@ Mainly college sports, so for the most part it’s hard to relate to your work, but I definitely feel the struggle with trying new gear, but not fully committing to purchasing anything expensive. This channel feels like a hidden gem where there is a Canon creator who can’t quite afford (or isn’t sent) the latest and greatest stuff from the manufacturer, but still is making content on/with Canon gear.
Oh nice! Something I've wanted to shoot for a long time is hockey, but I haven't made much time for breaking into it. And idk if I'll be good enough for Canon themselves to send me anything in this lifetime 😂
Great vid Dan! Your views are looking good and I bet this vid got good watch time. I sold my 50 1.8 RF for more than what I paid for it a few months ago. I didn't realize the 1.4 was on the horizon when I sold the 1.8. That being said....I pre-ordered the 50 1.4. I love my 24-70 2.8, but there are times in interviews where I am looking for more subject isolation so I'll see if this hits the bill.
Thanks! Haha excellent flip on your side it sounds like. What's shipping look like, still mid-December? Will be curious to hear your thoughts on it when you get it. I feel like the year is running away on me... hoping to try it early next year at this point.
Sadly in Canada we're stuck with a $270 f1.8, a $2000 1.4, or $3000 f1.2. I had hoped the 1.4 was sub $1000 CAD. All this hybrid shooting business is annoying for someone who does predominantly stills. Starting to wish I had gone Sony.
I had a little hope that it would match the msrp of the 100mm macro at $1,199 but no such luck 😕 There are several lenses I'd love to try over there too... this one for sure, but also things like the 20mm, 20-70mm, and the new 16-25mm and 24-50mm. The list goes on...
Ooo, nice. The one scenario where I think I'd actively use it in photo mode would be on something like an R8 or RP. I don't use the control rings all that often, but that ring would be close enough to my supporting hands that I would rearrange the other two dials for ISO/shutter.
It took Sony 6 years to come out with their 28-70 f2.0. That is several years behind Canon`s lenses. I think the second version will have internal zoom. If the first one gets cheaper then it`s cool. Sigma has just released 3 primes for RF mount, so there are options out there.
That lens is one that I give Canon praise for trying, along with any of their other nonconventional options. But Sony is generally considered much further developed, both first and third party. Canon definitely closed some gaps late this year, but RF on full frame still isn't really open. Hopefully that changes 2025.
I can understand, the want for an internal zoom. I got a RF 70-200mm f4 and had it now to send back, because something got loose inside and blocked the tubus, so that i wasnt able to go below 101mm. Picture quality and af worked fine though. Dont know but think that its a bit more unlikely that the new ones have that problem.
@@DanYosua no, i get a new f4 (lucky it was under warranty). Its not the lenses fault. I meant only that maybe the new ones, that not extend have a higher probability not to get something into the Lense body. The Image quality etc. are pretty fine, when it works.
Gotta say ... after the 1.4 was announced, I went to the store and held the 35 vcm (which has the same weight and size as the 50 and 24)in hand next to my 50 1.2 ... and the weight difference wasn't as perceivable as you'd believe on paper. The 1.2 is a much chunkier lens still, but the 1.4 is exact same lens. Overall the lens package was not as different as I would've thought. For me who already owns the 1.2, I'm not sure if I want to keep my preorder for the 1.4 or cancel. If you don't already own the 1.4, it's a no brainer almost. The 1.4 is also optically better per reviews, although the 1.2 might end up having more character - but I've yet to see any reviewer do a side by side of them.
Thanks for sharing that... I'll keep my expectations in check haha. If you remember to revisit this comment, it would be cool to hear which you end up keeping. Any chance you keep both and compare for a time period?
I just got mine. The difference is like night and day. It may feel imperceptible but if you are shooting a full 10 hour wedding every bit of weight starts to add up. The handling was also so much better as the 1.2 was so front heavy that using a non gripped camera like the R6 made it awkward to handle. The 1.4 has a nice balance and more importantly, focusing was quick and instantaneous. The 1.4 is sharper too, at least the sharpness was even across the frame - you get noticeably softer corners wide open on the 1.2. For me, losing a a third of a stop of light was worth the trade off for these advantages mentioned above.
@@Darth-TBAG You probably hit the nail on the head for most people, and great to hear that you are digging it! I absolutely wouldn't want to use the F1.2 all day.
It seems more about the breathing, power zoom compatibility, and similar sizes and weights for ease of gimbal use. So video-focused, but not really including the run and gun use case that I assume most photo-first shooters would value.
I love the vibe of your videos. You’re so well spoken, and I feel you can carry an hour long podcast on your own. Keep it up!
I appreciate it! Haha there's a lot of editing/condensing to try to keep it moving. What are you shooting lately?
@ Mainly college sports, so for the most part it’s hard to relate to your work, but I definitely feel the struggle with trying new gear, but not fully committing to purchasing anything expensive. This channel feels like a hidden gem where there is a Canon creator who can’t quite afford (or isn’t sent) the latest and greatest stuff from the manufacturer, but still is making content on/with Canon gear.
Oh nice! Something I've wanted to shoot for a long time is hockey, but I haven't made much time for breaking into it. And idk if I'll be good enough for Canon themselves to send me anything in this lifetime 😂
Great vid Dan! Your views are looking good and I bet this vid got good watch time. I sold my 50 1.8 RF for more than what I paid for it a few months ago. I didn't realize the 1.4 was on the horizon when I sold the 1.8. That being said....I pre-ordered the 50 1.4. I love my 24-70 2.8, but there are times in interviews where I am looking for more subject isolation so I'll see if this hits the bill.
Thanks! Haha excellent flip on your side it sounds like. What's shipping look like, still mid-December? Will be curious to hear your thoughts on it when you get it. I feel like the year is running away on me... hoping to try it early next year at this point.
Sadly in Canada we're stuck with a $270 f1.8, a $2000 1.4, or $3000 f1.2. I had hoped the 1.4 was sub $1000 CAD. All this hybrid shooting business is annoying for someone who does predominantly stills. Starting to wish I had gone Sony.
I had a little hope that it would match the msrp of the 100mm macro at $1,199 but no such luck 😕 There are several lenses I'd love to try over there too... this one for sure, but also things like the 20mm, 20-70mm, and the new 16-25mm and 24-50mm. The list goes on...
Yup, it's stupid really
5:27 I believe they do work with older bodies in video mode, but not photo mode
Ooo, nice. The one scenario where I think I'd actively use it in photo mode would be on something like an R8 or RP. I don't use the control rings all that often, but that ring would be close enough to my supporting hands that I would rearrange the other two dials for ISO/shutter.
keep doing what you do ;)
Slow and steady!
It took Sony 6 years to come out with their 28-70 f2.0. That is several years behind Canon`s lenses. I think the second version will have internal zoom. If the first one gets cheaper then it`s cool. Sigma has just released 3 primes for RF mount, so there are options out there.
That lens is one that I give Canon praise for trying, along with any of their other nonconventional options. But Sony is generally considered much further developed, both first and third party. Canon definitely closed some gaps late this year, but RF on full frame still isn't really open. Hopefully that changes 2025.
$3k for a lens is outrageous 😭but I am glad the 50mm 1.4 finally made its way to the rf mount
It is a LOT
I can understand, the want for an internal zoom. I got a RF 70-200mm f4 and had it now to send back, because something got loose inside and blocked the tubus, so that i wasnt able to go below 101mm. Picture quality and af worked fine though. Dont know but think that its a bit more unlikely that the new ones have that problem.
Oh no! Any idea what it might have been? And would you go to the F2.8? Hopefully I'll never have to eat these words about mine having no issue 😅
@@DanYosua no, i get a new f4 (lucky it was under warranty). Its not the lenses fault. I meant only that maybe the new ones, that not extend have a higher probability not to get something into the Lense body. The Image quality etc. are pretty fine, when it works.
Glad that happened still under warranty, would have been a big bummer if not.
@DanYosua yes that would be terrible. Would stil buy it or look how expensive the repair would be. Cant afford atm a over 3000 euro lense
Gotta say ... after the 1.4 was announced, I went to the store and held the 35 vcm (which has the same weight and size as the 50 and 24)in hand next to my 50 1.2 ... and the weight difference wasn't as perceivable as you'd believe on paper. The 1.2 is a much chunkier lens still, but the 1.4 is exact same lens. Overall the lens package was not as different as I would've thought. For me who already owns the 1.2, I'm not sure if I want to keep my preorder for the 1.4 or cancel. If you don't already own the 1.4, it's a no brainer almost. The 1.4 is also optically better per reviews, although the 1.2 might end up having more character - but I've yet to see any reviewer do a side by side of them.
Thanks for sharing that... I'll keep my expectations in check haha. If you remember to revisit this comment, it would be cool to hear which you end up keeping. Any chance you keep both and compare for a time period?
I just got mine. The difference is like night and day. It may feel imperceptible but if you are shooting a full 10 hour wedding every bit of weight starts to add up. The handling was also so much better as the 1.2 was so front heavy that using a non gripped camera like the R6 made it awkward to handle. The 1.4 has a nice balance and more importantly, focusing was quick and instantaneous. The 1.4 is sharper too, at least the sharpness was even across the frame - you get noticeably softer corners wide open on the 1.2.
For me, losing a a third of a stop of light was worth the trade off for these advantages mentioned above.
@@Darth-TBAG You probably hit the nail on the head for most people, and great to hear that you are digging it! I absolutely wouldn't want to use the F1.2 all day.
I still don't get "video-focused" without IS.
It seems more about the breathing, power zoom compatibility, and similar sizes and weights for ease of gimbal use. So video-focused, but not really including the run and gun use case that I assume most photo-first shooters would value.