For anyone who has some of the budget RF f1.8 primes, I think one of the key things is to shoot it at around f2.2-2.5 if you want to get better sharpness and contrast while still retaining a good amount of background separation. This is especially true when shooting against bright lights.
As Katelyn pointed out - if you can't afford the fancy version of any lens...don't stress about it. You can certainly grow your business with a 1.8 or a 2.8 or even a kit lens, really. Don't go into debt buying gear. Work on being a better photographer, on how to create a sustainable business, how to appeal to your market, etc, etc, rather than the quick dopamine payoff of gear acquisition. I'm just entering year 3 as a wedding photographer, and while my business has grown quite a bit, I still pay cash for everything - well, I put it on my CC, but I pay it off in its entirety. ;) A nice rule to consider if you're not sure if you can afford a product is whether you can buy it twice; if you can't buy it twice, then it might be worth holding off so you're not riding the line all day, every day. Because you never know when something might suddenly break and you'll be glad you have some cash to help cover the unexpected costs of running a biz.
I’m a 45 yr corporate and advertising pro. Buy the best gear and raise your rates. You don’t want to be the cheap guy with inappropriate gear that hinders your work. Being a photographer is about making great images- success will follow. I only looked for work for the first 3 months of my career, the rest was repeat and referrals. If you’re always marketing, you aren’t putting the work first. If your work is low-light or available light, or you need the isolation of fast glass, you should buy fast glass-the right tool etc., and your tools shouldn’t hinder your vision. If someone is paying for your best, bring it. That said, the 1.8 version is a good lens at f4. The 1.2 lens is made to shoot at 1.2-2.0. At f4, buy either. I own both, and many 50mm for different rendering. I prefer to manual focus a Zeiss (or Leica) than any AF Canon. I’d recommend getting a used Milvus 1.4 and adapting- it’s optically better, lighter and ⅓ the cost on the used mkt.
One other thought about the Nifty Fifty (RF 50mm f/1.8) is that it also solves the travel question you asked some weeks back. Not only is this MUCH less of an investment to worry about losing or dropping, but it's also MUCH lighter and more compact to carry around, but still gives you VASTLY better shots than you could take with your phone. The 35mm could also be a great solution, depending on your focal preference. Both are versatile and give great results and FANTASTIC value!
The RF glass from Canon is honestly so sharp and they have fantastic autofocus. I have the RF 35 f1.8 and the RF 85 F2 and paired with my R6, the results are often sharper than even some of their older EF L lenses. You really can't go wrong with RF glass, even on the budget end.
L lenses do bring presence, I find it important because it makes my clients feel secure that my prices are justified just looking at the hardware, it might be shallow, but is very relevant
So much fun to see you taking pictures of the kids having fun! I completely lost focus on testing the lenses and had to review everything! Much better than those very serious technical reviews
2:32 It's not all metal. It has a poly-carbonate body, a metal mount, and some metal parts inside 3:40 The EF version has also a metal mount Nice video. ☺
@@zambination11 OP must have gotten rid of her EF 50mm f1.8 II and bought the 50mm f1.2 USM instead many years ago so from her memory the EF version of 50mm f1.8 had a plastic mount. It is NOT irrelevant. The Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II was the "nifty fifty" for 15 years 1990-2015 and sold the most so much so that many TH-camRS even called it the "plastic fantastic". The EF 50mm 1.8 (let's called it mk 1) had a metal mount but was only produced for 3 years (1987-1990) and is rare. And the EF 50mm f1.8 STM version only appeared since 2015 by which time many professionals have gotten the metal mount EF 50mm f1.4 or the metal mount EF 50mm f1.2 or the metal mount 50mm f1.0 instead of that "plastic fantastic".
@@set3777 You are totally right, but she doesn't mention the "old" version but rather clearly the EF version. So because she reviews the Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM, for me its common sense that she compares it to the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 STM is selling at moment.
The 1.8 was a huge upgrade from my kit lenses... and I am by NO means a professional photographer, even though I would love to be some day... But I have noticed that the 1.8 doesn't quite give the crispness that I yearn for, but it has been an excellent addition for me, and has really helped me feel more confident! Thank you for this comparison. I really appreciated it!
So happy to listen to this video. I'm shooting with an R5 and the 50 mm 1.8 and have been so happy with the images I'm getting during family sessions. I can't afford the money for the 1.2 right now and my clients have been super happy with their images as well. This made my day!
I had a wedding a weekend from August until October 1st and found the RF 50 1.2 for $500 less than retail on eBay and decided to purchase as sort of a long term rental and I’d sell it once the wedding season was over. It’s fall mini and senior session season and I still can’t let it go. It never leaves my camera. I often debate whether it’s worth it, as it’s sometimes too sharp for some of my clients, but I still love it.
The 1.8 will always get the job done. Having a red ring on your lens (L Series) just communicates that you like nice things but it doesn't make your portraits $2000 better. :-)
This statement has an element of truth, but the thing is, even my cheap smartphone can make blurry images, same goes for my old Samsung NX1000 APS-C. I did not buy a full frame camera to continue making blurry, low detail pictures... 🤷♂ Sure, people say it is all fine from f/2.8-3.5, but that means you are very limited. Darker situations, indoor usage is out of the window. I will definitely keep abandoning this focal length until something happens on the market, never really was my favorite thing anyway.
For people who ACTUALLY want and honest idea of what these 2 lenses really are: The F1.2 lens is FAR superior, in every way. It isn't just sharpness, it is color rendering and everything else. Yes, it is worth it. If you can't afford it, the 1.8 is just ok. But for nit-picks like me, the 1.2 beats everything else.....
@@Tzunami07 ROI is one thing, and artistic vision and the creative process are a totally different thing. Pros need to consider the final product, and THAT will contribute to their returns. Of course though, customers are the final and true judge.
The ultimate question: will your target market notice the difference? In the vast majority of cases, absolutely not. If you need the 1.2....rent it. Better for cash flow.
I have L lenses and the cheaper RF lenses. I switch to the cheaper RF 50, 35, 24 for candid time. It really saves on the weight and fatigue for those few hours.. and less intimidating to guests.
Oh my gosh! I bought this wonderful 1.8 refurbished for $79!! I just got it delivered and tried it out. It is amazing and if you are a hiker this is a no brainer. It is sooooo light! And it’s superb! Hiking is gonna be fun again. And I don’t have to lug a heavy lens around. I have the Canon R6 mkll and this combo is amazing! Best $79 I ever spent on photography.
I use Canon lenses on my R5 and also Zeiss Planar and Zeiss Milvus. I was shooting at a advertising agency's studio recently and it was overhead food. I went from the 24-105 Canon to the 50mm Macro Zeiss and when the image with the Zeiss lens change popped up on the screen my assistant said "Dude. That is insane". He meant, specifically, how sharp and in focus the Zeiss lens felt compared to the R5. I don't mind a bit of softness to a lens but usually on commercial jobs clients want everything sharp and everything in focus. The more expensive lenses tend to bring that to the table.
R5 has given my old EF 50 f1.2 a new lease of life. Fast autofocus and now nails focus 100% of the time. Less digitally crisp as the newer RF glass but still a beautifully sharp portrait lens.
@@thayes21364 the RF 85 f1.2 is faster than the EF version. If you are only shooting subjects that stay perfectly still then the EF version is fine, but if you know your subject is going to be moving around get the RF
Very nice to see something different for once, compared to all the other reviews talking about specs and this and that but not really focusing on hands-on experience compared to a much higher priced option. Thanks you guys for the video!
It would be interesting to know if the 1.2 really offers more resolution or if a bit of micro contrast could push the 1.8‘s results closer towards the 1.2
I just Sold my EF USM 50 f/1.2. But I do have my 85 f/2. STM macro, and ordered the 50 f/1.8 right now. Refurbished for only $130 from canon. Most clients, if not all with the exception of product photography cannot tell the difference.
I own the R6 and the RF 35 1.8, 50 1.8, and 85 2. I’m not a huge fan of the 85 for some reason. I adapt the EF 135 2 when I want the magic look for portraits. The RF 50 1.8 is a great lens that gets tons of use on my R6. Would highly recommend it, not even because of the cost.
@@KatelynJames From what I remember about the EF 85 1.8, I used to enjoy that lens back in the day. But the RF 85 2 just doesn’t seem to render with that “it” factor. Maybe I haven’t spent enough time using it? I usually reach for the 50/135 combo.
I have the 85mm 1.4L and it's amazing. I don't know if it's as sharp as the RF 85 f2 but it is pretty sharp. I got it for my DSLR because it's image stabilised. Now I'm using it on an R7 it's very accurate and wide open it murders the background nicely. think it would be pretty damn good on an R6.
@@breannamedek9186 sorry for the late reply, didn't get a notification on this. It really has to depend on what you do most. If events and groups, the 35mm is probably best for flexibility, and can still do decent if you need to move close for individual shots. The 85mm is GREAT if you mostly do headshots and portraits, but will struggle with anything wider or with more than 1 or 2 people. The 50mm is the best all-rounder, and if I could only have one it would be that.
It might also depend on your camera resolution and if you like bokeh. Personally I always stop down enough to make sure that the whole face from note tip to ears is in focus. Will you still see a difference if you stop down both lenses to f/4?
Nice comparison, though you should consider that the f/1.2 is stopped own to f/1.8 - while it's very good at f/1.2 it would have some image improvement at f/1.8 and that's a little over 1-stop difference. 50mm f/1.8 however you used it at f/1.8 - it's already a cheap lens, and usually they don't perform their best at widest. Stopping down 1 or 2 stops (to f/2.8 - f/4 range) could make a lot of difference in the image quality. Your conclusion however is correct. I build my photography career with the EF 50mm f/1.8 and EF 50mm f/1.4 and they're not issue to me as I photograph stills and often stop down to f/5.6 - f/8 range. Those EF lenses are far inferior compared to RF glass, and that EF 50mm f/1.8 was so annoying as it hunts too often.
@@tylerherrinton funny thing! I was typing this as she showed the picture of the video rig. I have that same set up. The c70 and rs2. Such a great camera!
I do like my nifty 50 and have captured some beautiful shots with it. I've taken the plunge and ordered the 1.2 (be here on Monday). I'm really excited to see what it can do. The nifty 50 is very prone to soft photos and I feel lucky when I get a good one. I found that the best way to get more sharp pictures than less with the nifty 50 is to stop down to 2.8 and set your shutter to a min of 1/100s (1/250s is the sweet spot on my lens). But Katelyn is spot on with her assessment on it. Make sure you have one in your bag and test your creativity and skill with it. It is a great investment for the RF cameras.
For me, the nifty 50 is a great lens for the price and a lot of pros have made a lot of money shots with them over the years. The main benefit of the f1.2 is the edge to edge sharpness, where the f1.8 clarity drops off on the edges noticeably. Personally, I'd prefer to spend the money on the f1.2 85 or the f1.8 135, and take the nifty fifty over the f1.2.
I think only you can decide that. The primary difference will be a significantly greater light transmission with the primes and better subject isolation due to a shallower depth of field. Sometimes primes can be better lenses with fewer compromises than a zoom, but that's on a case by case basis. If you're brand new to photography, sometimes it can be nice to buy a zoom to figure out what focal length speaks to you. Or, the classic answer would be to buy a 35mm or a 50mm and shoot with it for a year before buying anything else - learn photography with a simple prime, then you can upgrade your path later. Personally, I used to own all the zooms, the 2.8 holy trinity, wildlife lenses, everything. I sold it all for a couple of macro lenses and a fantastic prime trio. I own 5 total lenses now and I am much happier. But it took me a while to get here. Best of luck!
Thanks you! Now I can focus on getting the RF 85mm f/1.2 L. Side note could you rent a couple of Lensbaby do a piece on the unique lens affects. Thanks in advance. 🧏🏾♂️👍🏿🇯🇲🇯🇲🇯🇲
Katelyn, I am about to switch / upgrade to a Canon RF camera. I currently have a T6s and use the 50mm f1.8 EF lens for portraits and astrophotography. It gets TINY pinpoint super sharp stars and it's fast enough to soak up tons of nebula gasses (especially with Ha filter inserted). My question for you is: Is the RF version just as good / comparable to the EF version? And should I just invest in the EF-RF adapter and use my old EF lens on my RF camera?
Thank you, this was very educational and exactly was I was looing for. I'm new to this channel, got to say your video, lights and audio is outstanding! what microphones are you using?
I had the 50mm 1.8 first and it was ok for this price. But what i really hated was the dust inside the lens. I tried always to keep my equipment clean and dust free, but the 50 got after few weeks always dust inside. That alone is a big reason, why i use only L lenses in the future. But for beginner, is the cheaper 50mm great.
I have been struggling with this exact question! I am just starting to take my photography from hobbyist to professional and this information is exactly what I have been looking for! I LOVE your teaching style and will definitely be following you! I really look forward to taking your classes very soon.
The 50 1.8 is only sharp in the dead center, and I’ve seen this with multiple copies, hence the decision not to waste the money on this lens. Getting the eyes in focus is a must most of the time especially if you print the photos.
Thanks for the honest review. I just got back into my camera stuff and purchased the RP full framed Canon. My subjects have all grown up, got married without grand kids for now. I have a 1/2 dozen or so EF lenses (non L) and two EF L lenses (17-40) and (70-200). I really don't want to jump right into expensive RF lenses at this point in my life, yet anyways. My subjects will be interior design like kitchens and baths (which I do for a living). Thinking the EF L 17-40 should work for now. What are your thoughts for that type of photography? Sometimes I just couldn't get back far enough with the C-sized sensors which is why I decided on the full framed RP' I will probably use the photos for website, etc. I also like to hike/back pack and the smallness of the RP was attractive to me (especially with that little RF50 you just demoed) I enjoy taking nice landscapes but maybe not at the expense of all that weight (and liability $$$) in the back country. Love to know your recommendations if you have the time. (Subscribed)
I’d rather get a 35-50-85mm 1.8 and a 70-300 2.8 for a grand total of 2k instead of dropping it all on 1 lense knowing that I can literally do everything good instead of being amazing at 1 thing
Admittedly, I just bought the 1.8 50mm lens, its my second lens ever. My first lens was the kit one, the 24-105mm f4-7.5 zoom lens and I have to say, the 50mm is BLOWING ME AWAY! I'm so excited!
The AF on the 1.8 is pretty loud. But you’re right, if you never used a 1.2 you don’t know what you’re missing. If I had the cash to spend, I’d go for the 85mm 1.2 instead.
i am honestly considering getting the 1.8 , and i already have the 1.2. Main reasons are weight and I heard great things about it . if i want the best clarity i use my GFX
To me, there is a fairly big difference in sharpness. Is it worth $2K more? If you are a professional, absolutely. If you have that much spare cash... sure. I can't see spending that much for a prime lens but knock your socks off if you can. I have the RF 50 /1.8 on my R7 and think it's wonderful for the hobby purposes I use it for (1.6X crop so it equals an 80mm)
Nice. Shot with the 1.8 for a hot minute last year, similar results. The size/weight is one of its advantages, especially one-handed eg street work etc.
In my humble opinion, pretty much any reputable lens is a good lens. It is the person behind the lens which counts. I started as an amateur photographer when I was 15, then became a professional camera equipments sales only for the pro for many years. I am in my 60’s now, looking back at the industry things had changed a great deal, but the one thing never change is quality of the equipment and the skill of the photographer is the utmost important factors if you want to produce a good photo. But always remember it is the creator not the equipment comes first.
I have a canon m50 and am thinking about going with the 1.2 lens! I know I’ll have to get an EF mount, but does anyone know if this camera & lens yield good enough results for elopement photography?
I have just realized that ever since I bought these non-L RF lens, I have not touching my L lens as they are too large, heavy in comparison. I think L lens are properly reserved for professional work that required very large print size. Anything else, these lens are more than capable. Clients would be equally happy with the results from both L and non-L RF
I really like the fact you are concerned about someone over extending themselves financially. The advice you gave is solid gold. My firm rule is I NEVER buy anything that isn't going to appreciate in value on time. A house would qualify a camera, a lens, a car? Absolutely not. Better to work harder, save up and then own it. As you so aptly pointed out, having the less expensive lens is not going to hurt one's ability to produce an acceptable product. And besides, we both know, that most clients could never, will never, be as picky as are we. They will naturally know that we are doing our best we can die them and love us for caring about them the way we do. Your daughter and nephew are incredibly cute! Incidentally.
@@KatelynJames You are very welcome Katelyn. I have a question though I am hoping you can help me out with. I am going to buy the new Sony a7R V in about 6 months after all the as yet undiscovered bugs are exterminated! I want to buy a good, high quality lens for it. One that will produce excellent closeups, median range (portraits) and handle landscapes serviceably but not particularly high priority. My work revolves around my taking images I shoot, putting them through the arcane processes I have figured out and producing digital images that bear little actual resemblance to their progenitor photos, but which sell as giclee prints on canvas for about a thousand or so. This likely will be the last actual "real" camera I will invest in as, let's face it, the quality the Sony a7R V yields? Who really needs more? Yes, some my dear! I am sure - that that is so - but not, yours truly. I can take a 13 megapixal RAW image right now, shot with my phone and turn it into a 24 x 36 inch print file that at 16 bits and 300 DPI is around 600 MB that's amazing and tack sharp. So, I think I will maybe be able, with the Sony a7R V, to somehow muddle through! If you have a suggestion for a really good lens, even if expensive, I would welcome very much your help and counsel. Thank you in advance!
As a beginner - Canon 850D with 18/55 & 55/250 lens by Canon. They suit my needs alongside my drone footage. It's a hobby not my main source of income. Decent ... Thanks Katelyn
I spent the majority of my first year and a half in business on my ef 50 1.8 and I love it! I just got the Sigma 28-70 2.8 this summer and am in heaven lol. I’m very happy with these two (I have a 70-300 4.0 that I hardly ever use unless personally for landscape) and will probably save for another year or two to get the 70-200 🥰
Since i'm retired now and want to get back into photography.....i'm waiting for the Canon R5 Mark 2 to come out in Feburary 2024. I plan on buying the RF50mm 1.2 and the RF35mm 1.2 (once it's released)
For the clarity of the image content in the photo quality and the realism of the visual contrast, the correct white balance accuracy of the photo is far more important than the factors of the old and new camera body and the price of the lens.
I WANT the 50mm 1.2, but I settled for the 50mm 1.8, since I only do photography as a side hustle and a hobby. Also, having a family with two kids and lots of bills to pay, I really can’t justify the 2000$ difference. This still does not kill my WANT for the lens, but videos like this show how far one can come with a cheaper lens.
You can definitely use the 1.8 for professional use. Been doing professional social media work for brands, even with the EF version of the 1.8. And "worse" lenses than that. It's ALL about your professional level, not if you can or can't use it. The first year of shooting, my lens for 95% of the video work I did, was a cheap 10-18mm f 3.5-.5.6 efs lense on a Canon 80d.
great video Katelyn! and what do you think about the ef 50 1.2? will it be better than the rf 1.8? i do have the rf 1.8 and i dont love it too much... (RP camera and going to buy R6 MK2 soon)
It’s all about the glass. I started with budget glass and when I finally bought a premium lens, it was totally night and day. I’ve since only buy premium glass and I tell others to invest in good glass. It won’t disappoint. Your photos will standout from the crowd time and time again.
I'm new to photography so this might be a dumb thing to say, but could some of the sharpness and color difference on the shots for the kids be from the extra light coming in from the .6 stop advantage?
13:30 good thing you are honest. one can tell just by the sound of your voice that it's not worth $2000 more. if one has to zoom in to 200% to see the slight sharpness increase then a client will never ever experience that difference. Maybe outdoors with a busy background the 1.2 will really shine by blowing out the background other than that it's a hard no from me. If I had a little $$$ I'd invest in the sigma 50mm 1.4 art which is $650 new or about half that used.
I would also include the Rf 24mm and 16mm for a startup kit with the 35mm, 50mm and the 85mm. I also have the EF-S 10-18mm and the EF-S 24mm for my R7 and R10 APSC cameras. The only other lens I bought was the 100-400mm lens. I am debating on what Full Frame camera to buy from Canon. I love how you can save the settings for video and picture mode for the R7.
You get some really cool imagery if you flip the 50 back to front, it then becomes a macro lens. Try it out, but make sure camera is locked down other wise its just a big blur. And thanks for doing this.
Recently I decided to buy some compact mirorrless camera, and 50/1.8 is why I choosed canon, ordered Canon RP with 50/1.8. 160$ against 500$ Sony/Nikon 1.8 primes, and they are huge in comparison to 50/1.8 STM
thank you for your video , I just want to say that you did not put the lenses under pressure to see the real difference. try bad light conditions and you will see the difference ............if you try to take photos with 1.8f with both lenses you will see 50mm 1.2f is more lighter even when it is on 1.8f ............why this happen ........this happen because of the diameter of the lens which means that it allows more light to enter to the camera.......the second difference is the sharpness .
I'm using the EF 85mm 1.4L on my R7 and it's very nice. I got the RF 50 1.8 recently but have only done some snaps with it so far but the focus seems spot on. Although I can say that the EF 85 1.4 is way sharper.
How do you focus?? I always set mine to one point and move my finger to the spot each time I take a portrait. I do mostly landscape photography, so I’m curious what focus option you’re using?Thanks!!
Great video! Just stumbled on it after purchasing a 1.8. I wanted to grab it as a low dough 50 mm. I have more money invested in my sport lenses. I love your presentation you say what you’d prefer but also show strong points of the lesser lenses. Great job
I'm not a full-time professional photographers (or part time pro for that matter), but I do make money with my gear and I've NEVER (not one time) had a client ask me what gear I use, let alone the lens or aperture value of a lens; they just want their pics to look good. The only time I get asked what type of gear I use, is when I'm applying to be a second shooter for an event. I think all the gear talk mostly comes from us semi-pro/hobbyist/enthusiasts folk. And yes I do have L glass, but didn't start out with it.
Yup, it's always difficult returning to your Nissan Versa once you've driven a Maserati. They both get you to your destination, but the quality of ride is quite noticeable.
Thanks for that. It was really helpful. For me, another big decision factor besides the price is the weight. I hate lugging huge heavy lenses, so if something light and plastic works decently, that's a big plus.
For anyone who has some of the budget RF f1.8 primes, I think one of the key things is to shoot it at around f2.2-2.5 if you want to get better sharpness and contrast while still retaining a good amount of background separation. This is especially true when shooting against bright lights.
Thanks for watching!
What if I use the prime with APSC? Do i just leave it at 1.8?
Totally agree as well as there is no this or envy greenish outline on a body thinking f2.5-3.5 gets rid of it for me
Agree. I rarely shoot on 1.8 or 2 as its too soft.
@@2darki I think you may still have issues with sharpness/contrast in certain situations. Overall you can still get some nice results though!
This is the content we're looking for, unbiased,, straight froward and honest. Thanks
Thanks!
As Katelyn pointed out - if you can't afford the fancy version of any lens...don't stress about it. You can certainly grow your business with a 1.8 or a 2.8 or even a kit lens, really. Don't go into debt buying gear. Work on being a better photographer, on how to create a sustainable business, how to appeal to your market, etc, etc, rather than the quick dopamine payoff of gear acquisition.
I'm just entering year 3 as a wedding photographer, and while my business has grown quite a bit, I still pay cash for everything - well, I put it on my CC, but I pay it off in its entirety. ;)
A nice rule to consider if you're not sure if you can afford a product is whether you can buy it twice; if you can't buy it twice, then it might be worth holding off so you're not riding the line all day, every day. Because you never know when something might suddenly break and you'll be glad you have some cash to help cover the unexpected costs of running a biz.
Great tips, thanks for sharing!
I’m a 45 yr corporate and advertising pro. Buy the best gear and raise your rates. You don’t want to be the cheap guy with inappropriate gear that hinders your work. Being a photographer is about making great images- success will follow. I only looked for work for the first 3 months of my career, the rest was repeat and referrals. If you’re always marketing, you aren’t putting the work first.
If your work is low-light or available light, or you need the isolation of fast glass, you should buy fast glass-the right tool etc., and your tools shouldn’t hinder your vision. If someone is paying for your best, bring it.
That said, the 1.8 version is a good lens at f4. The 1.2 lens is made to shoot at 1.2-2.0. At f4, buy either. I own both, and many 50mm for different rendering. I prefer to manual focus a Zeiss (or Leica) than any AF Canon. I’d recommend getting a used Milvus 1.4 and adapting- it’s optically better, lighter and ⅓ the cost on the used mkt.
One other thought about the Nifty Fifty (RF 50mm f/1.8) is that it also solves the travel question you asked some weeks back. Not only is this MUCH less of an investment to worry about losing or dropping, but it's also MUCH lighter and more compact to carry around, but still gives you VASTLY better shots than you could take with your phone. The 35mm could also be a great solution, depending on your focal preference. Both are versatile and give great results and FANTASTIC value!
I travel with the nifty fifty, the 1.2 is only for paid work. Taking no chances. Saw a few people lose their whole set ups recently.
I’d sure rather replace 159 versus 2000. Travel with that 1.8
Thanks for watching!
I've just bought the 1.8 second hand. Superb.
@@CarloPiana it's a budget banger for sure!
The RF glass from Canon is honestly so sharp and they have fantastic autofocus. I have the RF 35 f1.8 and the RF 85 F2 and paired with my R6, the results are often sharper than even some of their older EF L lenses. You really can't go wrong with RF glass, even on the budget end.
Love it!
because r6 only have 20mega pixel
It's true but the 35 is way sharper than the 50.
@@four-kings😂 „only“…you can print big enough
I have a RP that doesn’t have Sensor Shift in body like your R6.. is that make much difference in the final shoot or could be same.
L lenses do bring presence, I find it important because it makes my clients feel secure that my prices are justified just looking at the hardware, it might be shallow, but is very relevant
Thanks for watching!
So much fun to see you taking pictures of the kids having fun! I completely lost focus on testing the lenses and had to review everything! Much better than those very serious technical reviews
2:32 It's not all metal. It has a poly-carbonate body, a metal mount, and some metal parts inside
3:40 The EF version has also a metal mount
Nice video. ☺
3:40 The EF f1.8 STM version has also a metal mount. The older EF f1.8 "non-STM" version did NOT have a metal mount.
@@set3777 Yeap, but she compares it to the EF STM version. So the Canon 50mm f1.8 II you mention is irrelevant
@@zambination11 OP must have gotten rid of her EF 50mm f1.8 II and bought the 50mm f1.2 USM instead many years ago so from her memory the EF version of 50mm f1.8 had a plastic mount.
It is NOT irrelevant. The Canon EF 50mm f1.8 II was the "nifty fifty" for 15 years 1990-2015 and sold the most so much so that many TH-camRS even called it the "plastic fantastic".
The EF 50mm 1.8 (let's called it mk 1) had a metal mount but was only produced for 3 years (1987-1990) and is rare. And the EF 50mm f1.8 STM version only appeared since 2015 by which time many professionals have gotten the metal mount EF 50mm f1.4 or the metal mount EF 50mm f1.2 or the metal mount 50mm f1.0 instead of that "plastic fantastic".
@@set3777 You are totally right, but she doesn't mention the "old" version but rather clearly the EF version. So because she reviews the Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM, for me its common sense that she compares it to the Canon EF 50mm f1.8 STM is selling at moment.
The 1.8 was a huge upgrade from my kit lenses... and I am by NO means a professional photographer, even though I would love to be some day... But I have noticed that the 1.8 doesn't quite give the crispness that I yearn for, but it has been an excellent addition for me, and has really helped me feel more confident! Thank you for this comparison. I really appreciated it!
You're welcome! Thanks for watching and good luck on your photography journey!!
So happy to listen to this video. I'm shooting with an R5 and the 50 mm 1.8 and have been so happy with the images I'm getting during family sessions. I can't afford the money for the 1.2 right now and my clients have been super happy with their images as well. This made my day!
As long as your clients are happy, that's all that matters! Glad to hear you enjoyed the video, thanks for watching!
I had a wedding a weekend from August until October 1st and found the RF 50 1.2 for $500 less than retail on eBay and decided to purchase as sort of a long term rental and I’d sell it once the wedding season was over.
It’s fall mini and senior session season and I still can’t let it go. It never leaves my camera. I often debate whether it’s worth it, as it’s sometimes too sharp for some of my clients, but I still love it.
Thanks for watching!
I find that reducing clarity in Adobe camera RAW can soften skin and subtly reduce detail. It also softens highlights.
@@TonyGrant.duplicate the layer, mask the background and blur the one underneath, then lower the opacity of the upper layer.
I own both and I’m glad someone finally compared the two…clear plastic vs L-Series Glass
The 1.8 will always get the job done. Having a red ring on your lens (L Series) just communicates that you like nice things but it doesn't make your portraits $2000 better. :-)
This statement has an element of truth, but the thing is, even my cheap smartphone can make blurry images, same goes for my old Samsung NX1000 APS-C. I did not buy a full frame camera to continue making blurry, low detail pictures... 🤷♂
Sure, people say it is all fine from f/2.8-3.5, but that means you are very limited. Darker situations, indoor usage is out of the window. I will definitely keep abandoning this focal length until something happens on the market, never really was my favorite thing anyway.
For people who ACTUALLY want and honest idea of what these 2 lenses really are: The F1.2 lens is FAR superior, in every way. It isn't just sharpness, it is color rendering and everything else. Yes, it is worth it. If you can't afford it, the 1.8 is just ok. But for nit-picks like me, the 1.2 beats everything else.....
Part of the Arguments IS to justify the costs, professionals Always Look for roi.
@@Tzunami07 ROI is one thing, and artistic vision and the creative process are a totally different thing. Pros need to consider the final product, and THAT will contribute to their returns. Of course though, customers are the final and true judge.
The ultimate question: will your target market notice the difference?
In the vast majority of cases, absolutely not.
If you need the 1.2....rent it. Better for cash flow.
I have L lenses and the cheaper RF lenses. I switch to the cheaper RF 50, 35, 24 for candid time. It really saves on the weight and fatigue for those few hours.. and less intimidating to guests.
Great idea!
Oh my gosh! I bought this wonderful 1.8 refurbished for $79!! I just got it delivered and tried it out. It is amazing and if you are a hiker this is a no brainer. It is sooooo light! And it’s superb! Hiking is gonna be fun again. And I don’t have to lug a heavy lens around. I have the Canon R6 mkll and this combo is amazing! Best $79 I ever spent on photography.
That Canon Holiday sale was beautiful
Hallo machen Sie doch mal einen Vergleich mit einer 5D IV und einem EF 50mm 1.2 oder EF 50mm 1.8 und einer R6 mit RF50mm 1.2 .
Thanks for watching!
By far my favorite video explaining the difference between two different classes of lenses. Thank you!
I use Canon lenses on my R5 and also Zeiss Planar and Zeiss Milvus. I was shooting at a advertising agency's studio recently and it was overhead food. I went from the 24-105 Canon to the 50mm Macro Zeiss and when the image with the Zeiss lens change popped up on the screen my assistant said "Dude. That is insane". He meant, specifically, how sharp and in focus the Zeiss lens felt compared to the R5. I don't mind a bit of softness to a lens but usually on commercial jobs clients want everything sharp and everything in focus. The more expensive lenses tend to bring that to the table.
Of course! For commercial jobs you’d want the best of the best! But for the cost this lens surprised me!
R5 has given my old EF 50 f1.2 a new lease of life. Fast autofocus and now nails focus 100% of the time. Less digitally crisp as the newer RF glass but still a beautifully sharp portrait lens.
Love it!
Solid advice. I would like to see a similar comparison between an ef 1.2 and an Rf 1.2
We made a video comparing the EF and RF versions! Here is the link: th-cam.com/video/DFjIsn52sTo/w-d-xo.html
I was actually going to ask this because I trust her judgment over most. I have an EF 85 1.2 but can’t afford the Rf yet and would love the truth.
@@thayes21364 the RF 85 f1.2 is faster than the EF version. If you are only shooting subjects that stay perfectly still then the EF version is fine, but if you know your subject is going to be moving around get the RF
@@cjm8160 or just learn photography and use a faster shutter speed would be a lot chepaer and smarter
@@southbridgeforestHOA faster shutter speeds don't compensate for slow focus on the ef version....
If you don’t crop too much, what size can you print your r6 files (I assume you shoot raw)? Thank you, love the channel.
I have printed over 16x20 and it has been fine
Very nice to see something different for once, compared to all the other reviews talking about specs and this and that but not really focusing on hands-on experience compared to a much higher priced option. Thanks you guys for the video!
I would love to know your opinion with the 85 1.2 VS 85 2.0 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼
Thanks for watching!
It would be interesting to know if the 1.2 really offers more resolution or if a bit of micro contrast could push the 1.8‘s results closer towards the 1.2
i love how calm your voice and video are, thank you for this!
I just Sold my EF USM 50 f/1.2. But I do have my 85 f/2. STM macro, and ordered the 50 f/1.8 right now. Refurbished for only $130 from canon. Most clients, if not all with the exception of product photography cannot tell the difference.
Thanks for watching!
I really respect the honesty, practicality and reasonableness of your advice. I think it's spot on!
I appreciate that!
yes there is. since background get more bury out or blown out from 1.2 to 1.8 and 1.2 is faster glass
Thanks for watching!
What camera set up are you using for video, the shot of you outside was great 9:43
I own the R6 and the RF 35 1.8, 50 1.8, and 85 2. I’m not a huge fan of the 85 for some reason. I adapt the EF 135 2 when I want the magic look for portraits. The RF 50 1.8 is a great lens that gets tons of use on my R6. Would highly recommend it, not even because of the cost.
Interesting about the 85mm! I am so impressed with the 50mm 1.8!
@@KatelynJames From what I remember about the EF 85 1.8, I used to enjoy that lens back in the day. But the RF 85 2 just doesn’t seem to render with that “it” factor. Maybe I haven’t spent enough time using it? I usually reach for the 50/135 combo.
@@KatelynJames Have you had the chance to test out the RF 85 f2? I’d be curious to see what you think.
I have the 85mm 1.4L and it's amazing. I don't know if it's as sharp as the RF 85 f2 but it is pretty sharp. I got it for my DSLR because it's image stabilised. Now I'm using it on an R7 it's very accurate and wide open it murders the background nicely. think it would be pretty damn good on an R6.
YES!! When I switched to the Canon R6 this past June, I bought this exact 'trifecta' of budget lenses: the 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm (all together for
Thanks for watching!
Which one is your favorite out of all? I’m really torn on spending the extra money up front just so I don’t regret not going all in…
@@breannamedek9186 sorry for the late reply, didn't get a notification on this. It really has to depend on what you do most. If events and groups, the 35mm is probably best for flexibility, and can still do decent if you need to move close for individual shots. The 85mm is GREAT if you mostly do headshots and portraits, but will struggle with anything wider or with more than 1 or 2 people. The 50mm is the best all-rounder, and if I could only have one it would be that.
Hello. Try to review your images in develop module in lightroom. I noticed a diffrence in rendering when viewing pictures in library.
Thanks for watching!
It might also depend on your camera resolution and if you like bokeh. Personally I always stop down enough to make sure that the whole face from note tip to ears is in focus. Will you still see a difference if you stop down both lenses to f/4?
Thanks for watching!
Nice comparison, though you should consider that the f/1.2 is stopped own to f/1.8 - while it's very good at f/1.2 it would have some image improvement at f/1.8 and that's a little over 1-stop difference.
50mm f/1.8 however you used it at f/1.8 - it's already a cheap lens, and usually they don't perform their best at widest. Stopping down 1 or 2 stops (to f/2.8 - f/4 range) could make a lot of difference in the image quality.
Your conclusion however is correct. I build my photography career with the EF 50mm f/1.8 and EF 50mm f/1.4 and they're not issue to me as I photograph stills and often stop down to f/5.6 - f/8 range. Those EF lenses are far inferior compared to RF glass, and that EF 50mm f/1.8 was so annoying as it hunts too often.
Thanks for watching!
I’m kind of more blown away by the even exposure inside of your house to the outside. This video looks amazing. Great work on the whole thing!
Gotta love the 16 stops of dynamic range on the C70!
@@tylerherrinton funny thing! I was typing this as she showed the picture of the video rig. I have that same set up. The c70 and rs2. Such a great camera!
Thank you so much!
Ya their video set up for TH-cam is insane. Probably more accessible when it can be a write off for a business.
@@jwanger142 I use all my own equipment for TH-cam filming! Technically a write off for my own business I suppose but isn't all equipment a write off?
I do like my nifty 50 and have captured some beautiful shots with it. I've taken the plunge and ordered the 1.2 (be here on Monday). I'm really excited to see what it can do. The nifty 50 is very prone to soft photos and I feel lucky when I get a good one. I found that the best way to get more sharp pictures than less with the nifty 50 is to stop down to 2.8 and set your shutter to a min of 1/100s (1/250s is the sweet spot on my lens). But Katelyn is spot on with her assessment on it. Make sure you have one in your bag and test your creativity and skill with it. It is a great investment for the RF cameras.
Enjoy it! You’re going to love the 1.2, it’s amazing!
Are you using that on a mirrorless or a DSLR?
@@TonyGrant. My R6.
I had the Rf 1.8 and didn’t like the CA. Had to sell it and buy the Rf 1.2. I’m happy with my decision.
Thanks for watching!
For me, the nifty 50 is a great lens for the price and a lot of pros have made a lot of money shots with them over the years. The main benefit of the f1.2 is the edge to edge sharpness, where the f1.8 clarity drops off on the edges noticeably. Personally, I'd prefer to spend the money on the f1.2 85 or the f1.8 135, and take the nifty fifty over the f1.2.
Hi! If you had to choose between the 50 mm 1.2 and the 28-70 mm 2, which one would you pick?
I have been choosing the 28-70 2.0
Rather than getting a few starter kit-level primes, would you instead suggest the 24-105 f/4 L instead?
I think only you can decide that. The primary difference will be a significantly greater light transmission with the primes and better subject isolation due to a shallower depth of field. Sometimes primes can be better lenses with fewer compromises than a zoom, but that's on a case by case basis. If you're brand new to photography, sometimes it can be nice to buy a zoom to figure out what focal length speaks to you. Or, the classic answer would be to buy a 35mm or a 50mm and shoot with it for a year before buying anything else - learn photography with a simple prime, then you can upgrade your path later.
Personally, I used to own all the zooms, the 2.8 holy trinity, wildlife lenses, everything. I sold it all for a couple of macro lenses and a fantastic prime trio. I own 5 total lenses now and I am much happier. But it took me a while to get here.
Best of luck!
Thanks for watching!
Thanks you! Now I can focus on getting the RF 85mm f/1.2 L. Side note could you rent a couple of Lensbaby do a piece on the unique lens affects. Thanks in advance. 🧏🏾♂️👍🏿🇯🇲🇯🇲🇯🇲
Great idea!
Katelyn, I am about to switch / upgrade to a Canon RF camera. I currently have a T6s and use the 50mm f1.8 EF lens for portraits and astrophotography. It gets TINY pinpoint super sharp stars and it's fast enough to soak up tons of nebula gasses (especially with Ha filter inserted). My question for you is: Is the RF version just as good / comparable to the EF version? And should I just invest in the EF-RF adapter and use my old EF lens on my RF camera?
Thank you, this was very educational and exactly was I was looing for. I'm new to this channel, got to say your video, lights and audio is outstanding! what microphones are you using?
Glad it was helpful! That would be a ty question haha
I had the 50mm 1.8 first and it was ok for this price. But what i really hated was the dust inside the lens. I tried always to keep my equipment clean and dust free, but the 50 got after few weeks always dust inside. That alone is a big reason, why i use only L lenses in the future. But for beginner, is the cheaper 50mm great.
I have been struggling with this exact question! I am just starting to take my photography from hobbyist to professional and this information is exactly what I have been looking for! I LOVE your teaching style and will definitely be following you! I really look forward to taking your classes very soon.
The 50 1.8 is only sharp in the dead center, and I’ve seen this with multiple copies, hence the decision not to waste the money on this lens. Getting the eyes in focus is a must most of the time especially if you print the photos.
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the honest review. I just got back into my camera stuff and purchased the RP full framed Canon. My subjects have all grown up, got married without grand kids for now.
I have a 1/2 dozen or so EF lenses (non L) and two EF L lenses (17-40) and (70-200). I really don't want to jump right into expensive RF lenses at this point in my life, yet anyways. My subjects will be interior design like kitchens and baths (which I do for a living). Thinking the EF L 17-40 should work for now. What are your thoughts for that type of photography? Sometimes I just couldn't get back far enough with the C-sized sensors which is why I decided on the full framed RP' I will probably use the photos for website, etc.
I also like to hike/back pack and the smallness of the RP was attractive to me (especially with that little RF50 you just demoed) I enjoy taking nice landscapes but maybe not at the expense of all that weight (and liability $$$) in the back country.
Love to know your recommendations if you have the time. (Subscribed)
Now how does the EF lens with adapter compare to the cheaper RF 1.8 lens
Thanks for watching!
I just recently bought the RF 50 1.8 to use as my travel lens and I love how small and compact it is.
Thanks for sharing!
I’d rather get a 35-50-85mm 1.8 and a 70-300 2.8 for a grand total of 2k instead of dropping it all on 1 lense knowing that I can literally do everything good instead of being amazing at 1 thing
Thanks for watching!
Admittedly, I just bought the 1.8 50mm lens, its my second lens ever. My first lens was the kit one, the 24-105mm f4-7.5 zoom lens and I have to say, the 50mm is BLOWING ME AWAY! I'm so excited!
That second will turn into a third, fourth, fifth…… 😂
This is the most fun I’ve had watching a review in a long time.
I love the video!
Not camera related, but I also love your jacket! Can you link it? ☺️
It is from Target!
that is a great video Katelyn! what microphone are you using? the sound is so crisp and clear!
I use the 1.2 for weddings and 1.8 for travel! Super easy to throw in my purse and grab some shots!
Thanks for sharing!
The AF on the 1.8 is pretty loud. But you’re right, if you never used a 1.2 you don’t know what you’re missing. If I had the cash to spend, I’d go for the 85mm 1.2 instead.
I do LOVE my 85mm 1.2! That comes down to personal preference and what you shoot primarily.
i am honestly considering getting the 1.8 , and i already have the 1.2. Main reasons are weight and I heard great things about it . if i want the best clarity i use my GFX
Definitely will recommend especially if you can get it for under $160.
If size and weight are a big factor for you then the 1.8 is a great option for those circumstances!
To me, there is a fairly big difference in sharpness. Is it worth $2K more? If you are a professional, absolutely. If you have that much spare cash... sure. I can't see spending that much for a prime lens but knock your socks off if you can. I have the RF 50 /1.8 on my R7 and think it's wonderful for the hobby purposes I use it for (1.6X crop so it equals an 80mm)
Agreed!
Nice. Shot with the 1.8 for a hot minute last year, similar results. The size/weight is one of its advantages, especially one-handed eg street work etc.
Thanks for watching!
In my humble opinion, pretty much any reputable lens is a good lens. It is the person behind the lens which counts. I started as an amateur photographer when I was 15, then became a professional camera equipments sales only for the pro for many years. I am in my 60’s now, looking back at the industry things had changed a great deal, but the one thing never change is quality of the equipment and the skill of the photographer is the utmost important factors if you want to produce a good photo. But always remember it is the creator not the equipment comes first.
True well said.
Kaitlyn what’s your preset to get this super bright and airy look?
I use my own presets! Check them out here: katelynjames.com/kj-preset-process
I have a canon m50 and am thinking about going with the 1.2 lens! I know I’ll have to get an EF mount, but does anyone know if this camera & lens yield good enough results for elopement photography?
Thanks for watching!
I have just realized that ever since I bought these non-L RF lens, I have not touching my L lens as they are too large, heavy in comparison. I think L lens are properly reserved for professional work that required very large print size. Anything else, these lens are more than capable. Clients would be equally happy with the results from both L and non-L RF
I have just gotten mine and did a shoot with it .I am very happy with it .
Thanks for watching!
I really like the fact you are concerned about someone over extending themselves financially. The advice you gave is solid gold.
My firm rule is I NEVER buy anything that isn't going to appreciate in value on time. A house would qualify a camera, a lens, a car? Absolutely not.
Better to work harder, save up and then own it.
As you so aptly pointed out, having the less expensive lens is not going to hurt one's ability to produce an acceptable product.
And besides, we both know, that most clients could never, will never, be as picky as are we. They will naturally know that we are doing our best we can die them and love us for caring about them the way we do.
Your daughter and nephew are incredibly cute! Incidentally.
Thanks for sharing Erik!
@@KatelynJames You are very welcome Katelyn. I have a question though I am hoping you can help me out with.
I am going to buy the new Sony a7R V in about 6 months after all the as yet undiscovered bugs are exterminated!
I want to buy a good, high quality lens for it. One that will produce excellent closeups, median range (portraits) and handle landscapes serviceably but not particularly high priority.
My work revolves around my taking images I shoot, putting them through the arcane processes I have figured out and producing digital images that bear little actual resemblance to their progenitor photos, but which sell as giclee prints on canvas for about a thousand or so.
This likely will be the last actual "real" camera I will invest in as, let's face it, the quality the Sony a7R V yields? Who really needs more?
Yes, some my dear! I am sure - that that is so - but not, yours truly.
I can take a 13 megapixal RAW image right now, shot with my phone and turn it into a 24 x 36 inch print file that at 16 bits and 300 DPI is around 600 MB that's amazing and tack sharp.
So, I think I will maybe be able, with the Sony a7R V, to somehow muddle through!
If you have a suggestion for a really good lens, even if expensive, I would welcome very much your help and counsel. Thank you in advance!
Hey my car is worth more than I bought it for brand new (2008 Honda S2000). There are some exceptions 😉
Ok, you are about the best I have listened to. You got me hooked with you clarifying in first 3 mins. One of the best comparisons so far in the Tube👏
Awesome, thank you! Thanks for watching!
As a beginner - Canon 850D with 18/55 & 55/250 lens by Canon. They suit my needs alongside my drone footage. It's a hobby not my main source of income. Decent ... Thanks Katelyn
Thanks for watching!
I spent the majority of my first year and a half in business on my ef 50 1.8 and I love it! I just got the Sigma 28-70 2.8 this summer and am in heaven lol. I’m very happy with these two (I have a 70-300 4.0 that I hardly ever use unless personally for landscape) and will probably save for another year or two to get the 70-200 🥰
Thanks for watching!
Since i'm retired now and want to get back into photography.....i'm waiting for the Canon R5 Mark 2 to come out in Feburary 2024. I plan on buying the RF50mm 1.2 and the RF35mm 1.2 (once it's released)
As it wasn't included in your disclaimer and out of curiosity. What camera and lens combo did you use to shoot this video??????
🤔
For the clarity of the image content in the photo quality and the realism of the visual contrast, the correct white balance accuracy of the photo is far more important than the factors of the old and new camera body and the price of the lens.
Thanks for watching!
Great comparison, thanks for this video!
Thanks for watching!
I WANT the 50mm 1.2, but I settled for the 50mm 1.8, since I only do photography as a side hustle and a hobby. Also, having a family with two kids and lots of bills to pay, I really can’t justify the 2000$ difference. This still does not kill my WANT for the lens, but videos like this show how far one can come with a cheaper lens.
You can definitely use the 1.8 for professional use. Been doing professional social media work for brands, even with the EF version of the 1.8. And "worse" lenses than that.
It's ALL about your professional level, not if you can or can't use it.
The first year of shooting, my lens for 95% of the video work I did, was a cheap 10-18mm f 3.5-.5.6 efs lense on a Canon 80d.
Thanks for watching!
great video Katelyn! and what do you think about the ef 50 1.2? will it be better than the rf 1.8? i do have the rf 1.8 and i dont love it too much... (RP camera and going to buy R6 MK2 soon)
Thanks for watching!
It’s all about the glass. I started with budget glass and when I finally bought a premium lens, it was totally night and day. I’ve since only buy premium glass and I tell others to invest in good glass. It won’t disappoint. Your photos will standout from the crowd time and time again.
I'm new to photography so this might be a dumb thing to say, but could some of the sharpness and color difference on the shots for the kids be from the extra light coming in from the .6 stop advantage?
13:30 good thing you are honest. one can tell just by the sound of your voice that it's not worth $2000 more. if one has to zoom in to 200% to see the slight sharpness increase then a client will never ever experience that difference. Maybe outdoors with a busy background the 1.2 will really shine by blowing out the background other than that it's a hard no from me. If I had a little $$$ I'd invest in the sigma 50mm 1.4 art which is $650 new or about half that used.
how can you set the lightroom so that you can see the exifs in the top left of the picture?
I little bit under exposure with the 50mm 1.8
Thanks for watching!
I would also include the Rf 24mm and 16mm for a startup kit with the 35mm, 50mm and the 85mm. I also have the EF-S 10-18mm and the EF-S 24mm for my R7 and R10 APSC cameras. The only other lens I bought was the 100-400mm lens. I am debating on what Full Frame camera to buy from Canon. I love how you can save the settings for video and picture mode for the R7.
You get some really cool imagery if you flip the 50 back to front, it then becomes a macro lens. Try it out, but make sure camera is locked down other wise its just a big blur. And thanks for doing this.
I bought it for a walk around lens, not a business lens. It is a nice little lens for taking with you in small spaces etc.
Thanks for watching!
Also te weight and size. Sometimes i just put camera and lens in my jacket pocket....can't do that with the 1.2.
I sm tempted to get the rf 50 1.8 for my RP. I have had the EF 50 1.8 ii for over ten years and i have struggled with it on all my SLRs.
Recently I decided to buy some compact mirorrless camera, and 50/1.8 is why I choosed canon, ordered Canon RP with 50/1.8.
160$ against 500$ Sony/Nikon 1.8 primes, and they are huge in comparison to 50/1.8 STM
Thanks for watching!
thank you for your video , I just want to say that you did not put the lenses under pressure to see the real difference. try bad light conditions and you will see the difference ............if you try to take photos with 1.8f with both lenses you will see 50mm 1.2f is more lighter even when it is on 1.8f ............why this happen ........this happen because of the diameter of the lens which means that it allows more light to enter to the camera.......the second difference is the sharpness .
I bought an RF50 1.2 about 6 weeks ago. This thing might not come off my camera until I get my new camera body and put it on that one.
I'm using the EF 85mm 1.4L on my R7 and it's very nice. I got the RF 50 1.8 recently but have only done some snaps with it so far but the focus seems spot on. Although I can say that the EF 85 1.4 is way sharper.
Thanks for watching!
How do you focus?? I always set mine to one point and move my finger to the spot each time I take a portrait. I do mostly landscape photography, so I’m curious what focus option you’re using?Thanks!!
Great video! Just stumbled on it after purchasing a 1.8. I wanted to grab it as a low dough 50 mm. I have more money invested in my sport lenses. I love your presentation you say what you’d prefer but also show strong points of the lesser lenses. Great job
I'm not a full-time professional photographers (or part time pro for that matter), but I do make money with my gear and I've NEVER (not one time) had a client ask me what gear I use, let alone the lens or aperture value of a lens; they just want their pics to look good. The only time I get asked what type of gear I use, is when I'm applying to be a second shooter for an event. I think all the gear talk mostly comes from us semi-pro/hobbyist/enthusiasts folk. And yes I do have L glass, but didn't start out with it.
Thanks for watching!
The compactness and weight is also factor. Portability is a consideration.
I have both lenses. The 1.8 has a shorter focusing distance compared to the 1.2, if that means anything to anyone.
Thanks for sharing Ted!
I got the Viltrox RF 85mm 1.8 for portraits. I hope canon adds more cheap RF lenses and allow third party in the future. More options is great.
Thanks for sharing!
Would have loved a further comparison with the 28-70 2.0 at 50mm.
Thanks for watching!
What camera and wireless microphone was your cameraman using? Had to look for your lavaliere. Didn’t see it when first watching.
Shot on a Canon C70 and we don’t use lavs in the studio. I boom with an Audio Technica AT4053b shotgun 👍🏼
Yup, it's always difficult returning to your Nissan Versa once you've driven a Maserati. They both get you to your destination, but the quality of ride is quite noticeable.
Thanks for that. It was really helpful. For me, another big decision factor besides the price is the weight. I hate lugging huge heavy lenses, so if something light and plastic works decently, that's a big plus.
Exactly what I needed to know. Thank you.
Thanks for watching!