Hey Dustin, some time back I watched your Canon R5 review and left a nasty comment due to the fact that you didn’t speak of the overheating issues that I had experienced with the R5. I purchased the camera, used the initial firmware, had a ton of problems, returned it and decided to give it another chance with the latest firmware and what a difference! I can shoot video literally all day even in temps in the 70’s (F) without overheating. I wanted to own up to being wrong and being a jerk. For both, I apologize.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I’ve enjoyed running with the R5 and now with the C70; from my experiences, the video quality is simply amazing from both cameras but the video AF performance from Canon in general isn’t as good as what I can get from Sony with the A7III and the A7S III. Definitely better than most other systems but does require more work and direct control whereas with the Sony cameras they can virtually read my mind. Would you agree with that assessment?
I bought this lens and have no real complaints so far. One thing I noticed is that when you turn the camera off, it stops down the lens substantially rather than leaving the aperture blades wide open. Do you have any insight on why Canon might have chosen to do that?
When I got the R5 I got the 50mm as a freebie which reminded me of SLRs in the 1970s where 50mm lenses came with the camera. I owned 5 EF L lenses and bought the adaptor. When I was playing with the R5 I was glad I had the RF 50mm. Eventually I also bought the RF 24-105mm f/4L and traded in the very heavy EF 24-70mm f/2.8L.
Hello, So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers, Sincerely, Philgood ...
Not sure if you’ll see this since it’s been a while since the video. But I do have a question about one thing you mentioned. You indicate that the af is faster on the rf version vs the latest 1.8 ef version. since the r5 is significantly faster in af than any mirrored slrs except for the 1dx cameras, Do you think the camera is the main reason for the difference in af speed or is it the lens? If you’re thinking back to old versions of slrs with the older 50, that might have skewed your thoughts on it? Do you agree? Thanks for reading and your videos!
It seems like even if someone is planning to purchase the 50mm 1.2 L, this is a good stop-gap until the funds are available. Additionally for run-and-gun photography, where it’s more desirable to have lightweight glass, this would be a nice alternative to have in the bag. Would you agree with that assessment, Dustin?
@@DustinAbbottTWI I just got an R6 24-105 L kit. So, I’m working on a roadmap of how to add lenses that will expand my creative options. The acuity of the L lenses is so attractive, but it appears that added weight is an inherent caveat.
Hello, So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers, Sincerely, Philgood ...
Hello, So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers, Sincerely, Philgood ...
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you very much for your answer. What are the main reasons you think I would prefer the RF 50mm f 1.8 ? Is it better in terms of Image rendering ?
Really nice review! Do you think that you've seen copy to copy variation? Looks like a huge difference between yours and the other one... And that is kinda scary when considering purchasing it
@@DustinAbbottTWI Tank you so much for answering!! I have one rather specific question... I have EOS 90d + sigma 18-38 F1.8 , and I want to upgrade to R6 MK2 + 24mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8, do you think the IQ would be better or worse? I mainly use this setup for video, so I would need a 24mm for video, but I am really scared that 90D filming at 4K 30 fps might actually be better optically than R6 MK2 with either 24mm f1.8 RF lenses or 50mm rf 1.8 lenses. Currently the high-end canon lenses are way out of my budget, which is why I was eyeing the R6 MK2 with those two more entry-level ones.
Hi Dustin, I have the EF 50 f1.4 adapted to my R5. I am thinking of getting the RF just because it's smaller than an adapted EF lens. How does purple fringing on this lens compare the the dreaded purple fringing on the EF f1.4 ? Thanks
Great video as always! Thanks for taking the time to include so much detail. How do you think the Canon RF 50mm 1.8 compares to the Canon EF 50mm 1.4 using a RF mount adapter? Do you think the RF 50mm 1.8 is sharper wide open?
Not necessarily an odd comparison, but a difficult one in some ways. There are a lot of variables when you compare both different systems and also different crop factors. The Canon will be able to produce much shallower depth of field images, though I think that the Fuji is arguably sharper at F2.
@@DustinAbbottTWI but then when you actually step down the RF50mm to around the same DOF as the Fuji 35mm, the RF50 itself gets sharper as well, doesn't it?
Great review. I just received my RF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens last week and agree with all your observations. Nice improvement over the EF versions and an inexpensive and lightweight alternative to my Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4. Great for gimbal use, hiking, and travel (eventually).
Hello, So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers, Sincerely, Philgood ...
Looks interesting. Now I use the RF 24-105 for this length. I know it’s only F4 but gives great results. That would be an interesting comparison in the future
Helpful and comprehensive review Dustin. For those using back button focus, once focussing has been decoupled from the shutter button the focus ring gives you full time MF override without having to go into the menus to set It.
Hi Dustin, again a very good and detailed review. When you have to make a desicion, which lens would you use, the RF 50mm 1.8 or the sony Zeiss 55mm 1.8 in terms of image quality and auto focus speed / accuracy? Thanks in advance
That's an odd question, considering that we're talking about two completely different systems. The 55mm is a little sharper at wide apertures, but it also about 4x as expensive.
Does the manual focus ring still act like that - dont see the point of it. Excited to see canon are about to release a 24 f1.8 - some value lenses now appearing.
@@DustinAbbottTWI valid points. But due to the size and weight advantage and no adaptor, will I be losing significantly in image IQ if I decide to buy the rf ?
There is a setting to enable MF while half pressing the shutter button in the AF menu of the R5. It works very well this way. If you need to manual focus you flip the lens switch to Focus and half press the shutter. Otherwise leave it in Control mode for exposure comp adjustment or other function you have assigned.
Funny they put in an aspherical element since that was originally the only differentiator between the regular and L lenses! Just think, this would have had a red ring in the 1970s. Bit of a shame about the vignette. It's my layperson's understanding that vignetting can often be improved if the front couple of elements and housing are made wider. If that is the case then I wish they'd stuck to the 49mm filter size of the previous lens. Less vignette and a more standard filter size would make this much more tempting, considering it is over double the price of the EF one here. (£220+£30 hood vs £99+£18.) Still, I'm pleasantly surprised to hear the focusing is good. After the 85mm that was my main concern for this lens. I was expecting the focusing here to be a complete disaster. Not a total home run but I'm sure I'll buy one eventually, after a bit of a price drop. Thank you for the thorough review, it's a great help.
Thanks for your review. I own the ef 50 stm and rf adapter, but have not tried that len on my r. In your test you mentioned stopping down to f/4 for better quality. Which makes me wonder how the rf 24-105 set at 50mm and on f/4 would compare.
Thanks for your hard work and great review.... I got the RF 70-200 2.8 because A: didnt have the EF version. B: great improvement in size and weight and pretty good performance. Other RF lenses seems to under perform in vingetting etc for the price they demand. Bought 2nd hand EF lenses instead at good deals, 16-35 F4, 85 F 1.4, 35 F1.4 at great deals... need to deal with the adapter for my R6 but nevermind. Got myself a killer deal of a 5D mk1 as well so its all works on that one too...
Nice to see another creator also being sponsored by Into The AM! I have done a couple of videos sponsored by them as well. Great t-shirts and super cool designs. I have a few of them! Now, if only Canon would hurry up and send me my RF 50mm 1.8! I ordered it back in late November...still on backorder! 😩
You mention being surprised by a vignette of 4 stops. I just tested my copy using different shutter speeds and checking CR3 in ACR... and it is more like 2.3 stops in extreme corners (I tested the upper left on EOS R) which seems more in line with expectations. Otherwise I think the lens is good, especially is sharper on a wider area than EF STM version. For astro I use it at F3.2 ... it is what it is!
Hi Claude, it looks like Bryan Carnathan's results mirror mine: www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=1528&Camera=1508&LensComp=989. He's the king of chart tests, so I think my findings are solid.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for your quick answer. This is so strange! I checked on samples of the 2 lenses I took last December and I don't see a large difference (the RF is maybe ~0.3 stop worse). I note that I used the EOS R for both lenses in the same setting, the EF with the adapter of course. I have the Raw files if you are interested.
3 ปีที่แล้ว
@@DustinAbbottTWI Hi Dustin. If you and Brian are correct, how do you explain it: YT/66GZ9MdmVI8?t=309 (it's link to Christopher Frost YT channel and RF50mm F1.8 review). Don't you think it's a very strange (completely different results)?
@@DustinAbbottTWI Unless I'm misunderstanding, at 19:20, there seemed to be that much less haziness in the second copy of the lens. Either way, looks like a great lens for 200 USD
The second copy (the one I purchased) is a bit better, for sure. I thought you were insinuating that the test model was superior/cherry picked (I get that, sometimes, from people). My point was that my purchased retail copy was actually better, which is now what I believe you were saying
Really hoping they release a lens between the 1.2L and the 1.8, I think the 1.8 might be a downgrade from my EF 50mm 1.4. It looks like the bokeh is smoother/rounder on the EF 1.4. Thanks for your in depth review!
I'm not entirely without comparing them side by side. I've owned a couple of copies of the EF 50mm F1.4, and found that the bokeh gets quite busy in the transition zone.
Being a beginner, the less rounded bokeh irritated me a bit when I got the EF 1.8, so I got the 1.4, which I liked better, but I almost always stop down to at least 2.8. Probably part of the reason is the transition you mention. Open wide I don't like the photos as much. It's very interesting to learn about (albeit potentially expensive), thanks for your videos! Really helps to train the eye what to look for.
I noticed you didn't shoot any portraits with this lens.I must have had a copy like #1 because this lens is downright awful for portraits. Even stopped down to f/2.8 and shooting three quarter shots, the bottom third of every photo was soft and blurry. Basically everything from the thigh area on down. It wasn't my camera either because the 85 f/2 looked great. I may rent one and just see if I got a bad copy or if its just that bad for portraits. Thanks for the video.
I do love my EF 50mm 1.8 STM and will probably never sell it.. It was definitely am improvement over the very plastic feel of the previous.. Saying that, I Will be picking the RF version of the 50mm 1.8 STM. I plan on investing on a set of cine glass for manual focus pulling video work
I got the RF 50 1.8 on preorder and have been shooting it for a while as my street photography/stealth go-to (compared to my 28-70!). Decent pics and quality and I would agree with your assessments on your review that anyone with skill can get excellent results. For me the weather sealing (or lack thereof) caused me some temporary panic when it took nearly an hour for condensation to clear when going through an outside to inside transition in Vermont last month. Other than that, this lens has been a strong performer, especially for the price tag.
@@DustinAbbottTWI lol absolutely! hence my affinity for this 50 1.8 :). It had a valid place alongside my trinity since it goes unnoticed where the others can’t. Keep up these great reviews!
@@hudsoncaceres6820 Only when I don’t want the lens to alter the attention or mood of the subjects. The 28-70 is the complete opposite of discrete, but it really is jaw dropping in quality and character. These lenses certainly have their times and places, but I do find the 28-70 has more of those!
Love you reviews. They are very comprehensive. Vignetting looks to be a trick that Canon (and others) use to gain optical performance (and end up charging a premium). This is the case also with their EF 70-200 f2.8L ver i vs ii. I notice this often since I do a lot of composition for web/graphic design, where the main subject is placed on the far edge of the frame, leaving the rest of the frame for other graphic elements. In this case, it is more disappointing since this is the EF to RF transformation, where the short flange distance should make it an easier problem to solve. Maybe you can do actual breakdown of the lens, if you weigh out the glass, I would not be surprised the this Canon Nifty 50 would simply use less glass that the EF ..... and the price is in reality 60% more (retail). Regarding fixing in post, it is a pain in stills, and horrible in video.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, and you also point out the interesting detail of the front element, filter size. I guess I am lamenting on the promise of Canon and Nikon on "better optics" with the short flange distance optical design. They for sure MORE expensive, not any smaller/lighter. And at this point, emphasis on (very marginal utility in practice) center sharpness, while compromising other, such as vignette and (probably) distortion.
I am surprised by all of the positive reviews for this lens. I had it for a while. The images it produced were disappointing, very low contrast. I ended up returning the lens. I am wondering though, I did not have a lens hood for it. Would that have made a difference?
If you use backlight or sidelight a lot, it could make a difference. This lens surely doesn't have the glare coating of its 11X as expensive F/1.2L counterpart, nor does it have 15 lens elements. So a little glare might wash out your images with such lighting angles. Clearly this video shot with the 50 looks pretty sharp and had good contrast. I plan to buy the 35mm F/1.8 myself but I'll definitely buy a hood for it too.
The lens hood would have helped, though ironically I don't think the RF 35mm F1.8 is particularly special in its rendering. As for images being really low contrast - I did note that low contrast up until F2.8 is one of the primary optical shortcomings here.
I know this is a year+ after the filming of this video, but if anyone is reading this the JJC LH-ES65B lens hood is $11.99 on Amazon… worlds cheaper then the Canon ES65B for $39.99 and works just as good.
If you want best value for money, get yourself a used Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art. The availability of occasions is really good. Your choices aren't limited to a 240 euro budget option and a 2300 euro premium option. In my opinion the bokeh of the RF 50mm f/1.8 isn't so great in bright sunlight. To my eye the pictures here aren't really a torture test for bokeh quality. With more bright colors and/or highlights in the background it's definitely beneficial to get a better lens.
The Sigma weighs 5x more and costs 5x as much. I'm not sure that's a fair comparison or the type of lens that people will be cross-shopping. It is a good lens optically, though.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I'm not going to argue about size and weight, but as it comes to price in my market a used Sigma Art is twice the price (mine was even less), and a new one is only 3 times the price. Although this is significantly more expensive, i think it's a good lens to mention when you do mention the the L being 9 to 10 times the price. Hence my comment. Nonetheless this is a great review, and you're the greatest lens reviewer.
What Canon need is a midrange 50mm. There is a freaking 10 times price gap between the 1.8 and 1.2. I think most people feel the 1.8 isn't up tp the standard, but the 1.2 is overkill and out of reach (even if you are very rich it doesn't mean you have super human strength, that's a heavy lens). This gap is usually filled by third party, however it seems like all the third party like Tamron, Sigma just gives up on Canon and go full SONY, that really holds Canon back as a system.
Always thanks for high quality review. Hope sony to release new 50.8 or 50GM. Existing sel 50.8 is disappointing and 50.4za is compared to Z50.2s & RF50.2
Price aside, the f1.8 also beats the f1.2 in compactness. The f1.2 would be too bulky on my RP, but the f1.8 would make it a street-photography camera.
im getting really tired with canon. I switched from sony to canon, with the R5 8 months ago, now i want to switch back to sony. Why? Because getting ANY RF mount lens here in belgium is a disaster. I still cannot buy ANY rf mount lenses here! Im gonna sell my R5 and go back to sony, they have a lot more lenses in stock, also from third party brands. Ive had it with canon....
That’s true, though the convenience of not having to use an adapter is probably enough for many people to swallow the bit of price increase, and the lens is better overall.
It is unfortunately true that Fuji is slipping behind a bit right now. They've got to get more third party investment to increase their competitiveness.
![[Gegagedigedagedago] NEW Help Gegagedigedagedago Nugget escape from Nikocado Avocado Challenge](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hJWnwRC2Fz8/mqdefault.jpg)
Hey Dustin, some time back I watched your Canon R5 review and left a nasty comment due to the fact that you didn’t speak of the overheating issues that I had experienced with the R5. I purchased the camera, used the initial firmware, had a ton of problems, returned it and decided to give it another chance with the latest firmware and what a difference! I can shoot video literally all day even in temps in the 70’s (F) without overheating.
I wanted to own up to being wrong and being a jerk. For both, I apologize.
Well, Craig, what you've just done shows more character than I see from many people, so I happily accept your apology.
I'm also really happy that you're getting improved results on your new R5. I really love the camera, myself.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I’ve enjoyed running with the R5 and now with the C70; from my experiences, the video quality is simply amazing from both cameras but the video AF performance from Canon in general isn’t as good as what I can get from Sony with the A7III and the A7S III. Definitely better than most other systems but does require more work and direct control whereas with the Sony cameras they can virtually read my mind. Would you agree with that assessment?
Class Craig 👏👏👏👏
best camera gear reviewer on youtube!
Wow, thanks!
I bought this lens and have no real complaints so far. One thing I noticed is that when you turn the camera off, it stops down the lens substantially rather than leaving the aperture blades wide open. Do you have any insight on why Canon might have chosen to do that?
I'm not quite sure on the motivation, but that's the way that Sony has always handled things, too. A mirrorless thing, perhaps?
When I got the R5 I got the 50mm as a freebie which reminded me of SLRs in the 1970s where 50mm lenses came with the camera. I owned 5 EF L lenses and bought the adaptor. When I was playing with the R5 I was glad I had the RF 50mm. Eventually I also bought the RF 24-105mm f/4L and traded in the very heavy EF 24-70mm f/2.8L.
That's true. Everything used to come with a 50mm lens.
The size and weight fits perfectly to the RP. It has become a small setup that I carry with me easily.
Exactly.
Hello,
So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers,
Sincerely,
Philgood ...
it was out of stock here in Switzerland for months but I should finally get it this week. Looking forward to having it in hand.
This is a lens that wouldn't surprise me if demand outstripped supply initially.
Not sure if you’ll see this since it’s been a while since the video. But I do have a question about one thing you mentioned. You indicate that the af is faster on the rf version vs the latest 1.8 ef version. since the r5 is significantly faster in af than any mirrored slrs except for the 1dx cameras, Do you think the camera is the main reason for the difference in af speed or is it the lens? If you’re thinking back to old versions of slrs with the older 50, that might have skewed your thoughts on it? Do you agree? Thanks for reading and your videos!
It seems like even if someone is planning to purchase the 50mm 1.2 L, this is a good stop-gap until the funds are available. Additionally for run-and-gun photography, where it’s more desirable to have lightweight glass, this would be a nice alternative to have in the bag. Would you agree with that assessment, Dustin?
That makes sense to me. They are completely different lenses in terms of size.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I just got an R6 24-105 L kit. So, I’m working on a roadmap of how to add lenses that will expand my creative options. The acuity of the L lenses is so attractive, but it appears that added weight is an inherent caveat.
Mine it's scheduled to arrive next Tuesday, i cant wait to put it on my RP and go for a walk a shoot a lot with it!
You'll enjoy it
Hello,
So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers,
Sincerely,
Philgood ...
the quality of your video is amazing!
These recent cameras really produce killer 4K footage
Hello,
So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers,
Sincerely,
Philgood ...
I definitely think you'll like the 50mm as opposed to using the 40 plus adapter.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you very much for your answer. What are the main reasons you think I would prefer the RF 50mm f 1.8 ? Is it better in terms of Image rendering ?
Really nice review! Do you think that you've seen copy to copy variation? Looks like a huge difference between yours and the other one... And that is kinda scary when considering purchasing it
It is not unusual for there to be more sample variation with cheap lenses, but I'm not aware of such an issue from other users
@@DustinAbbottTWI Tank you so much for answering!! I have one rather specific question... I have EOS 90d + sigma 18-38 F1.8 , and I want to upgrade to R6 MK2 + 24mm f1.8 and 50mm f1.8, do you think the IQ would be better or worse? I mainly use this setup for video, so I would need a 24mm for video, but I am really scared that 90D filming at 4K 30 fps might actually be better optically than R6 MK2 with either 24mm f1.8 RF lenses or 50mm rf 1.8 lenses. Currently the high-end canon lenses are way out of my budget, which is why I was eyeing the R6 MK2 with those two more entry-level ones.
Hi Dustin, I have the EF 50 f1.4 adapted to my R5. I am thinking of getting the RF just because it's smaller than an adapted EF lens. How does purple fringing on this lens compare the the dreaded purple fringing on the EF f1.4 ? Thanks
There's less fringing, for sure.
I’m not sure you’ll see this but if you do can you make a case for owning the 1.2 and the 1.8? Great review!!
If you had two different size requirements, yes.
Great video as always! Thanks for taking the time to include so much detail. How do you think the Canon RF 50mm 1.8 compares to the Canon EF 50mm 1.4 using a RF mount adapter? Do you think the RF 50mm 1.8 is sharper wide open?
It's been so long since I've used/tested the EF 50mm F1.4 (probably ten years) that I don't have an informed opinion on that.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for taking the time to send your honest reply!
I simply love these videos. Sit back, chill and listen to this is just relaxing to me.
Glad you enjoy it!
It may seem like an odd comparison but I am wondering how this lens compares with the Fuji 35mm f2 in IQ?
Not necessarily an odd comparison, but a difficult one in some ways. There are a lot of variables when you compare both different systems and also different crop factors. The Canon will be able to produce much shallower depth of field images, though I think that the Fuji is arguably sharper at F2.
@@DustinAbbottTWI but then when you actually step down the RF50mm to around the same DOF as the Fuji 35mm, the RF50 itself gets sharper as well, doesn't it?
Bought this lens because of this review. Thanks!
Hope you enjoy it!
I upgraded to the R5 some time last year and wanted to have a small travel/hiking lens for my EOS R. Lugging around the 28-70 on hikes is so heavy.
Great review. I just received my RF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens last week and agree with all your observations. Nice improvement over the EF versions and an inexpensive and lightweight alternative to my Sigma Art 50mm f/1.4. Great for gimbal use, hiking, and travel (eventually).
That sounds like a fair assessment.
Hello,
So tell me what you think of this small RF 50mm f1.8 stm lens? Is it really excellent in terms of image rendering? I would like to buy it to put on my Canon RP to go light and do some street photography, is it really worth it? For now I am using my Canpon RP with the Pancake 40 mm f2.8 stm + an adapter ring, will the RF 50 mm be better in your opinion? Thank you in advance for your answers,
Sincerely,
Philgood ...
Looks interesting. Now I use the RF 24-105 for this length. I know it’s only F4 but gives great results. That would be an interesting comparison in the future
Hi James, the RF 24-105 is definitely a useful lens.
Helpful and comprehensive review Dustin. For those using back button focus, once focussing has been decoupled from the shutter button the focus ring gives you full time MF override without having to go into the menus to set It.
That's interesting.
Hi Dustin, again a very good and detailed review. When you have to make a desicion, which lens would you use, the RF 50mm 1.8 or the sony Zeiss 55mm 1.8 in terms of image quality and auto focus speed / accuracy? Thanks in advance
That's an odd question, considering that we're talking about two completely different systems. The 55mm is a little sharper at wide apertures, but it also about 4x as expensive.
@@DustinAbbottTWI But thanks anyway.
Does the manual focus ring still act like that - dont see the point of it.
Excited to see canon are about to release a 24 f1.8 - some value lenses now appearing.
Nothing has changed with the MF ring.
I just got this lens yesterday, can’t wait to use it. The control ring is a huge plus in my opinion. I have the eos r
Control ring is definitely a step up.
Hi Dustin...excellent video...very informative and straight to the point. My question is how does the rf 50 1.8 compare to the Tamro1.8
The Tamron 45mm F1.8 has a richer rendering and better contrast, but also has some onion bokeh effect.
@@DustinAbbottTWI valid points. But due to the size and weight advantage and no adaptor, will I be losing significantly in image IQ if I decide to buy the rf ?
There is a setting to enable MF while half pressing the shutter button in the AF menu of the R5. It works very well this way. If you need to manual focus you flip the lens switch to Focus and half press the shutter. Otherwise leave it in Control mode for exposure comp adjustment or other function you have assigned.
Thanks for the tip!
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks. You make excellent videos, thank you for your time and effort.
Obtain fantastic shots with the ef 50mm 1.8 with an adapter on my RP.
I'm glad you are enjoying it.
Funny they put in an aspherical element since that was originally the only differentiator between the regular and L lenses! Just think, this would have had a red ring in the 1970s.
Bit of a shame about the vignette. It's my layperson's understanding that vignetting can often be improved if the front couple of elements and housing are made wider. If that is the case then I wish they'd stuck to the 49mm filter size of the previous lens. Less vignette and a more standard filter size would make this much more tempting, considering it is over double the price of the EF one here. (£220+£30 hood vs £99+£18.)
Still, I'm pleasantly surprised to hear the focusing is good. After the 85mm that was my main concern for this lens. I was expecting the focusing here to be a complete disaster.
Not a total home run but I'm sure I'll buy one eventually, after a bit of a price drop. Thank you for the thorough review, it's a great help.
The vignette is an odd development, for sure.
Thanks for your review. I own the ef 50 stm and rf adapter, but have not tried that len on my r. In your test you mentioned stopping down to f/4 for better quality. Which makes me wonder how the rf 24-105 set at 50mm and on f/4 would compare.
The prime would be better as it is near flawless by that point.
Thanks for your hard work and great review.... I got the RF 70-200 2.8 because A: didnt have the EF version. B: great improvement in size and weight and pretty good performance. Other RF lenses seems to under perform in vingetting etc for the price they demand. Bought 2nd hand EF lenses instead at good deals, 16-35 F4, 85 F 1.4, 35 F1.4 at great deals... need to deal with the adapter for my R6 but nevermind. Got myself a killer deal of a 5D mk1 as well so its all works on that one too...
Nice!
Nice to see another creator also being sponsored by Into The AM! I have done a couple of videos sponsored by them as well. Great t-shirts and super cool designs. I have a few of them!
Now, if only Canon would hurry up and send me my RF 50mm 1.8! I ordered it back in late November...still on backorder! 😩
Nice! Yeah, so far I've liked their stuff. I'm surprised your lens is taking that long to arrive. That stinks!
Video is so clear. Wow
Thanks!~
You mention being surprised by a vignette of 4 stops. I just tested my copy using different shutter speeds and checking CR3 in ACR... and it is more like 2.3 stops in extreme corners (I tested the upper left on EOS R) which seems more in line with expectations. Otherwise I think the lens is good, especially is sharper on a wider area than EF STM version. For astro I use it at F3.2 ... it is what it is!
Hi Claude, it looks like Bryan Carnathan's results mirror mine: www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Vignetting-Test-Results.aspx?FLI=0&API=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0&Lens=1528&Camera=1508&LensComp=989. He's the king of chart tests, so I think my findings are solid.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for your quick answer. This is so strange! I checked on samples of the 2 lenses I took last December and I don't see a large difference (the RF is maybe ~0.3 stop worse). I note that I used the EOS R for both lenses in the same setting, the EF with the adapter of course. I have the Raw files if you are interested.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Hi Dustin. If you and Brian are correct, how do you explain it: YT/66GZ9MdmVI8?t=309 (it's link to Christopher Frost YT channel and RF50mm F1.8 review). Don't you think it's a very strange (completely different results)?
Seemed to be quite a bit of difference between the test model and purchased version. Thanks for the exhaustive review.
In what way? I purchased one myself, and, while I think my purchased copy is a hair sharper, they are both fairly similar.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Unless I'm misunderstanding, at 19:20, there seemed to be that much less haziness in the second copy of the lens. Either way, looks like a great lens for 200 USD
The second copy (the one I purchased) is a bit better, for sure. I thought you were insinuating that the test model was superior/cherry picked (I get that, sometimes, from people). My point was that my purchased retail copy was actually better, which is now what I believe you were saying
Really hoping they release a lens between the 1.2L and the 1.8, I think the 1.8 might be a downgrade from my EF 50mm 1.4. It looks like the bokeh is smoother/rounder on the EF 1.4.
Thanks for your in depth review!
I'm not entirely without comparing them side by side. I've owned a couple of copies of the EF 50mm F1.4, and found that the bokeh gets quite busy in the transition zone.
Being a beginner, the less rounded bokeh irritated me a bit when I got the EF 1.8, so I got the 1.4, which I liked better, but I almost always stop down to at least 2.8. Probably part of the reason is the transition you mention. Open wide I don't like the photos as much.
It's very interesting to learn about (albeit potentially expensive), thanks for your videos!
Really helps to train the eye what to look for.
I noticed you didn't shoot any portraits with this lens.I must have had a copy like #1 because this lens is downright awful for portraits. Even stopped down to f/2.8 and shooting three quarter shots, the bottom third of every photo was soft and blurry. Basically everything from the thigh area on down. It wasn't my camera either because the 85 f/2 looked great. I may rent one and just see if I got a bad copy or if its just that bad for portraits. Thanks for the video.
That's a bad copy. A good copy will work fine for portraits.
I do love my EF 50mm 1.8 STM and will probably never sell it.. It was definitely am improvement over the very plastic feel of the previous..
Saying that, I Will be picking the RF version of the 50mm 1.8 STM.
I plan on investing on a set of cine glass for manual focus pulling video work
Enjoy!
Looking forward for Sony to step up and update their nifty-fifty in similar fashion
That would be nice. There is a Viltrox 50mm F1.8 coming this year to FE, so that could be interesting.
I got the RF 50 1.8 on preorder and have been shooting it for a while as my street photography/stealth go-to (compared to my 28-70!). Decent pics and quality and I would agree with your assessments on your review that anyone with skill can get excellent results. For me the weather sealing (or lack thereof) caused me some temporary panic when it took nearly an hour for condensation to clear when going through an outside to inside transition in Vermont last month. Other than that, this lens has been a strong performer, especially for the price tag.
You’ve been using the 50mm 1.8 instead of the 28-70???????
The 28-70 is not exactly "street weight".
@@DustinAbbottTWI I’m a scrawny boy that weighs 125 pounds if I can do it anyone can
@@DustinAbbottTWI lol absolutely! hence my affinity for this 50 1.8 :). It had a valid place alongside my trinity since it goes unnoticed where the others can’t.
Keep up these great reviews!
@@hudsoncaceres6820 Only when I don’t want the lens to alter the attention or mood of the subjects. The 28-70 is the complete opposite of discrete, but it really is jaw dropping in quality and character. These lenses certainly have their times and places, but I do find the 28-70 has more of those!
I bought with r5 first lens... But I plan on getting rf 13-35mm l lens
Sounds good!
You should flag the highlights or stick up a scrim.
Love you reviews. They are very comprehensive. Vignetting looks to be a trick that Canon (and others) use to gain optical performance (and end up charging a premium). This is the case also with their EF 70-200 f2.8L ver i vs ii. I notice this often since I do a lot of composition for web/graphic design, where the main subject is placed on the far edge of the frame, leaving the rest of the frame for other graphic elements. In this case, it is more disappointing since this is the EF to RF transformation, where the short flange distance should make it an easier problem to solve. Maybe you can do actual breakdown of the lens, if you weigh out the glass, I would not be surprised the this Canon Nifty 50 would simply use less glass that the EF ..... and the price is in reality 60% more (retail). Regarding fixing in post, it is a pain in stills, and horrible in video.
Hi Shaun, I actually show the optical formula in the review, and it isn't the same.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, and you also point out the interesting detail of the front element, filter size. I guess I am lamenting on the promise of Canon and Nikon on "better optics" with the short flange distance optical design. They for sure MORE expensive, not any smaller/lighter. And at this point, emphasis on (very marginal utility in practice) center sharpness, while compromising other, such as vignette and (probably) distortion.
hey Dustin check you comparative photos of the money. they are not of the same aperture
I am surprised by all of the positive reviews for this lens. I had it for a while. The images it produced were disappointing, very low contrast. I ended up returning the lens. I am wondering though, I did not have a lens hood for it. Would that have made a difference?
If you use backlight or sidelight a lot, it could make a difference. This lens surely doesn't have the glare coating of its 11X as expensive F/1.2L counterpart, nor does it have 15 lens elements. So a little glare might wash out your images with such lighting angles. Clearly this video shot with the 50 looks pretty sharp and had good contrast. I plan to buy the 35mm F/1.8 myself but I'll definitely buy a hood for it too.
@@JohnDrummondPhoto I have the RF 35mm F1.8. I have a lot of fun with it. Enjoy!
The lens hood would have helped, though ironically I don't think the RF 35mm F1.8 is particularly special in its rendering. As for images being really low contrast - I did note that low contrast up until F2.8 is one of the primary optical shortcomings here.
I know this is a year+ after the filming of this video, but if anyone is reading this the JJC LH-ES65B lens hood is $11.99 on Amazon… worlds cheaper then the Canon ES65B for $39.99 and works just as good.
Good advice for people looking for a hood
If you want best value for money, get yourself a used Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art. The availability of occasions is really good. Your choices aren't limited to a 240 euro budget option and a 2300 euro premium option. In my opinion the bokeh of the RF 50mm f/1.8 isn't so great in bright sunlight. To my eye the pictures here aren't really a torture test for bokeh quality. With more bright colors and/or highlights in the background it's definitely beneficial to get a better lens.
The Sigma weighs 5x more and costs 5x as much. I'm not sure that's a fair comparison or the type of lens that people will be cross-shopping. It is a good lens optically, though.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I'm not going to argue about size and weight, but as it comes to price in my market a used Sigma Art is twice the price (mine was even less), and a new one is only 3 times the price. Although this is significantly more expensive, i think it's a good lens to mention when you do mention the the L being 9 to 10 times the price. Hence my comment. Nonetheless this is a great review, and you're the greatest lens reviewer.
Hi Joost, I would completely be on board with your argument if the ART came in a native RF mount.
9:44 good old German money 😎
A lot of people enjoy seeing that!
What Canon need is a midrange 50mm. There is a freaking 10 times price gap between the 1.8 and 1.2. I think most people feel the 1.8 isn't up tp the standard, but the 1.2 is overkill and out of reach (even if you are very rich it doesn't mean you have super human strength, that's a heavy lens). This gap is usually filled by third party, however it seems like all the third party like Tamron, Sigma just gives up on Canon and go full SONY, that really holds Canon back as a system.
That's exactly right.
Most people? All people 👍 Come on Canon!
So is it worthy ?
I bought one. It's not amazing, but it is a good and useful for the money.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks , can I buy anything better for a canon r100 only body ( I just got it )… budget around 200€
I already have 5 normal lenses... I may not be able to justify a purchase to ze wife. 😂
Could be a problem :)
Always thanks for high quality review. Hope sony to release new 50.8 or 50GM. Existing sel 50.8 is disappointing and 50.4za is compared to Z50.2s & RF50.2
Sony could definitely use a good 50mm F1.8. Viltrox is making one this year, so that might be interesting.
Price aside, the f1.8 also beats the f1.2 in compactness. The f1.2 would be too bulky on my RP, but the f1.8 would make it a street-photography camera.
That's fair.
They dont have a 50mm 1.8 with IS
Correct.
I have the EF 50 but you are making me think....................
I do enjoy not having to use an adapter!
RF version of nifty-fifty looks quite nice! Except it looks a bit cheaper than EF 50mm F1.8 STM .. With canon's traditonal 'optional hood'
Wow, I really disagree that it looks "cheaper". I think it definitely looks more upscale.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Maybe im wrong, but when i saw its plastic parting line i cant stop thinking like that..
If I'm not mistaken, I saw something similar on the EF version.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Maybe thats one of sample variations
@@DustinAbbottTWI Anyway, Thanks for the another great review
I feel like Samyang, Tamron, or Sigma will make a niftier fifty soon.
Here's hoping. I picked one up in the meantime, though, as it is really useful for video work on my channel.
im getting really tired with canon. I switched from sony to canon, with the R5 8 months ago, now i want to switch back to sony. Why? Because getting ANY RF mount lens here in belgium is a disaster. I still cannot buy ANY rf mount lenses here! Im gonna sell my R5 and go back to sony, they have a lot more lenses in stock, also from third party brands. Ive had it with canon....
The Canon supply chain issues have been frustrating.
RF 50mm 1.8 lens: or how to take identical photos to the EF 50mm 1.8 lens for 60% more cash.
That’s true, though the convenience of not having to use an adapter is probably enough for many people to swallow the bit of price increase, and the lens is better overall.
Fuji is losing its advantages in every way...invest more on r&d instead of marketing please...
It is unfortunately true that Fuji is slipping behind a bit right now. They've got to get more third party investment to increase their competitiveness.
@@DustinAbbottTWI hopefully！btw the quality of your reviews are truly superb！