Don't knock the 50mm 1.8 STM! It's a fantastic lens for the $ - Having owned a 50 mm 1.4 I found the 1.8 to be sharper on the 5D IV - saying that my go to lens is the 35 mm 1.4 L.
@@rynfilms No you are not the only one, I have used both 1.8 and 1.4. 1.8 images are like colors have been washed out with cooler tint, while 1.4 is bring out more colors with warmer tint.
@@rynfilms Maybe you had 50mm 1.8 II instead of the STM version that was released quite recently(mid 2015). The main difference was that STM version was sharper (especially on the edges) and the autofocus was usable. The "II" had almost as bad autofocus as the 50/1.4(which in my honest opinion is arguably the worst Canon 50mm all around :P)
The Canon EOS R is an awesome performer. I went ahead and bought the EOS R, played with it, was blown away by it, then I went ahead and switched and sold my Fuji XT- 3 with my lenses. I am really happy with my choice. The Fuji is a great, great camera but it can't compete with full-frame.
@@rynfilms I bought the EF 50mm 1.4, the RF 35mm 1.8, the EF 100mm 2.0, and if all goes according to plan I want to purchase the EF 135mm 2.0 L lens as well!
The EF 50mm 1.4 is a great lens for the money. Just gotta remember you don't have to shoot everything at f /1.4; the depth of field is so small. Like one of your examples, there's no problem getting a sharp eye-lash and a fuzzy nose if that's what you're after. And manually focused on a tripod, super sharp like a prime should be. You just need to be shooting something that doesn't move. Thanks for your efforts.
Good lord, that RF is sooo freaking good. I keep watching reviews trying to convince myself to NOT drop the coin on it. But the more I watch, the more I get convinced that it’s worth it 😂
lol, nah, I mean, I’m not an impulsive buyer so if this thing was out of reach I’d be able to recognize that for myself. But I’ve rented this lens a couple times at this point and as a full time professional, it’s worth it and within reach for me. I’m not a huge fan of buying cheap glass just because of cost when I know the better option is worth it and will pay for itself in one or two shoots
RYN photography yeah, I know it. I love sigma’s image quality but I’ve had other troubles with that exact lens before. Call me a sucker but I’m just convinced that native glass is the only way to go for photography. Video is a different story but for photography, I’m really just sold on native glass.
I have the Chinese Yongnuo 1.4 and that's even cheaper, less than half the price of the Canon EF 1.4. and the sharpness is almost the same as the EF 1.4. The RF 1.4 is amazing but too big to carry and unless you are rich or getting paid big bucks from a high end magazine, Even wedding photographers would find the RF too expensive since the EF 1.2 will do the job anyways. Most women in wedding photos would not want you to show every pimple or imperfections on their skin with the RF lens. Thanks for this video :)
You got it! I did test the Yongnuo in another 50mm comparison, and for $50 its really good. It's by no means high quality but its decent enough for most. 📸
great review! love it! i love the prediction which came true with the r6 and r5, spot on! i'm on the edge thinking if i really need the 50rf 1.2 for casual shooting
When purchasing a particular lens I believe it is important to consider how you actually display your images. If you only display your images via social media, do you really require that £2000 lens when there is a cheaper, but not quite as sharp, alternative for £800? You also have to consider your target audience: if you only show your images to family and friends, would they see the difference between a £2000 lens and an £800 lens?
You are 100% correct Pete! It’s really hard to tell the difference in sharpness on social media. Best not to spend so much extra if that’s all you’re doing. 👍
Great review and I'm with you on what Canon is going to come out with. They haven't developed and built these new lenses for the EOS R and all those people moaning and complaining about Canon and shifting to Sony are going to regret it.
Hey bro... Kinda old video but just saw now... I have a question, if money wasn’t a trouble, would you like this EF 50mm f1.4 or the Sigma 50mm f1.4 ART? For stills and videos.... Thanks bro!
WOW! I really like this comparisson. I just got the EOS RP with the 35 mm RF lens and I own the 5D mk4 with my favorite 50mm 1.4, but I will be sticking to my 1.4 EF because I don't have the money for the RF 1.2... but I am anxious to see you comparing the 50 mm EF 1.2 with the RF 50 mm 1.2 to see how it goes. Thanks again RYN! Great job!!!
I really appreciate the Jamie! If you look a few videos back I did a comparison between the EF 1.2, the RF 1.2 and the Sigma 1.4. Thinking I may have rented a bad EF 1.2 though. You’ll see what I mean in the video.
You can't use a RF lens on an EF mount. The focal flange depth (distance from the lens to the sensor) is much shorter on the RF lens than the EF. Perhaps Metabones will come out with some sort of magical adaptor in the future, but as of now there is nothing I know of. 📸
I’m sure they will be great! I was actually just thinking, I’m glad this new 50 is so expensive. It keeps me from buying it when I don’t really need it. 🤣
I've shot several times with the eos 50mm 1.4 wide open on a Canon 6d (1st gen) and I have to say, it's pretty darn sharp if you practice good holding technique. Maybe I have a newer copy or something but it just doesn't seem as soft as the one that you're shooting with.
I have had mine a while. It may just be that it looks soft when it's right next to the RF. 🤷♂️ It's a great lens and I've filmed a good portion of my UA-cam videos with it.
Ive used a 6d mki and 5d mkiii and the 50mm f/1.4 for 2 years it really struggled having tack sharp photos at f/2.8 i learned to appreciate quality when using my R5 with an RF 50mm
I tested the rf 50. It is as heavy as my beloved 85 1.2L. For me, sharpness is over rated. It is good if you want to capture all the details of your subject like landscape. Though in my experience, models prefer the softer dreamy images as it is more flaterring and artistic.
just subscribed, cool to see content from here in the valley. I decided to invest in the RF 50 early with the buy once, cry once mentality. Very happy with the lens. Hope the rumors are true and the next body is a high resolution one.
@@rynfilms Liking it a lot. Focuses fast enough for me, seems super sharp, love the bokeh, colors, etc. Just updated the servo-focus eye AF firmware today so need someone to test that out with the 50. No IS hasn't been a problem, but I just shoot stills, no video.
There is no use comparing average-priced lens designed in early '90s (ef50/1.4) with something high-end with very high price tag. IMHO Sigma 50art is much better candidate for comparison :) Some people say it has trouble with FF and BF on DSLRs but on EOS R there shouldn't be such a disadvantage due to DPAF...but to be honest with you I douse it on 6d2 and have no issues with AF accuracy.
Pretty sure the video was shot on the EOS R with C-Log. I believe the PP was in Normal with the contrast and sharpness turned down. I don't remember specifically though.
Thanks for the comparison! I have also the EOS R with the EF 50 f1.4. I find the old lens together with the new AF system is great for the money. The new RF lens here is 2499€ and the old a little bit over 250€. So at the moment sadly no way to spend almost ten times more even the lens is so good. I hope Canon will bring another 50mm for RF which is not that good but on the RF 35mm level. The other point is the RF 50 f1.2 is to big and heavy for a fixed focal lens. It is on the level of my 24-70 f2.8.
Agreed! It is a big, heavy lens. When carrying it around in the R I actually found it to feel pretty good and not overly heavy. It’s so good though! But very expensive.
Try to get Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD and compare it. It's not much more expensive than Canon EF f/1.4 especially 2nd hand but much sharper wide open and more versatile.
It depends. I've seen 1.8 lenses that work fantastic and others that were total garbage. I think they QC if not nearly as good for the price-point, so it's a gamble if you'll get a good one or not.
If you want to see comparison between RF 50mm f/1.2L and EF 50mm f/1.2L lens you can click here www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2018/11/27/to-big-to-fail-the-canon-rf-50mm-f/12l
Sigma 50 1.4 ART should be the one to compare against the RF 50 1.2. Unlike on DSLR bodies, it should not have focus issues on the EOS R (with the last firmware) Fairly similar size and weight, no distortion, sharp across the frame, etc. overall not as fast or creamy, but sometimes it can be found for as low as 600$ which is still a lot less than the RF and the optical quality is much higher than the Canon EF 50 1.4.
@@rynfilms I agree, the Sigma Art 50 is fanstasic, and it was the best 50mm for Canon mount until the RF 50L came out. However the Sigma is not moisture/dust sealed, and its AF performance can be dodgey on many Canon bodies....still its a great lens.
I have the 50mm 1.8 STM but I still want this lens lol but for the money, i rather drop it on the 28-70mm f/2 for video/events. I have 16-35mm f/4 for my wides and 24-105mm for travel/general purpose
You'll have to do an extreme crop to really notice the difference on social media. The RF would be a great lens for fashion and portrait work. For your average user, the EF lens is all you really need.
I Wish canon launch a new RF 50mm 1.4 (more decent than the actual one, wich i'm using it always stoping down to 1.8 - 2.0 at least) or an RF 50mm 1.8 with fast and silent AF and a little close to the IQ of the 1.2 RF. We must remember that the 50mm 1.4 USM was launched in 1993 (!)
I’ve found it great for vlogging! The digital IS is a nice addition. 4K is crisp, but still has a crop. I haven’t shot a ton of slow motion with it yet, but it seems comparable to the MK4. Thanks Logan!
Sorry to jump in off-topic but I have noticed lately that a lot of youtubers are posting videos that seem to have little to no colour correction or grading. What I mean is, it looks like the video is shot in a low-contrast, log style and then just put up as is. I don't mean this as a criticism, truly. If it's an artistic choice, have at it. But since you seem like a reasonable person, I'm picking on you to ask about this. Your content is great, by the way. I'm subscribed and I'm glad to let others know to follow you as well.
Thanks Mike! I appreciate the sub! Are you saying my videos look like they are in log? I do color grade, but I also desaturate a little and that makes it look a little flatter. There are many people who don’t grade their footage for purposes of saving time. Keep the feedback coming! 👍
@@rynfilms Thanks very much for the considerate reply. I'm not saying your videos - or any of the others I've noticed this trend with - are in log but they are low contrast and desaturated. It's just that I've noticed this lately on several other channels and it struck me that it might be some kind of trend. I guess I notice it because in videos that have a large still photo component such as this particular one, there is a vast difference between the look of the stills and the look of the video. It isn't a bad thing, necessarily, just something that caught my eye so I thought I'd ask you about it. It sounds like you have made this particular choice for the look of your videos so, please, keep right on doing it! It doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the content at all and content is, really, the only thing that matters. Keep up the great work and thanks again for your reply.
Hi RYN! What a video! Very clear. I'm using ef 50 1.4. Yes, 1.2 rf is more and more sharper. But I'm thinking like you. It's more more pricey. 50 1.4 ef is price/performance! Thank you.
Thank you im new to your channel my name is Duke love your reviews and comedy lol . Yesterday i went and tried the sony A7r ii and 6d mark 2 and i put my 85mm 1.2 mark ii on them on the sony i used a mc 11 adapter come to my surprise when i got home the eos r was so sharp and the 85 focused fast to my surprise i was really shocked so i know if the 85 1.2 did that and beat those cameras the 50 1.2 will be crazy and the 50 1.2 rf didnt look better to me then the 85 it was crazy .
even latest 50 f1.8 is better than f1.4, it's old with outdated optics and was never good in a first place. Against RF - one of the top best lenses out there? To be more or less fair compare it at least to the legendary EF 50mm f1.0 or Sigma something, tho I can't think of a lens worse than this Canon 50 f1.4.
It would have been interesting to see this test at f/2 on both lenses. The 1.4 has spectacular center contrast when stopped down just a bit and the whole frame gets snappy between 2.8-4. You can get great results without going broke.
The 50mm f/1.4 EF lens is not a very good lens from the technical point of view. It creates nice and pleasing images, but has many flaws. But in this case, you do get what you paid for.
Is it worth it?… is a review of RF50 v EF50 1.4 worth it?… well, I watched it so I guess it has some value, although I knew what to expect. Not sure how you've used the 1.4 for years without realising the level of CA and soft edges when it's an absolutely known issue with the 1.4. There is also a known issue with the 1.4 where owners risk damaging the weak focusing components which extends the front of the lens if it is bumped too hard, rendering the lens manual only… Best use a lens hood with that baby. I have the 50mm f1.8 mk2 Plastic Fantastic, that's all plastic, built like a piece of crap, with the spinning front element, but I'm always blown away by the images it produces. I use it for street photography, and I wouldn't dream of replacing it, even with the 1.4 for the reasons shown in your video, as well as it being one of the lightest lenses I own. I do love the look produced by the EF50 1.2, but cannot justify such a high price just to do street shots. As for the RF50, which in comparison weighs an absolute ton… LOOOOL Is the RF50 worth it?… if sharpness is what you are after, or pixel peeping, or printing large format, or wowing friends, or just have loads of money and must have the latest… then maybe. Is the EF50 1.2 worth it? if build quality is important to you, if you must have L quality, if you are a bokeh baby, if you collect classic lenses, or like being one up on those with lesser 50's… then maybe. Is the EF50 1.4 worth it? if you can't affort the 1.2, if you hate the feel of the plastic fantastic, if you are concerned mainly with shooting subjects in the middle of the frame, if you got it at a knock-down price, if you are unaware of it's weeknesses… then maybe. Is the EF50 1.8 worth it? if you like spending next to nothing for a lens, if you don't care about build quality only output, if you have absolutely no intention of comparing your image with someone using an RF50, if you are mainly shooting street photography, and not about 'to turn up to some important job with it… then maybe. just my 2p :0)
Awesome write up! I’ve definitely noticed the CA in the past with the 1.4, but I have also gotten some really amazing images out of it. This vid was mostly to feed my curiosity on what makes the new 50 so expensive. 👍
I skipped over the EF50 1.4 for the reasons stated, and instead got the EF85 1.8... Sure there's small amounts of CA, but nevertheless the output is amazing, and it doesn't share the weaknesses of the 50. The EF85 f1.8 is my favourite lens; images just look magical, and it is physically insanely small and light compared to other 85s. If i'm doing any pro work, I'll bring the 85 any day rather than the 50. I've been eyeing up the EF85 f1.4L(for video work), but the price, and the weight is insane. The RFL and EFL lenses are so expensive because not only are Canon crazy, but, they know they have us Canonites (and even some of the Sony switchers) even more crazy for their L lenses. They operate like L-drug Lords, where most of us are L-Addicts, and Canon have us strung out on red stripe. Why else would we justify paying ten times more for a lens that will only give us a fraction of the improvement? Wasn't the EOS-R being mirrorless, supposed to give a weight advantage?… LOL Don't get me wrong, I love an L-lens, I have four of em, and they are great; 24-70 f4L, 35mm f1.4L, 135mm f2.0L, and 16-35mm f4L. Three of them I bought used, and the price was still quite high, but my favourte lens in my collection is the non-L EF85mm 1.8, and my most used lens (for street photography) is the EFS 10-18mm, both of which cost under £200 brand new. So in short, the L-lenses are so expensive, because we will pay for them, and then justify it with a video talking about bokeh, CA and improvements of corner-to-corner sharpness. All the things that clients aren't aware of, and couldn't care less care about… (another 2p worth)
@@lifetimesofamultiplemediam1003 High-End clients will, in fact, see the differences in lens quality. The wedding of the plumber to the salon girl not so much.
@@lifetimesofamultiplemediam1003 but what about you? Forget about high end clients for a moment, do you want your work to be as best as possible? I am sure you would see the difference, right? Your satisfaction matters to, yea? :-)
Thanks for the great review. I decided to RENT the 1.2 to test it myself and I agree it's pretty incredible. I have the 50mm 1.4 and like you agreed it was a GREAT lens. I was always pleased with the sharp results it gave. Using the new 50mm 1.2.....wow. Sharpness overload. But my end opinion is also similar to yours.....is that sharpness increase worth $2K? Not for me right now. Have you done the EF 50mm 1.2 vs RF 50mm 1.2 review yet? I'm interested in seeing that. Thanks again.
I did try a few other 50mm lenses, although I think I got a bum Canon f1.2 L. You'll see what I mean in the video. ua-cam.com/video/fFyqovMJPEM/v-deo.html
I must disagree the 1.4 isn't that sharp is well known for BAD CA very soft at 1.4 and has a weak AF motor. The newest 1.8 STM smokes it. The 1.2 is a brand new L design so is bound to be better! However your tests do prove that most people most of the time won't see the difference unless zoomed in on a sharp monitor 😎😎😎
Frankly I would be more impressed with a small new 50mm because while they have needed a new decent 50, do we really want to lug this thing around and for the price of a European vacation- why don't the new Canon cameras themselves do what Panasonic has been doing for years - super fabulous corrections in-camera - and how about some other fancy in-camera lens enhancements using digital calculations and the like - some form of computational images and how about the super obvious no-brainer depth of field in the finder like Fuji has been doing for years etc. They make nice glass but their head is up their ass - it rhymes!
I didn’t do any video with the 50, I imagine it would make an amazing lens for video. I did record an update about the business, just need to do a quick edit on it!
The Canon 50mm 1.4 is a lousy lens. Its a $360 canon lens. What do you want? I used it a few years ago on my Canon 6D and I was immediately disappointed with it. Focus is pretty awful. And the softness ruins a lot of images.
@@rynfilms hi buddy I thought there was a lot of over powering background noise in the street, what mic do you use, this is only a small critique and I know full well how blooming hard it is to get sound right mine is not good in areas either and I feel it could be a put off when actually the video is super good and very informative. I have experimented with differing mics and all have there draw backs but the best i have used is rode mics with dead kittens on.
Thanks Ian, I agree the background noise is a bit much. I’m still trying to figure out how to tone that down without making it sound weird. I’m using the Rode video mic pro.
WAIT WAIT WAIT.....I haven't even started the vid hardly and you've gone and knocked the Nifty Fifty Canon 50mm f/1.8, which is literally the BEST *bang for your buck* lens on the planet in my opinion. I have all 3 Canon EF fitment 50s and for photography I'd rather use the 1.8 than the 1.4 (in the unlikely occasion that I don't have the 1.2 EF with me that is...) Our 1.8 is old AF and sharp at 1.8, the 1.4 is sharp at.... 1.8 too....not 1.4. The 1.4 is a better built, better looking lens and the focus ring for mf is nicer than the 1.8 but that's it in my opinion and not a reason to have it over the 1.8. We have all 3 for multiple camera use/backup purposes in case you're wondering and I hate having identical duplicates of kit. Anyhooo.... back to your vid !
@@rynfilms The newer STM version has the metal mount and a sleeker design than the ancient one we have. I don't know if they changed out the glass but I have played with the newest STM version and it seems as sharp as our old one. I think maybe you got a duff one. Grab a new one and do a 50mm shoot out vid!
The ultimate 50mm shootout. Canon 1.8, 1.4, 1.2 EF, 1.2RF, and maybe throw a Sigma in there for good measure. That would make an awesome collab vid! Got a few hundred bucks I can borrow to rent them all? I’m going to have to plan this. 👍
@@rynfilms Nope but we could meet up and I could bring them. I had a 50 Art but unfortunately I didn't win the Sigma lottery with it and I had one that decided that autofocus just wasn't it's thing...so I sold it on when I had the chance to grab the 50L for a good price.
@@rynfilms If you do that big comparo, here is the results from best to worse: RF 50L, Sigma Art 50 f1.4, 50 f1.4, EF 50 f1.2, and last 50 f1.8. But of course do the comparo and see if I am wrong :-). Was I wrong to place the old EF 50L in 4th place? No! Its a terrible lens not worthy of the red ring, nor the L in its name...it's Canon's shame. But Canon redeemed it's self with the RF 50L, which is the best 50 available on a Canon mount, and I would even dare say the best 50mm ever created.
The RF 50L is everything the old tired EF 50L should've been. The EF 50L is horrible; I've had to send back 2 brand new copies...its problem cannot be fixed because the design is heavily flawed. The 50 1.8 is crap, even if someone gives it to you free, or gives it to you and then gives you $100 it changes nothing...the 50 f1.8 is still crap. The 50 f1.4 is better than the f1.8 but its also crap. If you want the best 50mm available for Canon, and may be of any brand, its the RF 50L. I've had all 5 of these 50mm's and so I know first hand. Before the RF 50L came out, the best 50mm for Canon was the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4.
I hope you are the best photographer in the world, because heaving owned every single lens you mentioned I can categorically confirm that none of them are crap. The tools you are calling crap are the same tools that did most of the work on kadirgold.com
Not worth the money. Just spend it on healthcare and fill up the fridge with groceries. Help the children of Africa. Study art and different cultures to capture reality instead of relying heavily on gears.
Don't knock the 50mm 1.8 STM! It's a fantastic lens for the $ - Having owned a 50 mm 1.4 I found the 1.8 to be sharper on the 5D IV - saying that my go to lens is the 35 mm 1.4 L.
I’m staring to wonder if I just had a bad 1.8..
@@rynfilms No you are not the only one, I have used both 1.8 and 1.4. 1.8 images are like colors have been washed out with cooler tint, while 1.4 is bring out more colors with warmer tint.
Easy win for the STM 50 1.8 😎😎😎
@@rynfilms The f1.8 only comes in 1 version: Bad.
@@rynfilms Maybe you had 50mm 1.8 II instead of the STM version that was released quite recently(mid 2015). The main difference was that STM version was sharper (especially on the edges) and the autofocus was usable. The "II" had almost as bad autofocus as the 50/1.4(which in my honest opinion is arguably the worst Canon 50mm all around :P)
The Canon EOS R is an awesome performer. I went ahead and bought the EOS R, played with it, was blown away by it, then I went ahead and switched and sold my Fuji XT- 3 with my lenses. I am really happy with my choice. The Fuji is a great, great camera but it can't compete with full-frame.
Nice! What lenses are you using on the R?
@@rynfilms I bought the EF 50mm 1.4, the RF 35mm 1.8, the EF 100mm 2.0, and if all goes according to plan I want to purchase the EF 135mm 2.0 L lens as well!
The EF 50mm 1.4 is a great lens for the money. Just gotta remember you don't have to shoot everything at f /1.4; the depth of field is so small. Like one of your examples, there's no problem getting a sharp eye-lash and a fuzzy nose if that's what you're after. And manually focused on a tripod, super sharp like a prime should be. You just need to be shooting something that doesn't move. Thanks for your efforts.
Good lord, that RF is sooo freaking good. I keep watching reviews trying to convince myself to NOT drop the coin on it. But the more I watch, the more I get convinced that it’s worth it 😂
The image quality is pretty darn nice! The Sigma 50mm 1.4 is pretty close and half the cost. just FYI. 👍
Sam Lucas: Do yourself and your wallet a huge favor and just save your money.... or buy a cheaper lens.
lol, nah, I mean, I’m not an impulsive buyer so if this thing was out of reach I’d be able to recognize that for myself.
But I’ve rented this lens a couple times at this point and as a full time professional, it’s worth it and within reach for me. I’m not a huge fan of buying cheap glass just because of cost when I know the better option is worth it and will pay for itself in one or two shoots
RYN photography yeah, I know it. I love sigma’s image quality but I’ve had other troubles with that exact lens before. Call me a sucker but I’m just convinced that native glass is the only way to go for photography. Video is a different story but for photography, I’m really just sold on native glass.
@@rynfilms Nah, you cant even really test the RF lenses yet considering the only sensor to resolute it on is the 30mp one in the R
I have the Chinese Yongnuo 1.4 and that's even cheaper, less than half the price of the Canon EF 1.4. and the sharpness is almost the same as the EF 1.4. The RF 1.4 is amazing but too big to carry and unless you are rich or getting paid big bucks from a high end magazine, Even wedding photographers would find the RF too expensive since the EF 1.2 will do the job anyways. Most women in wedding photos would not want you to show every pimple or imperfections on their skin with the RF lens. Thanks for this video :)
You got it! I did test the Yongnuo in another 50mm comparison, and for $50 its really good. It's by no means high quality but its decent enough for most. 📸
great review! love it! i love the prediction which came true with the r6 and r5, spot on! i'm on the edge thinking if i really need the 50rf 1.2 for casual shooting
Going to see you don't NEED it for casual shooting. It's a really great lens and if you can get, it go for it!
That 1.4 looks like crap!🤦♂️
🤣 after comparing it to the 1.2, yes!
@@Pizzatime650 I just check the price for the rf 1.2, it is about 2040 USD in my city.
Someone ( Canon ) give this guy his free gear or smth :)))))) he sells it good
Your videos are great, which lens are you using to vlog in this one? Keep up the good work!
I was probably using the Canon 24-70 f/2.8, It's my go to lens for most things. bhpho.to/2ZTl0LX
RYN photography thanks man, how is the autofocus noise indoors with say a rode mic on top? Looking for a fast zoom that solves this problem!
Tempted to pull the trigger on 24-70. How is the autofocus noise?
Rf 50 f1.2 became one of the sharpness lenses in RF like ef 135L f2.0, king of the sharpness of EF
It's a great lens!
He catching heat for that 50mm 1.8 statement down here boys 😂😂😂😂😂
Just a little heat.. 🔥😆🔥
When purchasing a particular lens I believe it is important to consider how you actually display your images. If you only display your images via social media, do you really require that £2000 lens when there is a cheaper, but not quite as sharp, alternative for £800? You also have to consider your target audience: if you only show your images to family and friends, would they see the difference between a £2000 lens and an £800 lens?
You are 100% correct Pete! It’s really hard to tell the difference in sharpness on social media. Best not to spend so much extra if that’s all you’re doing. 👍
Can some one do comparison between RF 24-70mm vs RF 28-70mm at low light shooting and overall ????
If I can get my hands on both at the same time, of course!
Great review and I'm with you on what Canon is going to come out with. They haven't developed and built these new lenses for the EOS R and all those people moaning and complaining about Canon and shifting to Sony are going to regret it.
👍🔥
Hey bro... Kinda old video but just saw now...
I have a question, if money wasn’t a trouble, would you like this EF 50mm f1.4 or the Sigma 50mm f1.4 ART?
For stills and videos....
Thanks bro!
Sigma all day long! I tested it in another vid and it’s an awesome lens!
WOW! I really like this comparisson. I just got the EOS RP with the 35 mm RF lens and I own the 5D mk4 with my favorite 50mm 1.4, but I will be sticking to my 1.4 EF because I don't have the money for the RF 1.2... but I am anxious to see you comparing the 50 mm EF 1.2 with the RF 50 mm 1.2 to see how it goes. Thanks again RYN! Great job!!!
I really appreciate the Jamie!
If you look a few videos back I did a comparison between the EF 1.2, the RF 1.2 and the Sigma 1.4. Thinking I may have rented a bad EF 1.2 though. You’ll see what I mean in the video.
Great videos! Question ... can u mount an RF lens back onto an EF body like the 6D or 5DmkIV with some sort of backwards compatible adapter?
You can't use a RF lens on an EF mount. The focal flange depth (distance from the lens to the sensor) is much shorter on the RF lens than the EF. Perhaps Metabones will come out with some sort of magical adaptor in the future, but as of now there is nothing I know of. 📸
Thanks!
Man the difference is night and day! Great comparison video, but I still love my 1.8 :D can't beat it for the price!
I was amazed at the difference. I suppose the 1.8 is alright. 🥴
@@rynfilms haha just wait till you see the portraits I took of you on the 1.8 ;)
I’m sure they will be great! I was actually just thinking, I’m glad this new 50 is so expensive. It keeps me from buying it when I don’t really need it. 🤣
oh man, all of this was so awesome, great job Ryan!
Thanks Javier!
I've shot several times with the eos 50mm 1.4 wide open on a Canon 6d (1st gen) and I have to say, it's pretty darn sharp if you practice good holding technique. Maybe I have a newer copy or something but it just doesn't seem as soft as the one that you're shooting with.
I have had mine a while. It may just be that it looks soft when it's right next to the RF. 🤷♂️
It's a great lens and I've filmed a good portion of my UA-cam videos with it.
Ive used a 6d mki and 5d mkiii and the 50mm f/1.4 for 2 years it really struggled having tack sharp photos at f/2.8 i learned to appreciate quality when using my R5 with an RF 50mm
Hey man, I really appreciate your videos. Thanks for the information and at the same time keeping it entertaining for us viewers. Two thumbs up!
Thanks Shaz!
I tested the rf 50. It is as heavy as my beloved 85 1.2L. For me, sharpness is over rated. It is good if you want to capture all the details of your subject like landscape. Though in my experience, models prefer the softer dreamy images as it is more flaterring and artistic.
I agree that a song skin is great. But when you can get the eyes crystal clear sharp and soft skin, that’s where it’s at.
From how many years your useing 50mm 1.4 USM ?
I’ve had it for at least 5 years, probably more.
@@rynfilms did you got any issue in focusing on 50mm 1.4 USM ?
Did you use the 50mm f1.2 RF at f1.2 in the 1st half of photos comparing sharpness? It seems the samples from the f1.2 RF had more depth of field.
Every shot on both lenses were wide open.
Thank you for clarifying. I enjoyed the review. Keep up the great work.
Try the Tamron EF 45 mm f/1.8 IS very sharp, contrast, etc. For the price doesn’t get any better.
Lots of people have been asking me to take a look at Tamron lately. I guess I'll have to give them a shot soon. 👍
Love these new Ef vs Rf videos!
Thanks Ben!
just subscribed, cool to see content from here in the valley. I decided to invest in the RF 50 early with the buy once, cry once mentality. Very happy with the lens. Hope the rumors are true and the next body is a high resolution one.
Thanks Justin! How are you liking it?
@@rynfilms Liking it a lot. Focuses fast enough for me, seems super sharp, love the bokeh, colors, etc. Just updated the servo-focus eye AF firmware today so need someone to test that out with the 50. No IS hasn't been a problem, but I just shoot stills, no video.
Been able to see a slightly better definition of the eyelashes when you zoom doesn't do a better photo
A sharper lens a better photo doesn't make.
🤔
What is your vlogging camera?!! Thanks!
I believe this one was shot on the EOS R.
RYN photography Great! Your hand held so steady! Is that 24-105? Thanks for your reply!
Thanks! It’s the 24-70 f/2.8. The digital IS on the EOS R is really good. I’ve been pretty impressed with it.
There is no use comparing average-priced lens designed in early '90s (ef50/1.4) with something high-end with very high price tag. IMHO Sigma 50art is much better candidate for comparison :) Some people say it has trouble with FF and BF on DSLRs but on EOS R there shouldn't be such a disadvantage due to DPAF...but to be honest with you I douse it on 6d2 and have no issues with AF accuracy.
Mostly I was curious on why this lens was so expensive. The best lens I had to compare it to was the 1.4.
Agree... Sigma is a monster.
What camera, lens and picture profile did you use for this video?
Pretty sure the video was shot on the EOS R with C-Log. I believe the PP was in Normal with the contrast and sharpness turned down. I don't remember specifically though.
Thanks for the comparison! I have also the EOS R with the EF 50 f1.4. I find the old lens together with the new AF system is great for the money. The new RF lens here is 2499€ and the old a little bit over 250€. So at the moment sadly no way to spend almost ten times more even the lens is so good. I hope Canon will bring another 50mm for RF which is not that good but on the RF 35mm level. The other point is the RF 50 f1.2 is to big and heavy for a fixed focal lens. It is on the level of my 24-70 f2.8.
Agreed! It is a big, heavy lens. When carrying it around in the R I actually found it to feel pretty good and not overly heavy. It’s so good though! But very expensive.
I have the 50 1.8 STM lens, it's great, lightweight and cheap ☺️👍
Just not that good @ 1.8,
I second this, the STM is phenomenal even when compared to the 1.2
Try to get Tamron SP 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD and compare it. It's not much more expensive than Canon EF f/1.4 especially 2nd hand but much sharper wide open and more versatile.
I wonder how 1.4 USM compares to RF 1.8.
It depends. I've seen 1.8 lenses that work fantastic and others that were total garbage. I think they QC if not nearly as good for the price-point, so it's a gamble if you'll get a good one or not.
Stop down the ef 50 1.4 to 2.8 and you get the same improvement in sharpness as the 1.2.
Yeah, It's not the best at 1.4, but when you need it it's nice to have it.
Great lens, sure wish I could afford it. Looking forward to a comparison between EF 50 1.2 to the RF...
I'm not sure many people can realistically afford that one. Really nice though! 🤷♂️
Wish you compared to something more Apple to apples ef 1.2 50mm.. but price wise this is fun
I was must curious on what made this so expensive, the 1.4 was the only thing I had to compare it to.
This comparison is amazing man! Well done. Putting that effort in for all of us.
You’re welcome Anthony! Hope you’re doing well. 👍
I love the new R mount and the control ring is fantastic.
Awesome!
What lens were you using when vlogging? When you darkened it
I use the Canon 24-70 f/2.8 with a variable ND filter.
Pricey😔
what aperture were you comparing these at?
If I remember right, the test shots are wide open on both lenses.
Good stuff, man! Just subscribed!
Appreciate it!
If you want to see comparison between RF 50mm f/1.2L and EF 50mm f/1.2L lens you can click here www.streetsilhouettes.com/home/2018/11/27/to-big-to-fail-the-canon-rf-50mm-f/12l
I've learned to embrace the flaws.
My flaws or the lens? 🤣
Sigma 50 1.4 ART should be the one to compare against the RF 50 1.2. Unlike on DSLR bodies, it should not have focus issues on the EOS R (with the last firmware)
Fairly similar size and weight, no distortion, sharp across the frame, etc. overall not as fast or creamy, but sometimes it can be found for as low as 600$ which is still a lot less than the RF and the optical quality is much higher than the Canon EF 50 1.4.
I’ll check it out!
@@rynfilms I agree, the Sigma Art 50 is fanstasic, and it was the best 50mm for Canon mount until the RF 50L came out. However the Sigma is not moisture/dust sealed, and its AF performance can be dodgey on many Canon bodies....still its a great lens.
I have the 50mm 1.8 STM but I still want this lens lol but for the money, i rather drop it on the 28-70mm f/2 for video/events. I have 16-35mm f/4 for my wides and 24-105mm for travel/general purpose
Would of been interesting to stop down the lenses and test for resolution.
It will become closer id think
You'll have to do an extreme crop to really notice the difference on social media. The RF would be a great lens for fashion and portrait work. For your average user, the EF lens is all you really need.
Try shooting at f2 or f1.8 it will be tacksharp
There're so many ways to test, It's hard to fit it all into one video. 🤷♂️
I Wish canon launch a new RF 50mm 1.4 (more decent than the actual one, wich i'm using it always stoping down to 1.8 - 2.0 at least) or an RF 50mm 1.8 with fast and silent AF and a little close to the IQ of the 1.2 RF.
We must remember that the 50mm 1.4 USM was launched in 1993 (!)
Good call Fran! I can see them coming out with a midrange RF line soon. If not, someone else will!
@@rynfilms if someone else do it (hello, sigma 😊), at least we will save a couple hundred of bucks hahahaha.
I had disliked your one of the videos...but then I saw this one and this is by far better than the one I disliked. Keep going!
🤣 hope you gave me a 👍 for this one then.
@@rynfilms yes obviously 😂
Curious, How's the R for vlogging? 4K? Slow Motion?
I’ve found it great for vlogging! The digital IS is a nice addition. 4K is crisp, but still has a crop. I haven’t shot a ton of slow motion with it yet, but it seems comparable to the MK4. Thanks Logan!
Does it only do 1080 60?
4K 30, 1080 60, and 720 at 120.
Very cute IOU’s how the 120 looks
Great review
Thanks Tom!
Sorry to jump in off-topic but I have noticed lately that a lot of youtubers are posting videos that seem to have little to no colour correction or grading. What I mean is, it looks like the video is shot in a low-contrast, log style and then just put up as is. I don't mean this as a criticism, truly. If it's an artistic choice, have at it. But since you seem like a reasonable person, I'm picking on you to ask about this. Your content is great, by the way. I'm subscribed and I'm glad to let others know to follow you as well.
Thanks Mike! I appreciate the sub! Are you saying my videos look like they are in log? I do color grade, but I also desaturate a little and that makes it look a little flatter. There are many people who don’t grade their footage for purposes of saving time. Keep the feedback coming! 👍
@@rynfilms Thanks very much for the considerate reply. I'm not saying your videos - or any of the others I've noticed this trend with - are in log but they are low contrast and desaturated. It's just that I've noticed this lately on several other channels and it struck me that it might be some kind of trend. I guess I notice it because in videos that have a large still photo component such as this particular one, there is a vast difference between the look of the stills and the look of the video.
It isn't a bad thing, necessarily, just something that caught my eye so I thought I'd ask you about it. It sounds like you have made this particular choice for the look of your videos so, please, keep right on doing it! It doesn't detract from my enjoyment of the content at all and content is, really, the only thing that matters. Keep up the great work and thanks again for your reply.
Hi RYN! What a video! Very clear. I'm using ef 50 1.4. Yes, 1.2 rf is more and more sharper. But I'm thinking like you. It's more more pricey. 50 1.4 ef is price/performance! Thank you.
Use what you have and save up for the better one if it makes sense for you!
I love my RF 50! They are releasing a 1DXMKIII tho lol.
I have the thus lens, the 35 1.8 IS and the RF-70-200.
Never too late to go back to EF!! 😆
Nice video, love your style！
Thank you im new to your channel my name is Duke love your reviews and comedy lol . Yesterday i went and tried the sony A7r ii and 6d mark 2 and i put my 85mm 1.2 mark ii on them on the sony i used a mc 11 adapter come to my surprise when i got home the eos r was so sharp and the 85 focused fast to my surprise i was really shocked so i know if the 85 1.2 did that and beat those cameras the 50 1.2 will be crazy and the 50 1.2 rf didnt look better to me then the 85 it was crazy .
The 1.4 is a good lens. You just need to stop it down unfortunately but it still has better quality than any of the 1.8s
even latest 50 f1.8 is better than f1.4, it's old with outdated optics and was never good in a first place. Against RF - one of the top best lenses out there? To be more or less fair compare it at least to the legendary EF 50mm f1.0 or Sigma something, tho I can't think of a lens worse than this Canon 50 f1.4.
I've had decent luck with my 1.4, i guess I got a good one. I did another vid where I compare a bunch of 50mm lenses.
Thanks ryn
You got it! 🥳
The new RF lenses are amazing!
I’m crushing so hard about the new 70-200. Can’t wait until it comes out. And then the 5 more years it’ll take me to save up for it. 😳
It would have been interesting to see this test at f/2 on both lenses. The 1.4 has spectacular center contrast when stopped down just a bit and the whole frame gets snappy between 2.8-4. You can get great results without going broke.
It's always hard to decide what settings to do these comparisons at. I do what I can. 👍
Fantastic presentation.
Thanks!
The 50mm f/1.4 EF lens is not a very good lens from the technical point of view. It creates nice and pleasing images, but has many flaws. But in this case, you do get what you paid for.
What matters in the end is the image. I've had some good luck overall with my 50 f/1.4
@@rynfilms I couldn't agree more!
Is it worth it?… is a review of RF50 v EF50 1.4 worth it?… well, I watched it so I guess it has some value, although I knew what to expect. Not sure how you've used the 1.4 for years without realising the level of CA and soft edges when it's an absolutely known issue with the 1.4. There is also a known issue with the 1.4 where owners risk damaging the weak focusing components which extends the front of the lens if it is bumped too hard, rendering the lens manual only… Best use a lens hood with that baby.
I have the 50mm f1.8 mk2 Plastic Fantastic, that's all plastic, built like a piece of crap, with the spinning front element, but I'm always blown away by the images it produces. I use it for street photography, and I wouldn't dream of replacing it, even with the 1.4 for the reasons shown in your video, as well as it being one of the lightest lenses I own. I do love the look produced by the EF50 1.2, but cannot justify such a high price just to do street shots. As for the RF50, which in comparison weighs an absolute ton… LOOOOL
Is the RF50 worth it?… if sharpness is what you are after, or pixel peeping, or printing large format, or wowing friends, or just have loads of money and must have the latest… then maybe.
Is the EF50 1.2 worth it? if build quality is important to you, if you must have L quality, if you are a bokeh baby, if you collect classic lenses, or like being one up on those with lesser 50's… then maybe.
Is the EF50 1.4 worth it? if you can't affort the 1.2, if you hate the feel of the plastic fantastic, if you are concerned mainly with shooting subjects in the middle of the frame, if you got it at a knock-down price, if you are unaware of it's weeknesses… then maybe.
Is the EF50 1.8 worth it? if you like spending next to nothing for a lens, if you don't care about build quality only output, if you have absolutely no intention of comparing your image with someone using an RF50, if you are mainly shooting street photography, and not about 'to turn up to some important job with it… then maybe.
just my 2p :0)
Awesome write up! I’ve definitely noticed the CA in the past with the 1.4, but I have also gotten some really amazing images out of it.
This vid was mostly to feed my curiosity on what makes the new 50 so expensive. 👍
I skipped over the EF50 1.4 for the reasons stated, and instead got the EF85 1.8... Sure there's small amounts of CA, but nevertheless the output is amazing, and it doesn't share the weaknesses of the 50. The EF85 f1.8 is my favourite lens; images just look magical, and it is physically insanely small and light compared to other 85s. If i'm doing any pro work, I'll bring the 85 any day rather than the 50. I've been eyeing up the EF85 f1.4L(for video work), but the price, and the weight is insane.
The RFL and EFL lenses are so expensive because not only are Canon crazy, but, they know they have us Canonites (and even some of the Sony switchers) even more crazy for their L lenses. They operate like L-drug Lords, where most of us are L-Addicts, and Canon have us strung out on red stripe. Why else would we justify paying ten times more for a lens that will only give us a fraction of the improvement? Wasn't the EOS-R being mirrorless, supposed to give a weight advantage?… LOL
Don't get me wrong, I love an L-lens, I have four of em, and they are great; 24-70 f4L, 35mm f1.4L, 135mm f2.0L, and 16-35mm f4L. Three of them I bought used, and the price was still quite high, but my favourte lens in my collection is the non-L EF85mm 1.8, and my most used lens (for street photography) is the EFS 10-18mm, both of which cost under £200 brand new.
So in short, the L-lenses are so expensive, because we will pay for them, and then justify it with a video talking about bokeh, CA and improvements of corner-to-corner sharpness. All the things that clients aren't aware of, and couldn't care less care about… (another 2p worth)
@@lifetimesofamultiplemediam1003 High-End clients will, in fact, see the differences in lens quality. The wedding of the plumber to the salon girl not so much.
@Dan Lovell… True true... In that case maybe we just rent it when we get that High-End gig.
@@lifetimesofamultiplemediam1003 but what about you? Forget about high end clients for a moment, do you want your work to be as best as possible? I am sure you would see the difference, right? Your satisfaction matters to, yea? :-)
What about comparing to EF 50mm f/1.2? Its a thousand less and remarkable.
I want to compare the 1.2 EF and RF so bad now! I bet its a close race.
Thanks for the great review. I decided to RENT the 1.2 to test it myself and I agree it's pretty incredible. I have the 50mm 1.4 and like you agreed it was a GREAT lens. I was always pleased with the sharp results it gave. Using the new 50mm 1.2.....wow. Sharpness overload. But my end opinion is also similar to yours.....is that sharpness increase worth $2K? Not for me right now. Have you done the EF 50mm 1.2 vs RF 50mm 1.2 review yet? I'm interested in seeing that. Thanks again.
I did try a few other 50mm lenses, although I think I got a bum Canon f1.2 L. You'll see what I mean in the video. ua-cam.com/video/fFyqovMJPEM/v-deo.html
1.8 Shoots great shots bro.
Nice vid and comparison! Keep em commin'
I must disagree the 1.4 isn't that sharp is well known for BAD CA very soft at 1.4 and has a weak AF motor. The newest 1.8 STM smokes it. The 1.2 is a brand new L design so is bound to be better! However your tests do prove that most people most of the time won't see the difference unless zoomed in on a sharp monitor 😎😎😎
I’m going to give the 1.8 another try. Thinking I had a bad one in the past because the one I used was terrible. 📸
Frankly I would be more impressed with a small new 50mm because while they have needed a new decent 50, do we really want to lug this thing around and for the price of a European vacation- why don't the new Canon cameras themselves do what Panasonic has been doing for years - super fabulous corrections in-camera - and how about some other fancy in-camera lens enhancements using digital calculations and the like - some form of computational images and how about the super obvious no-brainer depth of field in the finder like Fuji has been doing for years etc. They make nice glass but their head is up their ass - it rhymes!
Did you mean to do that magic trick at 1:00 ?!?!?!?!?!
WHAT!!!??? I never even noticed that! 😂
@@rynfilms The timing was just perfect!
Night and day. Thanks.
Happy to help!
Nice, Video #2 for the week!, Best way to get more subs and views is to make more content bud! Did you explore the video differences at all?
I didn’t do any video with the 50, I imagine it would make an amazing lens for video. I did record an update about the business, just need to do a quick edit on it!
The Canon 50mm 1.4 is a lousy lens. Its a $360 canon lens. What do you want? I used it a few years ago on my Canon 6D and I was immediately disappointed with it. Focus is pretty awful. And the softness ruins a lot of images.
Compared to a high end, yes it's lousy. For things like social media, it's not all that bad.
good video except for the sound quality
Thanks for the feedback Ian. What about the sound quality could be improved?
@@rynfilms hi buddy I thought there was a lot of over powering background noise in the street, what mic do you use, this is only a small critique and I know full well how blooming hard it is to get sound right mine is not good in areas either and I feel it could be a put off when actually the video is super good and very informative. I have experimented with differing mics and all have there draw backs but the best i have used is rode mics with dead kittens on.
Thanks Ian, I agree the background noise is a bit much. I’m still trying to figure out how to tone that down without making it sound weird. I’m using the Rode video mic pro.
Wow! What a incredible lens!! 👍 👍 👍 👍
👍🏽👍🏽 Thank you
No problem Mike!
I just order one last night :)
Sweet! 🥳
i had the 1.4 it sucks. i noticed this and sold it years ago. it is soft as shit.
Perhaps you had a bad one, just like my first 1.8 was crazy soft. It happens.
WAIT WAIT WAIT.....I haven't even started the vid hardly and you've gone and knocked the Nifty Fifty Canon 50mm f/1.8, which is literally the BEST *bang for your buck* lens on the planet in my opinion. I have all 3 Canon EF fitment 50s and for photography I'd rather use the 1.8 than the 1.4 (in the unlikely occasion that I don't have the 1.2 EF with me that is...) Our 1.8 is old AF and sharp at 1.8, the 1.4 is sharp at.... 1.8 too....not 1.4. The 1.4 is a better built, better looking lens and the focus ring for mf is nicer than the 1.8 but that's it in my opinion and not a reason to have it over the 1.8. We have all 3 for multiple camera use/backup purposes in case you're wondering and I hate having identical duplicates of kit. Anyhooo.... back to your vid !
🤣 I knew I would catch all kinds of flack for saying that. I think I’m going to have to give it another try soon.
@@rynfilms The newer STM version has the metal mount and a sleeker design than the ancient one we have. I don't know if they changed out the glass but I have played with the newest STM version and it seems as sharp as our old one. I think maybe you got a duff one. Grab a new one and do a 50mm shoot out vid!
The ultimate 50mm shootout. Canon 1.8, 1.4, 1.2 EF, 1.2RF, and maybe throw a Sigma in there for good measure. That would make an awesome collab vid! Got a few hundred bucks I can borrow to rent them all?
I’m going to have to plan this. 👍
@@rynfilms Nope but we could meet up and I could bring them. I had a 50 Art but unfortunately I didn't win the Sigma lottery with it and I had one that decided that autofocus just wasn't it's thing...so I sold it on when I had the chance to grab the 50L for a good price.
@@rynfilms If you do that big comparo, here is the results from best to worse: RF 50L, Sigma Art 50 f1.4, 50 f1.4, EF 50 f1.2, and last 50 f1.8. But of course do the comparo and see if I am wrong :-). Was I wrong to place the old EF 50L in 4th place? No! Its a terrible lens not worthy of the red ring, nor the L in its name...it's Canon's shame. But Canon redeemed it's self with the RF 50L, which is the best 50 available on a Canon mount, and I would even dare say the best 50mm ever created.
Night and day.
It's what another $2K get you! ☀️
@@rynfilms Absolutely. Some people can't see the difference, but my eyes can. Too much sharpness may not exactly be good for portraits though.
50mm Sigma art
That is one great lens. It's about 98% the quality of the RF.. and half the price!😆
Lol I hate this test...it makes the more affordable 1.4 looks like trash. Lol great review!
😂Agreed. I'm not sure I've used the 1.4 since making this vid.
Sigma 50 1.4 does job better...
The Sigma 1.4 is great! I tested it out in another vid. 📸
Can't wait for the pro-body 80mp Canon with ibis. Then the new lenses will produce unreal detail.
Agreed, these lenses are going to be great for years to come.
Horrible review. Didn't even say at what aperture he was shooting. I assume both wide open
My bad. I usually add the info to the screen. Guess I missed it on this vid. But yes, wide open.
Yeah... lens comparison at 1080p. Make sense! (not)
I have another 50mm comparison video with a link to download the sample images if that helps you better. You’re welcome! 👍
RYN photography just upload in 4k. We live in 2019, not in 2005 when 1080p was big new deal..
1080p is so 2005, you got it boss.
RYN photography no really. Do you see many 1080p tvs in store? I dont. Only 4k
Sold me on the 1.4 😂😂😂.
I dig it! 👍
RYN photography is there any way to work around the noise from the lens in video mode?
Your best option would be some sort of external mic.
The RF 50L is everything the old tired EF 50L should've been. The EF 50L is horrible; I've had to send back 2 brand new copies...its problem cannot be fixed because the design is heavily flawed. The 50 1.8 is crap, even if someone gives it to you free, or gives it to you and then gives you $100 it changes nothing...the 50 f1.8 is still crap. The 50 f1.4 is better than the f1.8 but its also crap. If you want the best 50mm available for Canon, and may be of any brand, its the RF 50L. I've had all 5 of these 50mm's and so I know first hand. Before the RF 50L came out, the best 50mm for Canon was the Sigma Art 50mm f1.4.
I’m putting together a big 50mm comparison. It’s anyone’s game at this point! 📸
I hope you are the best photographer in the world, because heaving owned every single lens you mentioned I can categorically confirm that none of them are crap. The tools you are calling crap are the same tools that did most of the work on kadirgold.com
Not worth the money. Just spend it on healthcare and fill up the fridge with groceries. Help the children of Africa. Study art and different cultures to capture reality instead of relying heavily on gears.
For most people, it's not necessary. Nice lens though.