This is easily the most amazing lens I’ve ever owned. The shots I’ve been able to accomplish using this lens have been spectacular. From Astro to ultra-wide landscapes, it does it all. Switching to Canon RF mount for this lens alone is worth it!
Had 16-35mm f4 'L', for dslr, was my fav & brilliant for Landscapes...this is prob much better though be better for price of ot was all internal zoom, regarding dust & moisture.
That extra millimeter at 15mm (vs the EF’s 16) was a smart move, for it may be enough to keep some photogs from needing an ultra-wide angle and permits use of standard filters. Nice. That price tag though...ouch.
@@Axonteer Always buy gear on sale. Some electronics chain or online shop will always have a 10% coupon or promotional thing going on. Just keep your eyes peeled. I bought the RF15-35mm for 2179 euro in October. It's going for 2374 right now in the same shop.
@@Axonteer Sure but well worth the price. And for the target group -> professionals or the Ines who require this quality to earn money, its just a regular cost position on their list
EF 16-35 4 IS USM is still most well balanced wide angle zoom lens for Canon. If you not afraid third-party options and dont need IS, you also can buy brilliant tamron 17-35 2.8-4. These two lenses is really exelent, not just "fine for money". If you really need more light on wide angles for some reason - this new RF lens or canon 16-35 2.8 III - maybe not best options, because these lenses have very high vignetting, practical killing sense of 2.8 aperture. You may look on tamron 15-30 2.8 - it not so sharp, but has really gentle vignetting, even on 15mm. You also can get closer look on some primes, like Sigma art 14 1.8, 20 1.4 or 24 1.4 - on 2.8 they have MUCH brighter corners, all this -3 EV nightmare they passed on theirs max apertures.
The reason new glass vignettes so bad is because (according to manufacturers) it is beneficial to use modern DSP for vignette and curvature correction and focus on optical correction of other aberrations (no pun intended). The end result should in practice be sharper than if everything was corrected with glass. Same aproach can be seen with Sony 16-35, 14-24, Sigma 14-24 and (worst case) Sigma 24-70 which by many is considered an APSC lens (ouch!).
I have this lens and it is a joy to shoot. It stays on my EOSR 85% of the time. Excellent for street & architecture photography. The IS is the best I’ve used. I wish it was 1-2 inches shorter and it’s ergos would be perfect. Just slightly front heavy. Would probably be better with a grip. But, I prefer not to use one. Bokeh is very smooth as well. When they come out with a high megapixel camera and you can confidently put it in crop mode, this lens may never come off my camera except to takes pictures of people. Brilliant lens. Hope they come out with a 100-400RF soon.
Chris, Thank you for your wonderful reviews! I have bought many lenses based on your recommendations and find them spot on. I have been intrigued by the new Tokina Opera lenses. I purchased the 16-28mm and greatly enjoy it. I would be curious to not only see a review of this lens in comparison to other wide angle zooms, but also to have you test the Opera 50mm 1.4. I'm thinking about buying one, but it is a bit pricy for me. When I look for reviews, I can't find many. If you don't have time, I totally understand. Thank you for the service you provide us!
@@christopherfrost That would be wonderful! With Covid-19, I need to be even more careful with my money than I usually am. I want to keep advancing in photography and having lens reviews like yours really helps me make good decisions when buying gear. Thank you!
Finally, I was waiting for that review. Well done 👍, massive improvement, sharpness, stabilizer, less vignetting, 1mm wider than ef 16-35mm iii l USM. What grate RF lenses 😉
hey christopher! i just bought this lens 10 days back - and i feel this with the r5, underexposes by about a stop! is this a character of the lens? quite frustrating!
Hey Chris, I know I'm two years late for a comment like this but I'd just wanna know your opinion on upgrading from the 16-35F4L to this lens. I've recently gotten an R6 so it's not resolution emphasized, and I mainly shoot at least at F5.6 or F8, half of the time maybe even smaller apertures than that. I'd want to upgrade as this is my most used lens, but the price tag really makes it hard to make the purchase even when my budget is closer to it after selling a few older lenses. What do you think? Should I upgrade to the 15-35L? I've seen a lot of praise for it but I'm not sure the price tag and the potential problems I've seen online, like focus shift and worse build quality would make me regret the purchase.
Well, based on your review as well as some other information I found, I'm going ahead and pulling the trigger on this. I need to make a trip to a museum that I will not be able to access easily and being able to get crisp low light shots is important.
Any suggestion for a new lens for my R10? I have the kit 18-150 and the 35mm which are great I only really do street photography. Am I overthinking things and just roll with what I got? Or is there a good 3rd option I can play with?
I hope Sigma or Tamron makes a lens with focal length like this, filter size of 82mm so that it can still use a 100x150mm square filter for landscape photography
@1:21 - Did you add the red ring to the RF 35mm IS STM in post? It's not like it really matters, but I was holding one at a camera shop the other day and could've sworn it was silver (and Googling seems to confirm that).
I added it myself with red tape, simply because I like the lens :-) sorry, I should have mentioned that instead of confusing everyone! It'll get mentioned in my review of the RF 24-70
Hey Chris! I love your videos. Is there any chance you could do a review on the old Ef 20-35 f/2.8 L lens? It's a lens I am very interested in because of the low price at the moment. It'd be greatly appreciated, but I know you're a busy man. God bless :)
Future me here, HI Chris :D - I own now finally a R6 and also somehow managed to get an adapter after failing at that for like half a year or more. I own the RF24-105 f4 and the 50mm f1.8 and still use the "old" ef 16-35 f4.. i thought about getting it (the reason i bought the r6 over the r5 was mostly because 25mp more for 3000$ wont make my pictures twice as good, and i rather invest in a new lense or two) but when i saw the price (here 2800$ in switzerland, converted) - yeet. And the size.. oh my, Especially because i own that 24-105 and i see that one already as a big lense, even compared to my old sigma ef 24-105 :O
I'm still considering EF 16-35 f2.8L iii USM since it is much cheaper than RF one. The RF one obviously out-performs the EF one. But as the EF one was one of the best of the kind at the time it was released, I really want to know if the EF one is worth using on Canon mirrorless considering the cheaper price and overall performance, or not. Does anyone have any idea?
correct me if im wrong but are corners not as sharp bc of field curvature? make sure the lens is completely parallel to the subject and focus on a corner instead of the middle.
Hi! Great material! I have a huge challenge! Select a filter system. I have old Haida. Unfortunately, the vignette on wide 16-18mm lenses excludes its use. Please provide a clear statement. Haida M10 with polarizing filter and one gray filter will not give a 15mm vignette on Canon RF 15-35 ??? Typically, I protect the filter with a thin protective filter (Marumi / Hoya) Will the use of such a filter blend the lens and the Haida M10 cause a vignette? Thank you very much for your reply.
Thank you Christopher for this review! I've been waiting for that. What do you think is the better option for astro photography and landscape - this lens or the Sigma 14 -24 f2.8 which has been coming to the market for sony e mount and will hopefully also reach the canon RF mount very soon? Many thanks in advance for you kind answer🙏
The Sigma lens might be very slightly sharper and is far less expensive and goes a little wider. The Canon lens goes to 35mm and has IS. It's up to you what works best for you :-)
@@christopherfrost Thank you for your answer Christopher. To me two more things are important for this kind of photographay. Firstly vignetting is very important when rising shadows and weather sealing which is very important due to the fact that I am living in the heart of europe and therefor we do not have the dry conditions from advertised american deserts at night. Btw it makes me very sad to see you Brits leaving our community tomorrow. God bless you and your family christopher.
I'm curious how much of that DSLR lens ended up in this lens. It looks like the lens elements closest to the sensor are buried pretty deeply into the lens, so that makes me wonder if they started with the DSLR lens as a reference and then made changes, or if it was a clean-sheet design.
@@TWX1138 All RF lenses are completely new designs with beside reduce flange distance relevant new features especially regarding focus, close focus, etc. Canon takes the game serious, really!
Hi! Are you perhaps testing or about to test the new Tamron primes for Sony? I mean the 20mm, the 24mm and the 35mm f/2.8 DI III OSD. Thanks for your videos!
looks like it works fine at higher apertures, but I would want to use this type of lens for wide angle landscape at both day and night time, in particular, astrophotography on my r
Hi i have a question. I bought me the eos r with the ef 50mm 1.8. I like to do street photography and im looking for a second lens. Is the 85mm from Sigma a good option for street?
If you want to stick out like an elephant, then yeah, sure, why not. The Sigma is huge and heavy, you‘ll get tons of attention from bystanders and motifs. The 85mm 1.8 USM is a much better fit. Focuses fast, is really small, costs next to nothing used, sharp enough wide open and you‘ll never notice the bokeh difference in real life. Your 50mm 1.8 is already perfect size- and performance wise, stick to that formula!
Hey Mr. frost, Out of ALL of the cameras and lenses you’ve used, what’s your favorite setup to shoot with yourself? If you had to pick camera/lens combo.
Thanks for the review. I shoot a lot of architecture and those distortion characteristics don't look great. Just out of interest, which other UWA lenses did you think are sharper in the corners?
Ultrawide zooms have allways distortions, others more others less. Sony 16-35 2.8 gm dont have much, but price is 2700€ without stabilization. Distortions are allways away just with one click of a button, when giving basic edits to picture anyway.
You have to keep in mind that size is one of many things you an optimize for. A mirrorless camera should be able to have a smaller and lighter lens for the same speed and quality. With the initial RF lenses Canon has been aiming more to improve quality than shrinking size. With their 70-200 they did drop the size quite a bit though. This is also a full frame mount. You're not going to get EF-M sizes that use the whole sensor. I'm sure somebody will come out with some more compact RF lenses, though they probably won't be as fast or have the same image quality as these initial ones.
@Foto4Max the laowa 9/2.8? That is nice, but in FF it is 14mm and unfortunately not a zoom lens, the 10-18/4.5-5.6 is good too with 37mm rear filter, but no bigger version of 2.8 yet.. :(
I wish you could test the Nikon Z 14-30, i know you don't do Nikon, but this would be an amazing comparison from $2000 vs $1000, I bet the Nikon would be as good
Dr. Sommer so you're saying if a F4 proves just as good as a 2.8 then that's not apples to apples??? Lets be real, no one will shoot 2.8 at 16mm and up to 24mm, unless you like egg-shape heads. You know Nikons lens will crush it, enough said.
@@coltoncyr2283 you forgot astro and low light photography and videography. Anyways its never a good sign when nobody is willing to test a lens which is already on the market for more than one year.
Dr. Sommer I stated he won't test a Nikon lens, so that puts it to rest right there. However, many people review lenses differently and have different results. It's up to you if you want to take one perspective. That's the definition of a "comparison" video. Even if the Nikon Z is a F4, it's overall performance will show saving $1000+ has the upper hand. Perhaps save enough to also get a 20mm 1.4, to do video and Astro, basically 2 lenses vs 1. I highly doubt the NEW lens will BLOW Nikons out of the water.
You need that overlap at 24-35. At least for reporting 24-70 in one lens is a must. You don't usually switch to another lens because you cannot do it most of the time.
Tameron is for people that CAN’T afford Canon . Don’t know why you would buy a Canon camera body and buy cheaper lenses . That’s like buy a Ferrari and putting on WALMART sport tires. Doing something like this just shows “STUPIDITY “ !!!! You might as well bought an Olympus Camara body then buy your Tamron, Sigma or Tokina lenses!
And you don't get any money back just memories of your rip off holiday, you will have the lens for the rest of your life and maybe £1000 when you sell it, good deal I think
@@TarekAlShawwa For the past 5 years everyone has been correcting their images for chromatic aberration - either in their camera, or when they're editing. So there really is no point in showing it
Thank you for addressing us properly. “Howdy everyone”
He should actually say, "What's up my little babies"
Goooooood Eeeevening~~~
This is easily the most amazing lens I’ve ever owned. The shots I’ve been able to accomplish using this lens have been spectacular. From Astro to ultra-wide landscapes, it does it all. Switching to Canon RF mount for this lens alone is worth it!
Had 16-35mm f4 'L', for dslr, was my fav & brilliant for Landscapes...this is prob much better though be better for price of ot was all internal zoom, regarding dust & moisture.
That fake red ring on the RF 35 1,8! XD.
I really love that little lens...it deserves it ;-)
@@christopherfrost can you do a tutorial on DIY red ringing lenses that deserve it? I'd like to do my 55-250
@@rkgaustin ua-cam.com/video/zLcbKBhQ-M0/v-deo.html
@@rkgaustin I already have - it's on my channel, it's called 'Photo101: Canon Kit Lens to 'L' lens HACK!'
LOL!!! When I saw it I thought: Did Canon released a RF 35mm 1.4 L in January 2020?
That extra millimeter at 15mm (vs the EF’s 16) was a smart move, for it may be enough to keep some photogs from needing an ultra-wide angle and permits use of standard filters. Nice. That price tag though...ouch.
"Howdy everyone" makes me smile every time.
It's 15mm fully extended! "mind blown"
flat front element, F2.8 and IS in 1 lens. 😍
The flat element is impressive for sure
the prise is also impressive, dont forget that :-D
@@Axonteer Always buy gear on sale. Some electronics chain or online shop will always have a 10% coupon or promotional thing going on. Just keep your eyes peeled. I bought the RF15-35mm for 2179 euro in October. It's going for 2374 right now in the same shop.
@@Axonteer Sure but well worth the price. And for the target group -> professionals or the Ines who require this quality to earn money, its just a regular cost position on their list
EF 16-35 4 IS USM is still most well balanced wide angle zoom lens for Canon. If you not afraid third-party options and dont need IS, you also can buy brilliant tamron 17-35 2.8-4. These two lenses is really exelent, not just "fine for money".
If you really need more light on wide angles for some reason - this new RF lens or canon 16-35 2.8 III - maybe not best options, because these lenses have very high vignetting, practical killing sense of 2.8 aperture. You may look on tamron 15-30 2.8 - it not so sharp, but has really gentle vignetting, even on 15mm. You also can get closer look on some primes, like Sigma art 14 1.8, 20 1.4 or 24 1.4 - on 2.8 they have MUCH brighter corners, all this -3 EV nightmare they passed on theirs max apertures.
The reason new glass vignettes so bad is because (according to manufacturers) it is beneficial to use modern DSP for vignette and curvature correction and focus on optical correction of other aberrations (no pun intended). The end result should in practice be sharper than if everything was corrected with glass.
Same aproach can be seen with Sony 16-35, 14-24, Sigma 14-24 and (worst case) Sigma 24-70 which by many is considered an APSC lens (ouch!).
should do a re-test with the R5.
Same
1:45 I am too chicken to get the lens wet....
Chris, I feel the same way about my lenses😁😂🤣
I have this lens and it is a joy to shoot. It stays on my EOSR 85% of the time. Excellent for street & architecture photography. The IS is the best I’ve used. I wish it was 1-2 inches shorter and it’s ergos would be perfect. Just slightly front heavy. Would probably be better with a grip. But, I prefer not to use one. Bokeh is very smooth as well. When they come out with a high megapixel camera and you can confidently put it in crop mode, this lens may never come off my camera except to takes pictures of people. Brilliant lens. Hope they come out with a 100-400RF soon.
Your wish came true. They now have a 100-500 RF which is phenomenal
finally I was waiting for Liverpool review about this lens the legendary lands and you're the best of you finally video
Best lens channel !
Chris, Thank you for your wonderful reviews! I have bought many lenses based on your recommendations and find them spot on. I have been intrigued by the new Tokina Opera lenses. I purchased the 16-28mm and greatly enjoy it. I would be curious to not only see a review of this lens in comparison to other wide angle zooms, but also to have you test the Opera 50mm 1.4. I'm thinking about buying one, but it is a bit pricy for me. When I look for reviews, I can't find many. If you don't have time, I totally understand. Thank you for the service you provide us!
Some more Tokina lens reviews are coming soon, hopefully, including the Opera lenses
@@christopherfrost That would be wonderful! With Covid-19, I need to be even more careful with my money than I usually am. I want to keep advancing in photography and having lens reviews like yours really helps me make good decisions when buying gear. Thank you!
Hi, first of all thank you for all your fantastic contents! Second: when do think to review the new Canon RF 14-35mm?
Thank you for making this review. Loads of great information.
I would like to see direct comparison between this and 16-35 2.8 III or even 16-35 4.0 IS.
me too
I think 16-35 is sharper
Hello, Christopher! Have you had a chance to test this lens on an R7? I'm debating between this and the 24mm 1.8.
Finally, I was waiting for that review. Well done 👍, massive improvement, sharpness, stabilizer, less vignetting, 1mm wider than ef 16-35mm iii l USM. What grate RF lenses 😉
hey christopher! i just bought this lens 10 days back - and i feel this with the r5, underexposes by about a stop! is this a character of the lens? quite frustrating!
Thanks for informing about this lens on your listed recommendations.
I have this and it now replaced my sony 16-35 A7 setup. That red ring is a game changer for my needs!
Hey Chris, I know I'm two years late for a comment like this but I'd just wanna know your opinion on upgrading from the 16-35F4L to this lens. I've recently gotten an R6 so it's not resolution emphasized, and I mainly shoot at least at F5.6 or F8, half of the time maybe even smaller apertures than that. I'd want to upgrade as this is my most used lens, but the price tag really makes it hard to make the purchase even when my budget is closer to it after selling a few older lenses.
What do you think? Should I upgrade to the 15-35L? I've seen a lot of praise for it but I'm not sure the price tag and the potential problems I've seen online, like focus shift and worse build quality would make me regret the purchase.
Sounds like there’s need for you to upgrade at all 😊
Well, based on your review as well as some other information I found, I'm going ahead and pulling the trigger on this. I need to make a trip to a museum that I will not be able to access easily and being able to get crisp low light shots is important.
Any suggestion for a new lens for my R10? I have the kit 18-150 and the 35mm which are great I only really do street photography. Am I overthinking things and just roll with what I got? Or is there a good 3rd option I can play with?
Lolol i remember people complaining of sonys lens prices and now that canons are more there's silence.
Well, there's still the EF lenses. That are cheaper than ever.
That's why.
@@pahwraith Talking about their mirrorless not the ef lenses.
@@HeroShotz yeah, but that's why.
Review this on the Canon R7 ?
A really nice lens, and surprisingly large. I think however Canon should have had a switch to change the control ring from smooth to clicked.
I hope Sigma or Tamron makes a lens with focal length like this, filter size of 82mm so that it can still use a 100x150mm square filter for landscape photography
Excellent Chris! I am waiting to see your comparison about Sigma 18-35mm, Canon 16-35mm III and this one.
Well, you're going to waiting a long time...!
Sigma 18-35 is APSC... 14-24 is their full frame mirrorless wide angle.
16-35 f4 was super sharp, thought it was better than the 16-35 III
@1:21 - Did you add the red ring to the RF 35mm IS STM in post? It's not like it really matters, but I was holding one at a camera shop the other day and could've sworn it was silver (and Googling seems to confirm that).
I'm curious about this as well
He added the red ring for fun in his previous lens review of the RF 35 F1.8.
I added it myself with red tape, simply because I like the lens :-) sorry, I should have mentioned that instead of confusing everyone! It'll get mentioned in my review of the RF 24-70
@@christopherfrost No worries - it is admittedly good enough to warrant it, just not nearly expensive enough ;)
Hey Chris! I love your videos. Is there any chance you could do a review on the old Ef 20-35 f/2.8 L lens? It's a lens I am very interested in because of the low price at the moment. It'd be greatly appreciated, but I know you're a busy man. God bless :)
Future me here, HI Chris :D - I own now finally a R6 and also somehow managed to get an adapter after failing at that for like half a year or more. I own the RF24-105 f4 and the 50mm f1.8 and still use the "old" ef 16-35 f4.. i thought about getting it (the reason i bought the r6 over the r5 was mostly because 25mp more for 3000$ wont make my pictures twice as good, and i rather invest in a new lense or two) but when i saw the price (here 2800$ in switzerland, converted) - yeet. And the size.. oh my, Especially because i own that 24-105 and i see that one already as a big lense, even compared to my old sigma ef 24-105 :O
I'm still considering EF 16-35 f2.8L iii USM since it is much cheaper than RF one. The RF one obviously out-performs the EF one. But as the EF one was one of the best of the kind at the time it was released, I really want to know if the EF one is worth using on Canon mirrorless considering the cheaper price and overall performance, or not.
Does anyone have any idea?
I'd love to see a comparison with this and the EF 16-35 as you can get the for a bargain now, especially the version 1 and 2
I wonder how the RF Ls compares against the GM series. Especially this one vs 1635GM
correct me if im wrong but are corners not as sharp bc of field curvature? make sure the lens is completely parallel to the subject and focus on a corner instead of the middle.
Hi! Great material! I have a huge challenge! Select a filter system. I have old Haida. Unfortunately, the vignette on wide 16-18mm lenses excludes its use. Please provide a clear statement. Haida M10 with polarizing filter and one gray filter will not give a 15mm vignette on Canon RF 15-35 ??? Typically, I protect the filter with a thin protective filter (Marumi / Hoya) Will the use of such a filter blend the lens and the Haida M10 cause a vignette? Thank you very much for your reply.
I'm sorry, I don't know. Ask Haida :-)
Thank you Christopher for this review! I've been waiting for that.
What do you think is the better option for astro photography and landscape - this lens or the Sigma 14 -24 f2.8 which has been coming to the market for sony e mount and will hopefully also reach the canon RF mount very soon?
Many thanks in advance for you kind answer🙏
The Sigma lens might be very slightly sharper and is far less expensive and goes a little wider. The Canon lens goes to 35mm and has IS. It's up to you what works best for you :-)
@@christopherfrost Thank you for your answer Christopher.
To me two more things are important for this kind of photographay.
Firstly vignetting is very important when rising shadows and weather sealing which is very important due to the fact that I am living in the heart of europe and therefor we do not have the dry conditions from advertised american deserts at night.
Btw it makes me very sad to see you Brits leaving our community tomorrow.
God bless you and your family christopher.
Great video!!! Chris
Christopher at 1:25 - how do you get that red ring on your RF 35mm 18?!
Not many lens reviews using Portreath as a sample!
so from what i ve seen in the photo!! is the 24-70 coming????
I'm curious how much of that DSLR lens ended up in this lens. It looks like the lens elements closest to the sensor are buried pretty deeply into the lens, so that makes me wonder if they started with the DSLR lens as a reference and then made changes, or if it was a clean-sheet design.
Set at 15mm the rear element is just at RF flange distance.
@@peterebel7899 Good to know, and glad they've actually made an RF lens instead of just affixing a permanent tube to an existing design.
@@TWX1138 All RF lenses are completely new designs with beside reduce flange distance relevant new features especially regarding focus, close focus, etc.
Canon takes the game serious, really!
Hi! Are you perhaps testing or about to test the new Tamron primes for Sony? I mean the 20mm, the 24mm and the 35mm f/2.8 DI III OSD. Thanks for your videos!
I will get round to them eventually
looks like it works fine at higher apertures, but I would want to use this type of lens for wide angle landscape at both day and night time, in particular, astrophotography on my r
Can you zoom in and zoom out on this lens?
The build quality of this lens is better than EF 16-35 2.8 III?
Hi i have a question. I bought me the eos r with the ef 50mm 1.8. I like to do street photography and im looking for a second lens. Is the 85mm from Sigma a good option for street?
35mm or 40mm should give you the best results for street. 85mm is a telephoto lens so it might be harder to use for street
If you want to stick out like an elephant, then yeah, sure, why not. The Sigma is huge and heavy, you‘ll get tons of attention from bystanders and motifs. The 85mm 1.8 USM is a much better fit. Focuses fast, is really small, costs next to nothing used, sharp enough wide open and you‘ll never notice the bokeh difference in real life. Your 50mm 1.8 is already perfect size- and performance wise, stick to that formula!
RF 35 f1.8 is the perfect focal lenght for street, reasonably priced, and very good quality.
Can you tell us how well it works on an R7
Compared to the EF 16-35 f2.8 III ,does it have better corner performance or worse?
Let us be real, this is probably one of the best lenses if not the best lens ever made.
Hey Mr. frost,
Out of ALL of the cameras and lenses you’ve used, what’s your favorite setup to shoot with yourself? If you had to pick camera/lens combo.
It depends what lens I happen to be testing at the time :-)
Will you pick it up or the 24-70 2.8 RF?
Could you review the 16-35mm f/2.8L III EF Mount? Noticed that review does not exist in your library!
Hmm, maybe one day
Ooooh, are you testing/using the breakthrough x2s? I was keeping my eye on them, and I was thinking of buying them. What do you think of them?
They're fine - just a decent quality Polariser, really
Can you try thr new 10-20 canon f4 rf?
Thanks for the review. I shoot a lot of architecture and those distortion characteristics don't look great. Just out of interest, which other UWA lenses did you think are sharper in the corners?
Ultrawide zooms have allways distortions, others more others less. Sony 16-35 2.8 gm dont have much, but price is 2700€ without stabilization.
Distortions are allways away just with one click of a button, when giving basic edits to picture anyway.
So what would u use that would be better than this?
What is that 35mm red ringed lens on yohr desk?
Maybe the size of this lens shows simply that merely being mirrorless does not equate to an overall significantly reduced footprint.
You have to keep in mind that size is one of many things you an optimize for.
A mirrorless camera should be able to have a smaller and lighter lens for the same speed and quality. With the initial RF lenses Canon has been aiming more to improve quality than shrinking size. With their 70-200 they did drop the size quite a bit though.
This is also a full frame mount. You're not going to get EF-M sizes that use the whole sensor.
I'm sure somebody will come out with some more compact RF lenses, though they probably won't be as fast or have the same image quality as these initial ones.
Father I have sinned. It has been 5 days since I last saw one of your videos on UA-cam.
You should start some Photography tips tutorials 😕
Hi Christopher - I really love that picture shown @1:08. Can you let me know the camera/lens settings for that please? Thanks!!
Bigger than the 15-30mm VC?
Is this the perfect lens for video work?
Darn i can only get 1 lens either this 15-35 or the 50 1.2 what should i do good sir ?
Depends what kind of photography you wanna do
Whats a similar product for Canon 90D?
15mm with normal filter?
nice..
maybe some 3rd party lens will make 14-35/2.8 with normal 82mm filter next year?
@Foto4Max the laowa 9/2.8? That is nice, but in FF it is 14mm and unfortunately not a zoom lens, the 10-18/4.5-5.6 is good too with 37mm rear filter, but no bigger version of 2.8 yet..
:(
Did you find the zoom ring to be tighter/more stiff to turn than the other RF lenses you’ve reviewed?
About the same, I think
the lens does good in corners in my opinion
I wish you could test the Nikon Z 14-30, i know you don't do Nikon, but this would be an amazing comparison from $2000 vs $1000, I bet the Nikon would be as good
Please compare apples with apples. The Nikon is only F4 and isnt stabilised. Not to mention the software cheating of Nikon to make this lens work.
Dr. Sommer so you're saying if a F4 proves just as good as a 2.8 then that's not apples to apples??? Lets be real, no one will shoot 2.8 at 16mm and up to 24mm, unless you like egg-shape heads. You know Nikons lens will crush it, enough said.
Dr. Sommer also Z bodies have IBIS.
@@coltoncyr2283 you forgot astro and low light photography and videography. Anyways its never a good sign when nobody is willing to test a lens which is already on the market for more than one year.
Dr. Sommer I stated he won't test a Nikon lens, so that puts it to rest right there. However, many people review lenses differently and have different results. It's up to you if you want to take one perspective. That's the definition of a "comparison" video. Even if the Nikon Z is a F4, it's overall performance will show saving $1000+ has the upper hand. Perhaps save enough to also get a 20mm 1.4, to do video and Astro, basically 2 lenses vs 1. I highly doubt the NEW lens will BLOW Nikons out of the water.
This lens makes classics 24-70mm somewhat unneeded, range 35-70 just not enough to justify the cost.
You need that overlap at 24-35. At least for reporting 24-70 in one lens is a must. You don't usually switch to another lens because you cannot do it most of the time.
35mm with Red L ring??
Sadly it's so freaking expensive.
I own a 12mm 2.8 for 1100 euro. Fully metal. But I still want this one.
M8, your accent is like honey on a toast.
How's it called and where did it originate?
Anyone else come and watch this video after watching the Sony16-35 2.8? Im happy to have this lens over the Sony.
you obviously live in a very beautiful part of the world...
I really want this lens but its so expensive :(
Anyone notice the "Red Ring" RF 35mm F1.8?
Thank you
The Tamron 15-30 is $1300 and razor sharp all the way out to the edges. I'll stick with that one.
Tameron is for people that CAN’T afford Canon . Don’t know why you would buy a Canon camera body and buy cheaper lenses . That’s like buy a Ferrari and putting on WALMART sport tires. Doing something like this just shows “STUPIDITY “ !!!!
You might as well bought an Olympus Camara body then buy your Tamron, Sigma or Tokina lenses!
I want this! way out of my price range for now.
can i use this lens with canon EOS 90D.
No, it's for mirrorless EOS R cameras only, as I mentioned in the video
It;s interesting how you always say the USD/Pound prices, but never the Euro prices xD
thank you for the review: I am now saving my money to prepare for the acquisition of this glass to bring me joy below equal to the chief end of man.
Honestly this RF lens doesn't perform that much better than the EF 16-35m f2.8 IS USM II.
So long as they're both awesome...
There isn't such lens. The 2.8 variant doesn't have IS.
@@rhalfik true. So image stabilization is the only strong point of the RF lens.
@@sosomelodies659 I wouldn't say that until you tried it. It's a different system, different principles.
Using both the EF won't go any more to the RF adapter!
$2300 for this lens. That’s pretty ridiculous.
If only. It's almost 2900 USD here in my little EU country. Ludicrous.
@@michaelm1 Have you tried DigitalRev's store?
@SwitchRich You don't have to pay import duty with DigitalRev, and they offer their own 1 year warranty
@@christopherfrost Interesting. Thanks for the tip!
@SwitchRich All I can say is that I've bought loads of things from them and never had any trouble.
How much 😱😱😱
Nikon z????
What about it????????????????????????????????
$2300 that's at least a whole week in the Dominican Republic, in all inclusive resort.
You're getting ripped off.
And you don't get any money back just memories of your rip off holiday, you will have the lens for the rest of your life and maybe £1000 when you sell it, good deal I think
IS on line doesn't line up.
How to use this on a gimbal 🤦
3:56 using in-camera corrections defeats the purpose of testing a lens....
No
Are you saying that in-camera corrections boost resolution and contrast...?
Christopher Frost Photography no, but they don’t show the unaltered lens performance
I care about end result. Vignetting correction hurts high ISO but it is often not the end of the world.
@@TarekAlShawwa For the past 5 years everyone has been correcting their images for chromatic aberration - either in their camera, or when they're editing. So there really is no point in showing it
Хорошее стекло, но неоправданно огромный ценник!!!
🙏🏾
Great you took the eos R :)
Hello 2nd
Third
Don't do this to me. *hides credit card*
Images? Video....
?
"11 minutes ago", fuck I'm late. Instant click