Canon RF-S 10-18mm REVIEW: ultra-wide APSC first-look
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 вер 2024
- My Canon RF-S 10-18mm f4.5-6.3 first-looks review: an ultra-wide zoom for cropped EOS-R!
Check prices on the Canon RF-S 10-18mm at B&H: bhpho.to/3sqy1AG // WEX UK: tidd.ly/47hBlwQ
Check MPB to buy and sell used gear: bit.ly/3ULU9yL
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/...
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/...
Gordon’s retro gear channel: / dinobytes
Equipment used for producing my videos
Panasonic Lumix S5 II: amzn.to/3Hf5IcI
Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE
Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF
MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV
Music: www.davidcutte... / @dcuttermusic
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases - Наука та технологія
My Canon RF-S 10-18mm f4.5-6.3 first-looks review: an ultra-wide zoom for cropped EOS-R!
Check prices on the Canon RF-S 10-18mm at B&H: bhpho.to/3sqy1AG // WEX UK: tidd.ly/47hBlwQ
Check MPB to buy and sell used gear: bit.ly/3ULU9yL
Buy Gordon a coffee: www.paypal.me/cameralabs
Gordon's In Camera book: amzn.to/2n61PfI / Amazon uk: amzn.to/2mBqRVZ
Cameralabs merchandise: redbubble.com/people/cameralabs/shop
Gordon’s retro gear channel: ua-cam.com/users/dinobytes
Equipment used for producing my videos
Panasonic Lumix S5 II: amzn.to/3Hf5IcI
Sony A6400: prf.hn/l/pRO0wp5
Sony e 24mm f1.8: amzn.to/2TqWNzk
Rode NT USB mic: amzn.to/3AdHcUp
Rode Wireless Go II mic: amzn.to/3xkCvGo
Rode Lavalier Go mic: amzn.to/3ygzzKY
Godox UL150 light: amzn.to/2VpVbXE
Godox QR-P70 softbox: amzn.to/3yQfGdF
MacBook Pro 14in (16GB / 1TB): amzn.to/3PrKbPV
Music: www.davidcuttermusic.com / @dcuttermusic
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
❤
That max mag ratio is quite insane and will be very useful for wide angle macros.
Canon has no hope for the RF-S system. This lens is just the replacement of EF-s 10-18. But their kit lens could follow the EFS 18-55 F3.5-5.6. Instead, they made 18-45mm F4.5- 6.3, where it could be 3.5-5.6. Canon has huge potential at this time regarding R50 and R10 but lacks a prime like 22m F2 or an overall zoom lens (like 17-55 F2.8) or a good kit lens hampering their sales.
maybe they are planning to make a super-affordable full frame camera (?)
@@GungKrisna12 But for Vlog or general consumer level always need APS-C. Sony ZV-1, A6400 or Canon M50 has millions of users. Do they want to switch to a full frame or do they need to? In case of family travel or Vlog, there is always a demand for APS-C. If they do not want to sell ApS-C then stop making or advertising it, OR give us good lenses. Overall one single zoom lens and a pre is always required.
IMO The kit lens for RF-S should be 15-45mm like EF-M.
@@MT2K244 from the beginning I am saying this, again and again.
@@MT2K244 I agree
F4.5 lens .at this point I rather use My phone . Canon budget releases are so ridiculous and unworthy of buying .that's why they blocked 3rd party lenses. Because who would buy this over the sigma 10-18mm
Phones have tiny sensors and fixed focus on ultra wide.
It’s disgraceful what Canon is doing with third party lenses.
maybe Canon might one day decided to launch a campaign to attack third party lens users from all brands, calling them "losers", or maybe, they decided to attack third party lens makers, or camera makers that allows third party lenses
basically they will want people to discriminate third party lens users
Agree, but their financial report says they are right. At least until now.
@@t1agosantos Do you own stock? I don't. Canon making buckets of money based on overcharging consumers (monopolists gonna monopolize) isn't a positive thing, IMO.
@@AS-oz6epor they will sue Tamron and Sigma (as well as other third party lens manufacturers) for making EF mount lenses in the past
Not really. Everyone could do the same. Third party have disadvantages too. It's not all roses on Sony side either.
I think the failure of the eos m series was due to not releasing lenses quick enough. I loved the ef-m 22mm f2, 32mm f1.4 and 11-22mm lenses and was really hoping for a camera to be released with IBIS, but that never happened. I pray to the camera Gods that they’ll release these quickly and my preference would be some kind of range finder styled camera with IBIS
These new rf-s lenses are so underwhelming. They might as well have kept the ef-m line alive, those are some wonderful little lenses!
Well they had to transition to RF for cross format compatibility, but they could still try some different designs. As I noted at the end, the RF-S catalogue could end up looking like the EF-M one with nothing new. I hope they show it some love!
@cameralabs they could have just directly ported the ef-m lenses. A direct port of the 22mm and 32mm would sell like hotcakes and draw so many customers to the line. It just makes no sense.
Realistically the only thing missing from Canon on the ef-m line is a fast standard zoom, and a couple dedicated portrait lens. Just port the existing, make those few new lenses, the money printing machine will go burrr. And apsc users would be joyous.
@@ohmartinbronson I'd love a few dedicated fast APSC primes.
This lens is wider than the EF-M one and weights half of what it weights. I do not get why people who obviously should go full frame complain of APS-C lenses.
Sure the kit lens sucks, being both slower and having less range than any other kit lens.
@@okaro6595 the weight doesn't matter at all, if the weight of the 11-22efm is an issue that then I'm not sure what to say. And of course the trade-offs are at 18 mm you can't get past 6.3. That's going to be brutal for late afternoon (4.5 is already tough at sundown), even with auto ISO you're going to be pushing into the thousands very easily.
And you lose the still useful 19-22mm range, And while it doesn't sound like much it's still a loss of range.
I'm glad I still have my big old 10 to 22 EFS. If the day came that I needed to get one of these hobbled RFS bodies, I can still count on that lens to put in work.
if you are looking to adapt ef lenses you can get the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM Lens for Canon EF. it costs about $250 and works really well.
Thanks for this early look. 😎
Now I am really disappointed!!!
Tamron has the 11-20mm f2.8; Ok it's bigger and heavier
but Sigma offers the same focal length in the 10-18mm f2.8 with only 100 grams more weight
BUT WITH CONSTANT FAST APERTURE!
For shooting with an R7 indoors it's absolutely necessary to have as much light as possible.
I wish the Sigma and Tamron lenses were available for RF
Left Canon for Sony, and this release just shows how right was that move.
Why are RF series lenses so ugly. EF-M lenses had so much class to them.
Super totally agreed. That said I don't like the direction of Canon plastics overall over the years. The plastics used to be really solid and smooth and now most of it is brushed and scratches easily. They look really nice when they're new and can look okay when they're worn down a bit. But in the middle the aesthetic is just not that great. Especially on the 24 to 105 and 28 to 70. They just look pedestrian for stuff that cost well over $1,000.
There are plenty of crop (RF-S) format third party super wide lenses if (and only if) you are willing to give up autofocus. With a lens this wide, we each must consider just how important autofocus is to what we do. When you do your final review, it might be good to compare image quality and other features from some of the manual f/2.8 options from Laowa or NiSi. Of course there are also the 9mm lenses that do cover full frame all for the same speed reduction. Also a final review needs to address whether the fall off of corner sharpness is caused by field curvature or is just fuzzy at all distances. Test charts can be deceptive when you get this wide.
One effect to be expected with these new releases might be the used price drop from those trading in their previous models. Whether we upgrade here will be dependent on image quality making your upcoming tests most interesting.
Thanks Gordon, I'd love to see an image comparison at 10mm of this and the EF-S 10-22mm at F3.5.
Yeah, I'll try to do that
Please do! I'd be very interested to see how sharp it is and how it handles chromatic aberration.@@cameralabs
alternative Tamron for EF 15-30 full frame, much bigger but f2.8 all the way. Very sharp and second hand prices under 400
Why can't they just call it 16 to 29 mm???? Do camera companies really think APSC users care what's listed on the lens when you're talking about what it is in full frame when it's not a full frame lens. If it's an APSC lens just give the focal length of what it is geez. If you can't achieve 10 to 18 mm why listed on the lens I'm just confused why they do this
What? Not f/7.1 on the long end? lol
I really think that Canon isn't doing this for real, but to make fun of poor users of the RF-S system.
This 10-18 for general vlog and landscape use. and RF16 RF24 RF28 is there for low light or higher IQ lenses. It's not making fun of the RF-S system if you look at the RF system properly.
I totally agree. The Sigma 10-18mm f2.8 makes a lot more sense. Perfect if 10-22mm f2.8. This RF-S is just another stock lens that no one uses. F6.3 on an APSC is a joke. I would rather have an RF 20mm f1.8, which is actually usable on both APSCs and full frames.
Plastic bajonett? No thank you!
@@kenneth6102 a 20 1.8 would be nice - the Sony one is excellent for full-frame vlogging.
@@zegzbrutal The RF16 is not good so low light doesn't make a difference. It's not a good lens.
Well, I'll likely purchase it for my R7 hiking kit, but I won't be very enthusiastic about it. I would really like to have some wide-angle options that are up to the quality of the R7 capabilities. I have my collection of ff R lenses, but they're just too heavy to take up the side of a mountain with me. I'm not getting any younger. :-)
But we don't know what the quality of this lens is yet. Why simply assume that it's not up to the R7 capabilities? Canon has been releasing some really good cheap RF lenses recently. The 16, 28, 35, and 85 are all superb optically, and even the nifty 50 is better than previous versions. In terms of size and weight, the 28 is barely bigger and heavier than the EF-M 22, which is remarkable, given that it's a full frame lens. You really don't have to use big and heavy RF full frame lenses on crop bodies. I find that the 16, 28, and 50 all pair very nicely with my R7, as well as my R6II. And given how good the RF-S 18-150 is, I wouldn't be surprised if this new 10-18 is also excellent.
So you first complain about the weight and then complain about a 150 gram ultra wide. Some people cannot be satisfied.
@@okaro6595 Not a complaint as much as an observation. I've gotten too old to carry my ff gear on a hike, but would like some APS-C gear that didn't feel like I was "dumbing down" while using my R7.
@@alastairnorcross We'll see. The specs and lack of metal mount would appear to put it a notch below my EF-M 11-22mm which really has a nice build.
The RF 35mm and RF-S 18-150mm round out my "hiking"/"grab and go" kit. If there were a wide-angle RF prime already available, I likely would get that and be done for a while and see how this lens plays out.
Yes, I love my 11-22 as well, and it’s definitely better than the EF-S 10-18, which I also owned (and was pretty decent). Everything I’ve read so far about the RF-S 10-18 suggests it will be better. The build doesn’t bother me. Only the optical quality
It really does feel like the RF mount and it's large diameter mount absolutely wasn't designed with APS-C sensors in mind...
I wonder if they were initially imagining the EF-M mount and RF mount co-existing together early onwards, and then couldn't backtrack on the RF mount by the time it became clear that having 2 separate mounts simultaneously wouldn't work out?
I hope Canon will make a prime RF-S lens of 10mm with a minimum aperture of 2.8 or smaller. This zoom lens with an aperture starting from 4.5 is not very appealing for me.
That would be great
My camera is R7. I can't wait to buy the new wide-angle lense.It's enough lightweight and impact.Good for Vlog!
Given the market segment this lens was designed for, this looks like a decent addition to the RF-S line-up. I don't intend to acquire any RF-S lens for my R50 as it can "make do" with the EF and RF lenses and adapted EF-S 10-18mm. If I want to go "dinky", I'll use the M50 and EF-M lenses.
Really? It was designed for me and I wouldn’t buy it
Thanks for not forgetting other options.
Tokina 11-20mm atx-i f2.8 is also another solid contender for aps-c wide zoom.
When I heard about a 4.5 to 6.3 lens I wonder who's gonna buy an equivalent 7.2 to 10 in full frame?
Someone who doesn't want shallow depth of field effects and who has a camera with good high ISO performance or who films during the day without filters? PS - Sigma's 10-18 2.8 is coming later this year.
@@cameralabs maybe 👐🏻 me personally I really prefer the opportunity to have the versatility of an f2.8. Yes sigma come in late for canon
I own an R10 and I am looking for an overall zoom lens like Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 IS or Canon EFS 17-55 F2.8 IS. For prime, I am happy with 24mm F1.8 IS (please fix the price of this lens at 479USD or 499USD permanently).
That's why Canon is no no without alternative lenses from Sigma or Tamron. That f4.5-6.3 is a slap in the face..
Kinda neat how view counts have roughly correlated with focal length on the latest three RF treats. It's ok lil tenner, I'm here for ya.
Keen eyes note that you are at the same facility for some of the B-roll taken with the big full frame 10-20. Is it common for manufacturers to stagger embargoes this much on the same briefings?
Your eyes are indeed keen! That's just a meeting room in Canon's HQ which they let me use for filming b-roll for these embargoed previews. And yes, I was there only a couple of weeks ago for the 10-20!
Same list price as nikon's excellent 12-28 in the UK, and an entire stop slower over the shared zoom range (the 12-28 is only f/4.5 at 18mm) - the only advantages to the canon lens are an extra 2mm in 35mm FoV terms and a smaller design that'll suck dust into the lens. The RF-S bodies really deserve better.
Don't forget Canon RF-S has 1.6x crop, so the effective focal length/aperture is even worse.
@@frankfeng2701 The 1.07 crop factor between canon APS-C and every other APS-C has a negligible effect on light gathering, and I've already accounted for the difference in FoV - it's 16mm vs 18mm equivalent.
More uninformed speculation from someone who doesn't have the lens.
@@alastairnorcross It's all just easily verifiable facts, what exactly are you claiming is "uninformed speculation"?
@@maxhammick948 it’s uninformed speculation that the lens sucks dust, or is a poor performer. None of the specs are relevant to that. But, of course, if you have the lens and have had bad experiences with it, I’ll listen. I’ve only had good experiences with my copy so far. If you don’t have the lens, you might consider quitting while you’re behind.
If the optics are slightly better then the old version then that's nice. 11 aperture blades sounds really out there.(is that correct? From BH video).
The f6.3 aperture is rough...though honestly for my landscapes on crop I'm always shooting at 6.7 or 7.1 Tonight trip over the diffraction barrier. But to be unable to go brighter than that is pretty sad especially for normal users who will have to crank that ISO up something serious.. Cannon's Auto ISO has never been conservative to say the least. Unfortunately with Canon there's always a caveat no matter what you buy.
Good luck to RFS users, you're still going to need it. I can't imagine what they're going to do with the prime that eventually comes out. It's probably going to be stuck at 2.8 and be plastic.. and ugly cheap build.
It’s a very compact lens, I would hope for an RF-S 10 or 11mm f1,8. make it more expensive but this would indeed be great.
I did use the EF-S 10-18 on my R7 and it’s a good combo, as I normally just shoot on 10mm, max 12mm, the lower aperture on the end would not bother me. Let’s hope for sigma and tamron in the long run but at least a neat small lens now which makes the travel bag not too heavy. Combine it with the RF-S 18-150 and you can cover a lot with those…
Thanks for the great overview Gordon and also your own thoughts. It really is appreciated 🙏🏻
These lenses are never that large anyway. When you get to a point where it's so compact that it hobbles the usability, then what are you really doing. Even the EFM version took a long time for me to get used to because it's just so small and turning the focus is sometimes ridiculous. I didn't have those problems on the older EFS 10 to 22. Much larger, but still very lightweight and the handling is amazing. There's always a trade-off, but especially for canning going small typically means some severe usability caveats.
@@simonmaduxx6777 well, I was pretty happy with the efm 11-22mm on my m6 mark ii, to be honest, and the quality I got out of that was great. Will give the new one a try but I would prefer a 11mm prime. That said, right now I like to use the rf 16mm on my R8, so I cannot complain
@@mb-watches the performance of the 11-22 is wonderful and the stabilization makes it practical to handhold and get sharp shots considering the sensor.
Especially when you're trying to keep your kid as small as possible. But the EFM lenses had the benefit of not being built cheaply which these RFS lenses are suffering from. They don't look interesting, their performances slow, and overall they are very low effort by Canon except to make them as cheap as possible which is their main effort lol.
@@mb-watches 11 mm prime? Oof that's going to be a tough one. If you like to shoot manual you may have an option with the Chinese lens makers.
Why is it a 4.5-6.3 instead of the common 3.5-5.6? The mount was too tight to design?
I think they're making them dimmer to be cheaper and lighter.
What Variable ND Filter Can I get to work with this? Just placed my pre-order today.
Hopefully those claims of it being sharper than the EF-S 10-18 are true. I owned two copies of that lens, both obviously decentered and soft even in the "good" corners. I moved on from Canon APS-C to Olympus for my backpacking landscape system, but would look hard at this lens plus an R10, _if_ the sharpness is there.
Aside from the 10 mm which is a big deal, the 11- 22 EFM on a m62 is likely to beat this lens/rfs body combo hands down. Even with the R62, I really enjoy having nearly 7,000 pixels worth of sharpness from center to the edges. The IS even makes it possible for nice sharp shots handheld and walking. It's just been great even though the size still bugs me it's just so small. Zooming that tiny little thing is not fun, and it doesn't look like it's any better on this small lens.
If R7 is used with RFS10-18. Then there will be some distortion and warping when shooting videos.
Almost certainly
Might be worth checking out. I wonder how it compares to my old EF-L FF lenses in terms of sharpness. Been using the 17-35 L on my R7 but could do with being a little wider, lighter and not needing the adapter
It'll be MUCH wider, but it is a much more budget lens as well.
@@cameralabs On second thoughts that aperture is very off putting. I think the f3.5 second hand option you suggested might be better for me with the adapter.
@@ArcanePath360 it's a brighter lens for sure, but quite long, especially with the adapter...
@@MegaCasperC But it adds length, and for a wide angle that you want to use in tight spaces, that means even tighter space.
Why do they make those rfs lenses so you can't attach a Lee or formatt hitech filter set😢
First item on my Santa´s lisy this year
f4.5 to 6.3! I think I'll stick with my 10-22! Although i'm keen to see how sharp it is.
The 10-18 is lighter, much smaller, and cheaper than the 10-22 (which I owned for several years). The 10-18 is also sharper, and has IS. The slow aperture doesn't bother me at all, as I use ultra wides for landscapes and city scapes, and am always stopped down. I never shot my 10-22 wide open.
I use the 10-22 under varying circumstances including landscapes as well as event and previously for newspaper photography. For landscapes I use it at f11 or f16 but for event or newspaper work I often use it wide open as it's often under low light conditions. Being an RF lens, Id expectthe new 10-18 to be sharper than the EF versions.@@alastairnorcross
I'm waiting for this lens
Canon and Nikon don't want to make proper crop lenses. They completely loosing to Sony and Fuji in lens selection
Nikon has some pretty good lenses, 90% of the lens complaints for Z DX are just the lack of an extra bright standard zoom (sigma and viltrox are filling in the missing primes). Canon OTOH is determined to release the worse possible slow zooms in RF-S, every one is cost reduced as far as humanly possible except the 18-150 that's just remounted from EF-M.
informative lens review.
Canon lens releases are getting embarrassing…. !!!
It looks like an overpriced "cheap" lens to me. Thanks to the policy of closing the door to third party lens manufacturers Canon can charge whatever it wants. I love Canon, but brand loyalty is not my cup of tea 😏
Agree. I do love Nikon, but give me any last 15 years professional camera plus proper equipments, and I'm happy as a button 😊
Correct. It is a cheap plastic lens which is definitively not worth 399€ (European price). No comparison to Fuji, Sony and Sigma lenses. I'm really very disappointed about the RF-S line. So I will probably sell my R7 which I currently only use as a tele converter for my RF lenses. That's wasting money. I will keep my R5 and invest on good glass for RF. Maybe I will look for a R8 as second body...
Maybe Canon might decided to launch a campaign that attacks third party lenses, or camera makers that allows third party lenses
Or even they will call third party lens users as "low-class" "losers" "not deserve to be called photographers" and other insults
Why does it have a brim
How about image quality and distortion?
This was a quick first-look, I'll test the quality on a final review.
Looks great what’s the difference between this lense and rf 16mm f2.8 honestly I am on the process of buy one or the other
Well, the 16 is fixed focal length and will also work on full-frame. The 10-18 is a zoom but only for APSC bodies. The 16 will work fine on APSC as well.
16 mm vs. 10 mm. A huge difference.
@@cameralabs I have canon R10 I use it as my main camera and I use my iPhone 14 plus as my b-roll and vlogging what lense will be better to put on my r10 for vlogging ?
@@basketball4dummies 16 may be a bit tight for vlogging on APSC, especially if you've added movie IS as well. So for a cropped APSC camera like the R10, I'd get the 10-18
I guess this lens has its place but again its pretty underwhelming. Cheap looking is how I'd describe it. No doubt Canon will over price this just because they can.
It's cheap, and light, and performs very well. I have it. Yours is the typical response from someone who knows absolutely nothing about what they're talking about.
with this angular, now I switch to canon APSC-RFS
Give us an F4 rfs lens or even better a 2.8 👍
canon no need to release RFS lens tbh, RF lens for FF sensor can be used in cropped sensor camera
This makes no sense. What are you talking about.
@@simonmaduxx6777 i say RF lens can be use on R7, R10, R50, R100 damn u are making me typing so long only to make u understand
@@mbismbismb You misunderstand. It's okay.
Full frame lenses are not the same on crop bodies. You should know this already. They act very differently. Basically what you wrote is not a solution. It's a bad way of thinking about it... Crop bodies should have its own selection to take advantage of the smaller format. But Canon feels the same way you do. Its not good.
This is humiliating when Sigma just launched 10-18 2.8 for APS-C
To be fair, the Sigma is almost double the price BUT yes, I am fond of the Sigma model which is why I mentioned it in the video.
Yeah I'm gonna wait for that sigma
I think Canon was more concerned about the compact design than the aperture because they wanted to appeal primarily to vloggers. Unfortunately! I was hoping for a good lense for landscape photography. This one seems to be to dark.
Do you need a brighter aperture for landscapes? I'd generally shoot them at f5.6 to f11
No thanks. I'll stick to the EF-S. RF is only a premium for a smaller size in my opinion.
How the HELL does Canon think they should be selling a lens that expensive with a plastic mount? That's just wrong.
Thanks for the review. Looking forward to the full review and comparison with the EF-S10-18. But so far, it seems Canon came up with another kitlens. Seems as far as RF-S goes, Canon has again dropped the ball.
Really? It seems to me like exactly what was both needed and wanted for RF-S lenses. The main complaint has been about no ultra wide in RF-S format. The 10-20 L is just as wide, and will work just fine, but it's big and heavy and expensive. This new 10-18 is perfect for what most R crop users want, myself included. I have it, and love it. Canon didn't just not drop the ball, they caught it in their own endzone and ran it all the way back for a touchdown.
EF S rehash but now charge $329. How nice for Canon
It's not rehash....
This is a mockery. We want 2.8 or lower
Best🥰
F 8.6-12.3 😂😂😂
Why have you reduced the aperture by TWO stops?
Poor Canon. No leadership at all.
Typical Canon, always making the crop cameras useless. good thing I switched to Sony.
Sigma just released a 10-18 2.8 for Sony, and Canon does that! This is probably the worst lens to release, it's a shame