the Canon R6 Mark II and I'm thinking of getting it, but I also need a prime 35mm lens. Unfortunately, Canon doesn't have a lens that compares to the Sony FE 35mm 1.4 GM. For example, the Canon RF 35mm 1.8 isn't bright enough and is quite slow, while the EF 35mm 1.4 L II USM is also relatively slow compared to the Sony FE 35mm 1.4 GM. The only option I see for myself is the Canon RF 35mm 1.4 L VCM. Do you know how it compares to the 35mm 1.4 GM from Sony in terms of focusing speed for video? Are the issues with vignetting and edge distortion as critical as other reviews suggest? My main criterion is focusing speed (I've set up the Canon R6 Mark II for maximum speed because the default settings aren't the fastest, but even so, with the lenses mentioned earlier, the focus is significantly slower compared to Sony's GM lenses, which I tested on the ZV-E1 camera). However, Canon lenses are good for photography, where the focusing speed is sufficient, but I'm considering this for video, and they lag behind significantly at the moment. My hope is on the 35mm 1.4 L VCM. Thanks in advance for the answer, and I hope you have a great day despite everything :)
I hope to do a full test at some point, but beware of complaints about corner quality or distortion unless they are using updated raw converters or ooc jpegs.
@@cameralabs Thanks for the answer! I'm not too worried about the distortions in the photo, since they can probably be corrected in post-processing. I'm most worried about the video. If there are the same problems there, it will be difficult for me to correct them in post-processing.
Thanks for the review, Gordon. Looks like Canon made a really good lens. For now, I’m only interested in one thing: how much in-body stabilization (for example, in R5) will be enough to compensate for the lack of stabilization in the lens?
I've done extensive tests on the R5 and see basically almost no improvement for in-lens IS on the R5. For instance, I took a 50lp/mm test target and shot it 10 times at each shutter time from 1 to 1/500 with the 50/1.8 (no in-lens IS). Of those ten exposures at each shutter time, the WORST sharpness from 1/2 to 1/15 was better than the BEST at 1/30 or higher. It sounds crazy but read that again. That non-IS 50/1.4 is better at 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, and 1/15, than at 1/30 or higher. Unbelievable, right? But true. I imagine this lens would be similar.
@@DGYtal Look at the size of for instance Leica's 35/1.4 for the M rangefinders vs. the 35/1.4 for the R SLR's. Same company, same lens designers, and maybe even similar price, but the SLR lens is far larger. OK if we neglect the mirror space and simply try to design a simple lens for the target f-stop and with the target aberrations and so on, the design we get will have back elements that are closer and closer to the film/sensor as we get wider and wider. For 400mm, 135mm, 85mm, or 50mm there is still room for the mirror, but suddenly at 35mm and wider there's not. So we have to modify the rear lens to project it's image far farther back than the natural design dictates. And that requires that we have to let other facets of the design suffer: it will be bigger, heavier, more expensive, slower-focusing, and have more aberrations, be less sharp, etc. etc. The rangefinder and mirrorless lenses don't need that compromise, so their designs are purer. That's the best I can explain it, sorry.
Thanks for sharing. Since I always use the thumb wheel for photos, I don't care about the limitations of the aperture ring. What's youropinion on the bokeh quality of the lens?
Thank you for the video and comparison to the RF 35/1.8 and the EF 35/1.4L II which I own and bought because it took so long to offer us this new RF 35/1.4L. While the new lens is a smaller L not sure I’m up to buying it. Inconsistent use of aperture rings and lack of optimization for both video, which I don’t shoot, and stills which I focus on is a poor choice IMHO. None of my other RF L lenses at 50/1.2, 85/1.2, 100/2.8, and 135/1.8 use this approach or the holy trinity I own. On Sony, which I also shoot the aperture I ring is fully functional. Take care.
@@cameralabs That's amazing! Do you think it's safe for video work with an on camera mic in quiet rooms? A lot of "quiet" lens often fail this scenario.
I have been using the RF 35mm f1.8 for the last 6 months on my R8 and it’s almost perfect, for a quarter of the cost of this f1.4. Yes the STM focus motor isn’t as fast as USM but for stills that’s irrelevant. To be honest, I hardly ever shoot at f1.8 as the DoF on FF is so small, and for portraiture it’s sharpest from f2.8-f4 anyway. It’s so light and compact which is a bonus on a small body.
Hi Gordon, thank you for this review, exellent as always! How did you find the lack of blue refractive lens? The EF version has it, but the RF hasn't, but yeah, the RF is cheaper, atleast in Sweden. How is this new RF 35/1.4L in high contrasty situations? Any chromatic aberrations? Purple fringing?
Man... I just picked up the RF 35mm STM lens! That said, this is a little rich for my blood for a focal length I use less often. The macro capability of the STM version is handier for me.
I'm not a pro and I have the 35 1.8 but lord I am tempted to ditch my EF 50 1.2 and RF 35 1.8 for this, I've always had a solid 35 1.4 for my camera systems and this looks like the business..
I haven't compared them side by side, but you can check my 15-35 review to see what it's like quality-wise. It ultimately depends if you want the flexibility of a zoom or two stops extra aperture.
Nice to see a 35 1.4 lens that has limited focus breathing, but it's being marketed as a hybrid lens for both video and stills, & an Aperture ring that's useless during stills seems like half baked feature on one of the pricest 35 1.4 AF lenses on the market.
Thanks for the video. Always enjoy your reviews. I have the old EF 35 1.4. I don't see enough of an upgrade to buy the new RF version. But I can see how it would be an awesome upgrade for people who are focused on video.
is it worth spending so much for this lens? or getting the 35mm 1.8?.. im a car photographer and mainly just care about sharpness and im tired of the soft 50mm rf its not sharp at all. lmk what i should do
Only having the aperture ring usable in video mode is an incredibly stupid decision and I'm very disappointed to see it carried over from the 24-105 f/2.8.
What's the obsession with declicked apertures?! - I have worked in professional video production for over a decade and not once had to change the iris setting during a take.
Its super useful if you shot more docu style. If you are filming longer takes when walking for examples. Variable ND filters a have a performance impact so I avoid them
@@cameralabs Not that it matters to me, I use Sony and I do not need aperture 1.4 for a 35mm Lens, but it would be very nice to know, it should be the Cano that is best because it is much newer than the Sony. I am very happy with my Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35mm 2.0 Aspherical which is at least as good as the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM !
Looks like a good lens. We all have been waiting a long time for it. I'd be curious to compare this new lens with the RF28-70 at 35mm in image quality between them. Besides the 1.4 and 2.0 differences.
thx for your presentation... but since a long while I am not a friend or even fan of Canon... especially because you cannot use any 3rd party stuff... and with this lens: why is it sooo big, when the lglass itself is so small? why didn't they realize a 1.2 brightness within the same body???
@@zegzbrutal not where I’m at…everyone is running around with the Z8 on 24-120 F4 glass. The only folks with DSLRs now are basically Boomers. I didn’t buy the A1 for its video specs, I bought the A1 for its 1/200s readout at 50MP with that burst mode to do things 99.9% of photographers cannot do. All these folks running around with stacks on F4 zooms got the COVID shots. I have clean blood with the fastest Primes…getchusome. Photography!!!!
Mine arrived today. Upon unboxing I instantly noticed a kind of loose part/glas component inside the lens which slightly moves when you turn the lens upside/down. As soon as the lens is connected to the cam and powered everything inside is fix. Anybody else noticed this? I wonder because i never had this issue on any Canon L Lens with fixed focal length, especially not on the predecessor (EF 35mm L)
I want this and the 24-105 2.8 😩. This 35mm might be the best gimbal/handheld lens. 24-105mm would be more for easyrig/tripod. Think I just convinced myself to get both 😅. 😂😂
The barrel doesn't extend BUT I'm not sure if there's an element moving back and forth at the front. I don't recall seeing that, but can't be 100% sure without rechecking.
@@cameralabs Thanks - asking as the RF 50 1.2 mandates a front filter for being weather sealed - a little annoyance with this otherwise brilliant 50mm lens - and looking at drawings Canon provided of the 35mm 1.4 I'm afraid that's the case here, too. Do you think we will see a more photo-centric RF 35 1.2 anytime soon?
@@cameralabs Canon USA just confirmed to me the lens is entirely internal focusing. The front of the lens does not move. A front filter is not required for its weather resistance - great news!
The aperture ring is an insult to photographers I feel canon only care about video users, Im sorry I went to canon, buying back into Sony as I can afford it. Messing with the flash shoe is another annoyance
I think they'll all come in time, they're building a new system, and when most of us bought Canon DSLRs, they'd already been making EF lenses for years!
Yes exactly, Unless Canon can somehow change the 'Aperture ring function in video mode only', in a firmware update, I sadly won't be buying one. A real shame as I got excited about this lens and was going to ditch my Fuji gear for that very reason.. an aperture ring to make photography fun.
Thanks Gordon. I’m definitely purchasing this lens. The EF version was a favorite. The sharpness comparison is a head scratcher. It looked like every picture had different focal plane. For example… The RF 35 1.8 was sharper further back. Why not a flat test chart or good ole brick wall
I had a very short time with the lens at Canon's HQ - and that's their building! So it was the only large subject accessible with detail into the corners. All lenses were focused at the same point in the middle, which, to be fair, was a bit further back than the corner elements, but within the DOF for this lens at this distance. This was just a first-looks though to get a taste, and normally I wouldn't even have included this many tests in a preview piece. I hope to get the lens back for a full in-depth test, where I will be photographing my usual pier view.
My initial Canon RF 35mm f1.4L VCM review vs EF 35mm f1.4L II vs RF 35mm f1.8 STM
Order the RF 35mm f1.4L from B&H: bhpho.to/3KxCnf6 or WEX UK: tidd.ly/4c73067
Sell your used gear to MPB at: bit.ly/3ULU9yL
Buy used gear from MPB at: prf.hn/l/YLqwRAP
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Gordon’s retro gear channel: ua-cam.com/users/dinobytes
Equipment used for producing my videos
DJI Osmo Pocket 3: click.dji.com/AIOhqT-LWUFDq-bGk8hD4Q?pm=link
Panasonic Lumix S5 II: amzn.to/3Hf5IcI
Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE
Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF
MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV
00:00 - RF 35mm f1.4L and rivals
01:10 - RF 35mm f1.4L size and weight
02:57 - RF 35mm f1.4L controls
05:02 - RF 35mm f1.4L focusing
05:54 - RF 35mm f1.4L portrait quality
06:15 - RF 35mm f1.4L sharpness vs EF 35mm f1.4L II
09:02 - RF 35mm f1.4L focus breathing
10:02 - RF 35mm f1.4L samples and verdict so far
10:34 - Speedlite EL-10 teaser
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
I always prefer an aperture ring ! So how will it compare to Sony 35mm 1.4 GM !?
@@cameralabs It would seem that the lens is relying very heavily on digital correction.. the Raw files with corrections turned off have massive distortion and vignetting.. the MDF charts are also showing the EF version to have better resolution.. a sort of mixed bag it would seem.
@@justinholding02 all new mirrorless lenses employ profiles as part of the design. These generally correct geometric distortion and vignetting. Depending on the design, some start off with more aberrations to correct than others, but be in no doubt, the profiles are part of the complete design. Turning them off is akin to removing a physical lens element. The lens is not designed to be used without them. Now there are some cons to using digital corrections, (such as potentially reduced resolution due to geometric wrangling and increased noise in the corners), but buyers and reviewers should be testing and evaluating performance as the unit was intended to be used: with the profile enabled. The only real issue is in an early review when the profile may not work or be available on all RAW converters. I see so much misinformation being spread on early reviews.
@@cameralabsall of this is very true. But Canon have introduced some really stunning lenses since the launch of the R series, an example is the 85mm 1.2 which is optically almost perfect.. so i was a bit disappointed when i saw the behaviour of this new 35mm.. and i wish i had kept my EF version.
For those complaining about the new Aperture ring - you also have a clicky wheel at frond end of the barrel, use it for aperture control
Yep it’s what I set it to. But from engineering perspective it would have been just as easy to have de-click function and just this ring. It’s an odd design decision
@@gaza4543 No, it's a feature for people doing video.
@@benjaminmesa1089 Das ist mir vollkommen egal! Wenn ich ein Objektiv kaufe möchte ich es vollständig nutzen können! Wenn eine R5 Mark I den Blendenring für Fotos nicht nutzen kann ist das für mich ein Ausschlusskriterium! Sollte Canon doch noch eine Firmware veröffentlichen die diese Einschränkung aufhebt werde ich meine Entscheidung überdenken!
Only 555 grams. Perfect lightweight 35mm 1.4 lens. Great job Canon. Looking for more 1.4 primes from Canon. The 1.2 primes are great but heavy.
Yep, it feels nice in your hands - light, but sharp.
I echo that for Nikon. Hope they go down the 1.4 route too.
Looks like you are rich
@@tejasvaniya2664or we choose to spend our money on other things rather than p%sing it up the wall each week with nothing show for it other than hangover the next day.
Yeah. Glad Canon is finally going with 1.4 primes. 35, 50 (releasing this month) and hopefully 85 soon. I'd happily trade one stop from 1.2 for something light, compact and affordable.
The biggest surprise is the price. For the first time ever, Canon has priced it at launch over $500 below everyone's expectation for 35L lens
Exactly, I thought it would be more.
Thats because this lens is terrible for photography…this is a videographer lens. Why does the aperture ring not engage for stills photography…this lens is blasphemy
@@hikertrashfilms Terrible??? or that one feature is not as good for photography? If you leave it on automatic and control with the camera body it functions just like the vast majority of camera lenses.
@@Gooserobber dude I shoot nothing but stacks and primes…to put an aperture ring on a 35mm lens and disable that function for stills is crazy. They have to fix this with a firmware update. I use the ring all the time for stills on my A1/20G/50GM/135GM Holy Trinity. Is it April 1st? Canon cannot be serious….
@@hikertrashfilms You are making the biggest mountain out of the smallest molehill. Its an EXTRA FEATURE that basically 90% of other lenses dont have. disabling it for photography just makes it on level ground with all other lenses without aperture rings. it in no way makes the lens WORSE than if it didnt have it. you said it makes the lens TERRIBLE for photography, when it was proven in this video that it is sharper, lighter, and smaller, than the venerable EF 35mm 1.4 L..... this lens is going to be FANTASTIC, especially for the price. You are straight up lying or delusional to think that an aperture ring that wont work well for photography as an added benefit somehow takes AWAY from this lens.
Wow, no review of new Sigma (I was a little worried), but exclusive review, or at least first looks, of new Canon!
Seriously, apparently no one else (at least among big names) made one yet? Congrats Gordon!
And of course you did a stellar job, thank you for your work
Thanks! Yes, Sigma forgot me for the 28-45 pre-brief, but that's fine, I don't need to make a rant video about it! I do have it now though and it'll give me longer to do a more considered review of it.
Man you got this before anyone! I want this so bad!!
you beat the canon stream with this one
Canons event was the worst marketing I have ever seen. Atrocious.
@@HezyTech it’s not even over yet
Absolutely, Gordon's review was brilliant and consistent. Canon USA should ask Gordon next time, how to introduce a new product.
Sweet! I've always preferred Gordon's lens reviews since my Olympus Pro lens days! Greetings from Canada 🙌🏼
Greetings to you too!
Wow, how did they even do that! Unreal quality!
20-35mm is where rangefinder and mirrorless lenses can have a HUGELY simpler design than SLR lenses that need to leave space for the flipping mirror.
i knew this was coming out, just had a feeling without even looking at rumors! loved the video
Me too, 3 years ago when the first rumours came out, I said to myself, this lens is coming… eventually
Thanks! TBH, I epxected a 35 1.4L a bit sooner, but glad it's here and performing nicely!
@@cameralabs same here! I actually expected the trio to be out already which would be the 50mm, 35mm, 24mm. I am excited though for what is to come, I just switched from sony back to canon.
I work mainly in video so I was nervous but I believe Canon will once again go back up on the creator side.
I googled this lens last night too 😂
Just ordered mind can't wait
The new RF 35mm f1.4L looks amazing! The sharpness across the frame, especially wide open, is very impressive Sir
It is performing very well so far!
That looks really sharp! Think I might have to start saving! 🤩🤩 Thanks for the review! 😃😃
Thanks, Gordon. I appreciate the comparison and review.
Nice review! I’d love to see a detailed shootout vs. the latest Tamron and Sigma 35mm f/1.4 primes for EF mount. Especially the sharpness, bokeh quality, and bokeh ball shape. The 3rd party primes look to be half the price of the RF, and both tested very well for many reviewers awhile back.
The Tamron 35 1.4 is nice!
I've done extensive hand-holding tests with the RFs on the R5 and really see no reason to have the in-lens IS. I'm glad they left it out and gave us something a bit smaller, cheaper, more reliable, lighter, and hugely less astigmatic. On the other hand I didn't need the aperture ring; I use the control ring for aperture and wouldn't switch my muscle memory just for this one lens.
Thank you for answering my inner question. 🇺🇸
That looks soft on F1.4. I downloaded a test photo. If this remains in the versions for sales, Sony will still be a better option.
@@michelecintramika8482 > If this remains in the versions for sales, Sony will still be a better option.
Photography is about taking photographs, not figuring out which brand's lens slightly out-performs the other. If you told me there's a case where the Canon literally isn't sharp enough to do the job, I'd call you a liar to your face. And I'd say the same if you were whining about Sony or Nikon. They're all good enough that the weak link is the photographer. It's just a question of getting the photographer to spend less time comparing specs and more time actually shooting.
@lqr824 I feel sleepy reading your outdated rhetoric. We are here debating about the lens and not about the skill of the photographer. And we're talking about strengths and weaknesses of a lens launch. Which is totally normal. And this RF 35mm f1.4, in a test that I saw and downloaded the file, the eyes of the photographed were very soft. Looking like the same problem as the EF 85mm f1.4. It has nothing to do with Sharpness. It has to do with optical defects. The same defect presented in EF 85mm f1.4. It is an OPTIC DEFECT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SHARPNESS.
@@michelecintramika8482 no, it is debating specs between manufacturers that is outdated. It's a phase some go through and some never grow out of. Some turn into actual photographers, though, and never go back to this spec comparison again.
I'd be so interested to see how this compares to the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM as I am still deciding which system. From what I know, the GM has a lot of focus breathing but the Canon has sizeable barrel distortion. I know the Sony lens is very sharp to the corners and I think it's cheaper, I guess we'll have to wait for more analysis.
Yes, the 35 GM is one of my favourite lenses
There's no/limited support for breathing compensation on Sony...
@@zegzbrutal I don't like using focus breathing compensation as it crops into the image and results in lower quality
Thank you Gordon, always my go-to lens reviewer person, so practical, honest and to the point! Just preordered! I am pleasantly surprised by the price, nice job Canon!
You're welcome!
Looks great. No click Aperture ring a bummer, though.
typical canon cripple hammer
I know, it's a bit odd, I keep suggesting to them to do like Sony and Sigma and allow click and declick for both photo and video.
No IS a bummer too. Especially for a lens extolling video capabilities 🤔
@@EverythingCameFromNothingyeah that’s strange, as the 1.8 one does have it
@@98JamesNixon Yeah! I’d rather it be slightly heavier and bigger and have IS.
If it was a heavy f1.2 version, i could understand why they’d leave it out 🤷♂️
It's a minor complaint, but I would have preferred the aperture ring to work in the opposite direction, as Canon's FD lenses.
I would love to see it tested vs the Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4, which is considered by many to be one of the best 3rd party lenses for the old EF system.
I'd like to see that because I had the 35 Art, but really he compared it to the 35 L II which if I remember already slightly outperforms the Art lens so you can infer from that
Same!
Nice lens just wander how is bokeh looks on full length portraits hopefully soft and creamy 😋
Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art is my most used lens on the wedding day probably 65% of pictures captured on the day. Remaining images are shot on 85mm f1.4 IS L and 16-35mm so 35mm is very important lens for me.
I don't even have Canon cameras myself, so why am I watching this video! No Brighton pier test shots? But looks like a good lens!
Yes, I only had it for a brief time, but long enough to grab some early test shots!
can’t wait for the pier shots. Vs the RF 1.8 especially
5:43 the image resulting from this lens is quite interesting .... nice bokeh but natural transitions and clear and sharp focused face but again looking natural
Nice!
A friend of mine used to own the ef 35mm 1.4 mark I and on one occasion I got to play with it and found it such a lovely lens and such a practical focal length, I almost didn't want to give it back!
I do like a good 35!
67mm diameter - more vignetting.
As Canon RF lenses suffering from heavy corners shading:
RF 15-35 has -5! stops of shading;
RF 50/1,2 has -4 stops of shading;
RF 70-200/2,8 (at 200mm) has -3 stops of shading.
What RF 35/1,4L has in the mid frame and in the corners?
Interesting to compare with Tamron SP 35/1,4 (at this moment the best 35mm on the market).
UP
Selten so gelacht!
Nur als Beispiel das RF 50 1.2 L USM hat maximal 1 Blendenstufe bei der Vignettierung! Alle weiteren Behauptungen sind ein Schmarrn!
Diagnose Hirnfurz!
Hirnfurz!
wonder if it is as nice with colors and sharpness as the old ef 50 1.2? That was incredible. If this is as good as that, great. Guess with R5 dont need image stabilization, using it for street.
As always, thank you very much for your videos.
You're welcome!
What is about chromatic aberation, distorion and vignetting? A modern L prime should be very good in this.
This was just a quick first look.
Apparently the distortion is a big issue.
@@awtransform are the people complaining about distortion using the lens profiles? If they're shooting RAW and converting without a profile, there'll be distortion on most lenses made in the last few years, as they rely on software correction.
@@cameralabs Daran werden sich viele erst gewöhnen müssen! Es zählt das Endergebnis! Die Kritiker haben meiner Überzeugung nach gar kein Interesse am Erwerb dieser Hybriden oder es fehlen einfach die finanziellen Mittel! Es muss ermüdend für sie sein immer die gleichen Dinge zu lesen und dann auch noch eine Antwort zu geben! Ich bewundere Ihre Ruhe und Sachlichkeit!
@@ER-gn8io thanks for your calm comment! I agree, the end result is most important and if it meets a certain standard, then that's fine. Obviously there could be issues and I'll report them when I fully test it, but the end result is what interests me.
There might be some problem with your copy of the EF 35L2, I remember it to be much better than in the video in the corners. Anyway, this new RF35L does look good, but it does seem like again relying on in body correction like many other RF lenses
The funny thing is, if I showed you my EF results alone, you'd think it was amazing. It's only when you put something next to a different product that you see the differences
Gordon, I have this lens now. It is sharp but the amount of chromatic abbreviation is high for a lens at this price point. Even with the lens profile enabled in Adobe Camera Raw I have to add +4 to get rid of the last of the purple fringe. Yes, it’s weather sealed and, yes, it is well made but I’m having some buyer’s remorse over the purchase. 😱
I didn't think it's out yet, that's impressive! Surprised to hear about coloured fringing though, as most modern lenses and bodies manage to avoid it.
@@cameralabs I preordered it when it was announced and it started shipping last week. I’ve only shot with it a couple of times. The sharpness is good and, at least with my copy, is sharper into the corners than the older EF version. If I open a raw file in Canon’s DPP app, they manage to remove the CA. The Adobe lens profile doesn’t quite get rid of it. If you open it up in something like Lumiar Neo it’s pretty bad. That’s not the kind of “lens character” I like. 🤦🏻♂️
@@ThroughJoesLens as it's such a new lens, I bet the RAW profile hans't been updated in all the converters yet, only DPP so far.
Mine arrived today. Upon unboxing I instantly noticed a kind of loose part/glas component inside the lens which slightly moves when you turn the lens upside/down. As soon as the lens is connected to the cam and powered everything inside is fix. May I ask if your lens also has this "issue"?
I wonder because i never had this issue on any Canon L Lens with fixed focal length, especially not on the predecessor (EF 35mm L)
@@jazy_jaf Yes, that is normal. The lens group moved by the VCM motor is loose until power is applied.
The price has me confused though. The 28-70 f2 is double the price but covers 4 main focal lengths - 27,35,50,70
Weeeeell, this one is obviously a stop faster for starters, plus smaller and lighter. I'd like to compare them
@@cameralabs would love to see that comparison
@@cameralabsplease do!!
holy smokes i own the ef 35mm 1.4 ii and i thought that it was extremely sharp. the RF just looks ridiculously sharp!
Is that because it was possibly used with an adapter here ?
@@jasyamaha No. The adapter has no lens elements in it so has no effect on image quality.
@PaulAmyes good point, thank you.
Me too and I have no intention of swapping it. It is one of Canon's two lenses with BSRO, the other being the RF 85mm f1.2 L.
Great video! How about the EF 35mm f1.4L version I. Its a really great lens!
The new lens performs quite well, easily surpassing the previous EF L & STM versions. Would prefer being able to use the aperture ring for photos and it's puzzling that feature was left out. Thank you for the great review Gordon.
You're welcome!
The lens is so perfect, and much more lighter than my 35mmLii, gonna get one soon!
Seems like the 35 f1.8 is a winner .
Do you think there's room for a hybrid-focused RF F/1.4 series from Canon, where there may be an 18mm, 24mm, 35mm, 55mm, 85mm, and 100mm? Maybe they can be identical size, similar weight, focusing system, and all have the stepless aperture ring. It could be in the vein of Samyang's V-AF series or Panasonic's F/1.8 series?
You mean all like this one? I think that may well be possible.
@@cameralabs Yes, exactly, it would be very exciting for videographers and leave room for a photography-centric RF 35mm F/1.2L in the future 🤞🏼
Unrelated, but I wanted to share something with you. I was looking for a higher-end "vintage" camera with a decent resolution and a CCD sensor, when I found the Sony A100. I went on eBay and found a near mint-condition Sony A100 with a battery, charger, and card for under $100! I saw the video you made with the A100, and it seems like an amazing camera. The CCD sensor should give a pleasing look to the photos. I have a nice video camera, but I'm excited to get a photo camera, especially an older one for the character.
Good choice! Also consider the Nikon D80 and D200 - see my recent retro review of the D80, and also my vintage Dino Bytes channel!
@@cameralabs Thanks for the suggestions! One small correction on my end; it doesn't look like the camera actually includes the CF card, but it does include the battery and charger. I will look into those cameras and your reviews. Thanks again!
Seems pretty good but the aperture thing is silly to not have it clickable. Not a deal breaker but for a stills shooter it’s useless.
Can’t wait to see how this performs for Astro… I’d love to use this for wide field panos.
would be interesting compared to the SIGMA 35mm / F1.4 ART..... SIGMA ART Lenses are great performers.
I have both Sony and canon bodies and I really like aperture rings on Sony. It is just stupid not to make it clickable after adding it in… just totally weird
Why is this lens $700.00 Canadian cheaper and the front element so small compared to the EF lens yet is a 1.4?
Different optical designs
this lens really looks premium, but ... in my case I have the canon R6II with the 24-105mm F4 kit lens, with IS, and I use it exclusively for video. I am looking for a lens with maybe a higher aperture, good image quality, responsive autofocus, preferably with stabilisation, small and light for video on gimbal. The high end zoom lenses are enormous and not practical for gimbal (and expensive). The small STM prime lenses are compact and light, they have IS and some are macro, image is OK but the autofocus seems a bit clunky (I record dance and movement, noise is not a problem but responsiveness is a must).
I'd try the 35 1.8 STM
In your case, it would go to Sony. I have R6II. But I use with RF 50mm f1.8 for pointing and shooting photos.
@@michelecintramika8482 I was hesitating between sony and canon .... Sony has all the right video features and plenty of lenses. I chose canon because I like the resulting image better, I don't regret, but still it is appalling the lack of lenses and limited video capabilities
I knew this waw coming. Im sure a 24L exists as well. Unfortunately for Canon its too little too late for many of us long time Canon shooters. I've already switched to Sony and not doing a switch again. What a pain it was selling my Canon gear.
Die Qual wird noch viel größer werden wenn sie ihre Sony Ausrüstung wieder loswerden wollen! Denken Sie an meine Worte!
Once the production model is out, can you please test it on R7? That'll be a testament to this lens.
Has anybody ever had a client say, "I sure wish you would take my photograph with an f/1.4 lens..."
I don't know. After the years of shooting photographs, I find it boils down to lighting, framing, and having a great location to get a decent photograph. I recently switched to a Canon ecosystem from Nikon as for mirrorless, the AF of canon won me over. I picked up a 35mm f/1.8 lens a few weeks ago. It does a nice job. Maybe this lens will be the Holy Grail, at least until the f/1.2 version comes out, or maybe even the f/1.1 version. Yeah, I think I can contain myself.
At least this lens is cheaper than the video lens that Canon released to go with the EOS C400. The new 17-120 mm lens retails for a hair over $23,000 (USD).
I’ve wanted to try a canon body for years now but this lens situation is unbelievable. As a photographer a non clicking aperture ring is a deal breaker.
It has a control ring that clicks which you can set to change aperture.
@@gerrya2133 does the control ring have aperture numbers?
@@VynZography No. If that's something you need.
(I'm guessing it being on the top plate, viewfinder, and screen isn't what you're looking for.)
But for Canon you'd have to go back decades to find a Canon lens that was built with an aperture ring at all. I don't even know if there's a single EF lens that has an aperture ring and you'd have to go back to Canon's FD mount.
I'm not as familiar with Sony or Nikon lenses but they don't appear to have aperture rings either from what I can see.
You shoot Fuji then? (Lecia?)
If that's something that's a dealbreaker for you, it's probabaly never going to happen.
@@gerrya2133 Hi. I also don’t know of another canon lens with an aperture ring either. All my Panasonic and Sony lenses have it this is exactly why I’m won’t be jumping to canon any time soon. Pity because the R5ii looks soooo good!
Comparison to Sigma 35 1.4 would be nice, since it can be had for a fraction of the price.
Or the Tamron 35 1.4.
Das sind Glasscherben für arme Leute!
Glasscherben...
I think by the price filter size etc we will see RF35 1.2L 82mm filter thread
Amazing lens. Hi Gordon, just wondering is no IS a deal breaker? Is IS even necessary for this lens? Thanks.
What a silly idea : an aperture ring that you cannot use! (that is if you are a photographer of course... 🫣).
And as always, very good review Gordon! 👍🏻 Keep up the good work 😊
Thanks!
I really wish it had IS built in. This would be an absolute beast on the C70 if it had IS for handheld shots. Still going to pick it up
Hi! Thanks for the review! I really like the Canon R6 Mark II and I'm thinking of getting it, but I also need a prime 35mm lens. Unfortunately, Canon doesn't have a lens that compares to the Sony FE 35mm 1.4 GM. For example, the Canon RF 35mm 1.8 isn't bright enough and is quite slow, while the EF 35mm 1.4 L II USM is also relatively slow compared to the Sony FE 35mm 1.4 GM. The only option I see for myself is the Canon RF 35mm 1.4 L VCM. Do you know how it compares to the 35mm 1.4 GM from Sony in terms of focusing speed for video? Are the issues with vignetting and edge distortion as critical as other reviews suggest? My main criterion is focusing speed (I've set up the Canon R6 Mark II for maximum speed because the default settings aren't the fastest, but even so, with the lenses mentioned earlier, the focus is significantly slower compared to Sony's GM lenses, which I tested on the ZV-E1 camera). However, Canon lenses are good for photography, where the focusing speed is sufficient, but I'm considering this for video, and they lag behind significantly at the moment. My hope is on the 35mm 1.4 L VCM. Thanks in advance for the answer, and I hope you have a great day despite everything :)
I hope to do a full test at some point, but beware of complaints about corner quality or distortion unless they are using updated raw converters or ooc jpegs.
@@cameralabs Thanks for the answer! I'm not too worried about the distortions in the photo, since they can probably be corrected in post-processing. I'm most worried about the video. If there are the same problems there, it will be difficult for me to correct them in post-processing.
Thanks for the review, Gordon. Looks like Canon made a really good lens. For now, I’m only interested in one thing: how much in-body stabilization (for example, in R5) will be enough to compensate for the lack of stabilization in the lens?
I've done extensive tests on the R5 and see basically almost no improvement for in-lens IS on the R5. For instance, I took a 50lp/mm test target and shot it 10 times at each shutter time from 1 to 1/500 with the 50/1.8 (no in-lens IS). Of those ten exposures at each shutter time, the WORST sharpness from 1/2 to 1/15 was better than the BEST at 1/30 or higher. It sounds crazy but read that again. That non-IS 50/1.4 is better at 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, and 1/15, than at 1/30 or higher. Unbelievable, right? But true. I imagine this lens would be similar.
@@lqr824 I don't understand how this is technically possible.
@@DGYtal Look at the size of for instance Leica's 35/1.4 for the M rangefinders vs. the 35/1.4 for the R SLR's. Same company, same lens designers, and maybe even similar price, but the SLR lens is far larger.
OK if we neglect the mirror space and simply try to design a simple lens for the target f-stop and with the target aberrations and so on, the design we get will have back elements that are closer and closer to the film/sensor as we get wider and wider. For 400mm, 135mm, 85mm, or 50mm there is still room for the mirror, but suddenly at 35mm and wider there's not. So we have to modify the rear lens to project it's image far farther back than the natural design dictates. And that requires that we have to let other facets of the design suffer: it will be bigger, heavier, more expensive, slower-focusing, and have more aberrations, be less sharp, etc. etc. The rangefinder and mirrorless lenses don't need that compromise, so their designs are purer. That's the best I can explain it, sorry.
Thanks for sharing.
Since I always use the thumb wheel for photos, I don't care about the limitations of the aperture ring.
What's youropinion on the bokeh quality of the lens?
I've not yet done formal tests for bokeh, so can't say yet
Thank you for the video and comparison to the RF 35/1.8 and the EF 35/1.4L II which I own and bought because it took so long to offer us this new RF 35/1.4L. While the new lens is a smaller L not sure I’m up to buying it. Inconsistent use of aperture rings and lack of optimization for both video, which I don’t shoot, and stills which I focus on is a poor choice IMHO. None of my other RF L lenses at 50/1.2, 85/1.2, 100/2.8, and 135/1.8 use this approach or the holy trinity I own. On Sony, which I also shoot the aperture I ring is fully functional. Take care.
Great video. Thank you.
Quiet or totally silent like Sony GM lenses? Thanks.
You mean the focusing motor? I couldn't hear it in a quiet room.
@@cameralabs That's amazing! Do you think it's safe for video work with an on camera mic in quiet rooms? A lot of "quiet" lens often fail this scenario.
@@davezarzycki I'd say it's ok if you have an external mic, yes. It's much quieter than the RF 35 1.8 STM.
Thank you for another wonderful first look and incredible details about this new lens.
You're very welcome!
Ништяк, все берем! Главное легкая! И не скучная MPo оптика. Кому нужен RF 24 F1,8 продам недорого :)
I have been using the RF 35mm f1.8 for the last 6 months on my R8 and it’s almost perfect, for a quarter of the cost of this f1.4. Yes the STM focus motor isn’t as fast as USM but for stills that’s irrelevant. To be honest, I hardly ever shoot at f1.8 as the DoF on FF is so small, and for portraiture it’s sharpest from f2.8-f4 anyway. It’s so light and compact which is a bonus on a small body.
I'm very fond of the 1.8
Hi Gordon, thank you for this review, exellent as always! How did you find the lack of blue refractive lens? The EF version has it, but the RF hasn't, but yeah, the RF is cheaper, atleast in Sweden. How is this new RF 35/1.4L in high contrasty situations? Any chromatic aberrations? Purple fringing?
I have way more tests I need to do!
Man... I just picked up the RF 35mm STM lens! That said, this is a little rich for my blood for a focal length I use less often. The macro capability of the STM version is handier for me.
Any observations with regard to how much distortion correction is required with this lens? Pincushion or barrel?
Not yet, this was a v early brief test, not a full review.
I'm not a pro and I have the 35 1.8 but lord I am tempted to ditch my EF 50 1.2 and RF 35 1.8 for this, I've always had a solid 35 1.4 for my camera systems and this looks like the business..
How does the quality compare to the 15-35mm 2.8? Would u have the 1.4 over the flexibility of the zoom lens?
I haven't compared them side by side, but you can check my 15-35 review to see what it's like quality-wise. It ultimately depends if you want the flexibility of a zoom or two stops extra aperture.
Nice to see a 35 1.4 lens that has limited focus breathing, but it's being marketed as a hybrid lens for both video and stills, & an Aperture ring that's useless during stills seems like half baked feature on one of the pricest 35 1.4 AF lenses on the market.
Ich hätte es nicht besser formulieren können!
Thanks for the video. Always enjoy your reviews. I have the old EF 35 1.4. I don't see enough of an upgrade to buy the new RF version. But I can see how it would be an awesome upgrade for people who are focused on video.
Definitely. The old 35 1.4L is still great and I had to really pixel-peep wide-open in the corners to see any difference.
is it worth spending so much for this lens? or getting the 35mm 1.8?.. im a car photographer and mainly just care about sharpness and im tired of the soft 50mm rf its not sharp at all. lmk what i should do
Get RF28mm f2.8 instead
I really like the 35 1.8, it's great value.
Focus breathing on the stm is an issue when shooting video. That’s the only compelling reason to choose this new lens.
Only having the aperture ring usable in video mode is an incredibly stupid decision and I'm very disappointed to see it carried over from the 24-105 f/2.8.
Canon and their history of artificially locking hardware has so many stupid decisions. It hardly seems like they care what it's users mention.
@@BrownieX001 Sure but it’s a non-issue
Don't worry. If you buy a camera released AFTER June 2024 it will totally work in photo mode as well. LOL
@j.sauer.photo_ Warum sollte ich eine R5 Mark I upgraden? Da verzichte ich lieber gerne auf diese VCM Objektive!
What's the obsession with declicked apertures?! - I have worked in professional video production for over a decade and not once had to change the iris setting during a take.
...and the run-and-gunners are all using variable NDs to shoot wide open anyway.
Yeah I know! I think the ring is actually more valuable to photographers, which is why it's a shame it's not included here.
@@cameralabs Exactly!
Its super useful if you shot more docu style. If you are filming longer takes when walking for examples. Variable ND filters a have a performance impact so I avoid them
I always prefer an aperture ring ! So how will it compare to Sony 35mm 1.4 GM !?
I am curious. That's one of my favourites. The Canon already breathes less, but need to do a side by side
@@cameralabs Not that it matters to me, I use Sony and I do not need aperture 1.4 for a 35mm Lens, but it would be very nice to know, it should be the Cano that is best because it is much newer than the Sony. I am very happy with my Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35mm 2.0 Aspherical which is at least as good as the Sony 35mm 1.4 GM !
Is it just me or.... does Canons pricing seems a bit off on that one?
But it's cheaper than the current price of the EF version!
Looks like a good lens. We all have been waiting a long time for it. I'd be curious to compare this new lens with the RF28-70 at 35mm in image quality between them. Besides the 1.4 and 2.0 differences.
Yep, i'd be interested in that too
nice, hopefully Canon brings the 24mm version of this. having the 28-70 f2 and the 35mm f1.8 I don't see the need for this 35mm
I suspect we'll see a 24 and maybe a 28 over time.
Why omit the IRIS switch on the lens? what does it do?
Nothing really, it just locks the iris rng in the automatic position.
How much digital correction have they implemented?
Not sure yet, normally not too much on bigger L lenses, but again, not tested that side yet
thx for your presentation... but since a long while I am not a friend or even fan of Canon... especially because you cannot use any 3rd party stuff... and with this lens: why is it sooo big, when the lglass itself is so small? why didn't they realize a 1.2 brightness within the same body???
Very impressive basically no focus breathing at all.
If canon had introduced this lens with the original R camera I would be an RF user today.
Will there ever be a photo centric lens and camera? Seems they’re all forgetting what photography means…..
Because the photocentric people aren't buying much, videographers/hybrid shooters will
@@zegzbrutal unfortunately yes
@@hikertrashfilms thank you for telling us you are willing and able to afford it. However the fact is many stills shooters remain in Nikon Canon DSLR.
@@zegzbrutal not where I’m at…everyone is running around with the Z8 on 24-120 F4 glass. The only folks with DSLRs now are basically Boomers. I didn’t buy the A1 for its video specs, I bought the A1 for its 1/200s readout at 50MP with that burst mode to do things 99.9% of photographers cannot do. All these folks running around with stacks on F4 zooms got the COVID shots. I have clean blood with the fastest Primes…getchusome. Photography!!!!
Permanently Declicked is a very nice friendly way to say they didn't give us a switch 😂
When do you expect r5 11 👍
I have no idea, sorry
Mine arrived today. Upon unboxing I instantly noticed a kind of loose part/glas component inside the lens which slightly moves when you turn the lens upside/down. As soon as the lens is connected to the cam and powered everything inside is fix. Anybody else noticed this?
I wonder because i never had this issue on any Canon L Lens with fixed focal length, especially not on the predecessor (EF 35mm L)
Supposed to be that way.
With such performance, it would devour an 80+ megapixel full-frame sensor, the Canon R5S launch feels imminent.
For 1/3 the price, I still prefer the Sigma 35 1.4 . It's so sharp and accurate and small too.
I want this and the 24-105 2.8 😩. This 35mm might be the best gimbal/handheld lens. 24-105mm would be more for easyrig/tripod. Think I just convinced myself to get both 😅. 😂😂
Given the issues with RT system and how even today Canon is overcharging for speedlights will give them a pass.
Thanks Gordon - is the RF 35 1.4L internal focussing, or is it's front element moving?
The barrel doesn't extend BUT I'm not sure if there's an element moving back and forth at the front. I don't recall seeing that, but can't be 100% sure without rechecking.
@@cameralabs Thanks - asking as the RF 50 1.2 mandates a front filter for being weather sealed - a little annoyance with this otherwise brilliant 50mm lens - and looking at drawings Canon provided of the 35mm 1.4 I'm afraid that's the case here, too. Do you think we will see a more photo-centric RF 35 1.2 anytime soon?
@@tom_k_d that's the big question. I suspect not, but it's pure guesswork
@@cameralabs Canon USA just confirmed to me the lens is entirely internal focusing. The front of the lens does not move. A front filter is not required for its weather resistance - great news!
why is the ef 1.4 about $500 more
Not sure why, I expect it to go lower when this hits the stores
The aperture ring is an insult to photographers I feel canon only care about video users, Im sorry I went to canon, buying back into Sony as I can afford it. Messing with the flash shoe is another annoyance
Hmmm i don’t know i have both the other 35mm lenses. I wanted 1.2 that would have made me upgrade
Yeah, I wonder if they'll do one
An aperture ring? 😮 Please canon can you make mid range primes like the old usm ones or the Sony 40mm 2.5
I think they'll all come in time, they're building a new system, and when most of us bought Canon DSLRs, they'd already been making EF lenses for years!
@@cameralabs Great to see Canon finally catching up. Hopefully we'll see 3rd party options soon
Great and informative reveiws as always. It's exciting to see Canon launch such an excellent lens. Can't wait to purchase this lens
Magnificant lens. Well done Canon!
Yes exactly, Unless Canon can somehow change the 'Aperture ring function in video mode only', in a firmware update, I sadly won't be buying one. A real shame as I got excited about this lens and was going to ditch my Fuji gear for that very reason.. an aperture ring to make photography fun.
Thanks Gordon. I’m definitely purchasing this lens. The EF version was a favorite.
The sharpness comparison is a head scratcher. It looked like every picture had different focal plane. For example… The RF 35 1.8 was sharper further back. Why not a flat test chart or good ole brick wall
I had a very short time with the lens at Canon's HQ - and that's their building! So it was the only large subject accessible with detail into the corners. All lenses were focused at the same point in the middle, which, to be fair, was a bit further back than the corner elements, but within the DOF for this lens at this distance. This was just a first-looks though to get a taste, and normally I wouldn't even have included this many tests in a preview piece. I hope to get the lens back for a full in-depth test, where I will be photographing my usual pier view.
@@cameralabslooking forward to your future official review!
Interested in this lens. Thank you for this video Gordon!
You're welcome!