Separating Fact from Flaw: Canon RF 35mm f1.4L VCM Review
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 ส.ค. 2024
- #canon #canonR5 #CanonRF35mm
If you want to get the Canon RF 35mm f1.4L VCM click here: bhpho.to/3W93vYi
We put the Canon RF 35mm f1.4L VCM hybrid photo & video powerhouse to the test to see if it lives up to the hype. Exploring its blazing-fast autofocus, stunning image quality, and lightweight design. Find out if the RF 35mm f1.4L VCM dethrones the competition and becomes your new favorite lens for street photography, portraits, videography, and more!
My Gear:
Camera: Canon R5 bhpho.to/4cuCpRa
Nikkor S 105 f2.8 Micro bhpho.to/3UnmD3I
Sennheiser AVX bhpho.to/4aFR0Z4
Zoom F6 bhpho.to/4aY29nK
Mac Studio M2 MAX bhpho.to/3xFXk4a
Apple Studio Display bhpho.to/3W0g60h
Lights:
Aputure 300X bhpho.to/4cXwXqJ
Amaran T2c bhpho.to/3W4oGei
Amaran F21c bhpho.to/3TZqXoy
Amaran COB 60X bhpho.to/4d4UYff
Amaran P60c bhpho.to/3Q8KIJi
Bag: 10% off Oberwerth Bags, Straps and Accessories:
shorturl.at/avxX2
Display Cabinet: Terravault
Chair and Desk: SecretLab
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.4 (4/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/d3l5rxl5CVo/mqdefault.jpg)
I HIGHLY recommend people to try out this lens and not base their opinions on other reviewers. I was completely put off by a few reviewers who butchered this lens because of the distortion and rattle issue, BUT, I decided to rent the lens myself and let me tell you, It's phenomenal. The colors, sharpness, contrast, all pair perfectly well with the L 1.2's (50,85). The distortion is minimal and can be corrected automatically, and I gotta say, sometimes the distortion gives the image some character so it's good to have that option. The rattle issue is so overblown on youtube, I barely noticed it, you forget about it when you start shooting. With that said, people need to stop whining about these small details and understand the beautiful images you get with this lens. Rent the lens, go out and shoot, then decide.
Well said.
How can somebody design a prime lens like this with such massive distortion? I would expect something like this out of a affordable inexpensive 24-85 mm Zoom lens for full frame but not from a very expensive prime lens with a fixed focal length of 35 mm. Even Nikon does have better lenses in the less expensive f/1.8 range for Z-Mount.
@@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas have you tried it or just critiquing based off some reviewers
@@btonelli Have a look at Sam’s discussion on this lens and appreciate the problem. This lens CANNOT be 1500 usd. It’s fine if it’s 500 usd. And why are other reviewers wrong and you’re right? Aren’t you a reviewer? Look, FACTS come out. The S9 fiasco and now this lens, TH-cam is starting to look irrelevant when it comes to camera reviews. Good to see your growth, but some guys somewhere is getting misguided. And that’s not right.
I saw. No disrespect to the reviewer but the way I test lens is real world situations and show a number of those samples in my video. I don’t shoot walls and tables as many don’t take photos that way.
If you actually use the lens to take photos of subjects and real world scenarios the distortion you are concerned about hardly is noticeable.
Also I’m not the only reviewer saying good things about the lens. Gordon Laing also praises it and actual users of the lens who bought it also like it.
Perhaps some out there could stop trying to find fault with reviewers because they think we are bought or have some benefit to lie and instead accept that we will all have different ways to test lenses and cameras and you as the viewer can decide what works for you.
I test in real world scenarios not charts. If you like charts and walls I might not be the channel for you and that’s okay. But if you love to take photos and videos and want to see how it performs ins variety of scenarios then welcome aboard and hope you enjoy the content.
@@btonelli It is clear that you are defending this lens in each of your comments and you do not admit that it is having several flaws.
@@jorgepinogarciadelasbayonas I said it’s not a perfect lens. No lens is but perhaps because I test various different brands I’m more open and more understanding than others. Most of these reviewers test Sony Canon and Nikon. I test more than that
I made the switch from canon to Sony just over a year ago and have to say I didn’t care for it at first but I got quite used to using the aperture ring on the GM’s for photo. It’s a little disappointing that the RF 35 ring only works for video and only “new bodies” will support the ring for photo. Sounds like the lens is more after competing for a compact 35 like the GM and trying to mimic what it has. I think a lot of people were really banking and hoping it would have been a 1.2, but at the same time the 1.4’s offer something compact
@@tonygerassi1502 the R5 I had worked well with it and I’m sure the newer bodies will as well.
I think it was a smart move by Canon. They are constantly getting complaints about expensive lenses so this release brings the price down but people are still complaining haha
Own this lens and it's phenomenal. The lens correction or slight rattle don't bother me in the slightest. The image quality and weight savings compared to the otrher RF L primes makes it all worth it.
@@PNWDOM I agree!
How loud is that rattling? That’s the only thing preventing me from getting it
@@edwincollins5847don’t be a snowflake about it lol. People are crying like babies about the rattle. If that’s the only thing holding you back than get it.
mine comes in tomorrow. couldn't be more excited. bought my last 35mm in 2018 and it was the Sigma EF 35 1.4 art, sold it a few weeks back and have been anticipating this purchase since.
@@brandonlarochelle6354 enjoy!
Funny I think a lot of this applies to Nikon's new non-S 35 1.4 too, which is on my wishlist replacing the 35 1.8 S. I love that it has a proper control ring, unlike the 1.8 S models (would love to see some v2 updates for the 1.8 line!)
@@csc-photo I agree. Would be great to see some updates on lenses. For me the 50mm f1.2 definitely needs an update. It’s really big compared to what’s out there
@@btonelliyou present it’s imperfections as ‘cinematic’. Can’t given its price
@@mainmain5303 compared to other fast primes in Canon’s lineup this is less expensive so explain how this is overpriced?
Gosh, without a doubt, there is no surprise that this was going to be a controversial lens! Hence, my apprehension when I pre-ordered it a few weeks ago. I’ve now had the pleasure to have own it for a week, and thanks to my prolonged 4th of July “staycation,” I’ve been able to use it daily and it has not left my R5 since. I can honestly say that this is a beautiful lens that renders super sharp images with character (not clinical!) and gorgeous colors and micro contrast to boot! Despite the purported “flaws”, of which I have not noticed /experienced, this 35mm surpasses the EF version and definitely the RF 1.8 version, both of which I own! And about that rattle?! Such an overblown “issue”! I noticed it once on day one and completely forgot about it! This is not the first lens to do this - my EF 85mm 1.4 IS rattles more than this! I’m quite happy with this lens!
There are many quick to complain but haven’t used the lens.
Glad you are enjoying it and I also liked the performance as well! Happy belated 4th!
I just wish they had the same RF lens that was just for photography. I want to get the R5 Mark II with a 35mm f1.4 lens and now I’m wondering if I should get the EF version and use that with the adapter on the R5 Mark II. I’m not liking this VCM version but I guess it’s just me. I’ll admit that I absolutely love the photos you took with this lens (you really are talented) but the whole VCM thing has turned me off from buying this lens when it’s exactly the lens I want were it not for the VCM. Another TH-cam review pointed out the heavy clunking sound as being that of the VCM motor and said ‘don’t worry about it’ but why do I need a lens with video features forced on me? I just wanted a 35mm f1.4 for photography. I currently have the Nikon Z9 with the Z85 1.2 and the Plena but wanted to buy a different brand’s high megapixel camera with a 35mm f1.4 for a completely different reason. The ‘solution’ of getting the EF version for the RF5 Mark II via the adapter makes the already physically long EF35mm f1.4 even longer. The perplexing thing is that Canon seems to make so many erroneous assumptions about their customer base and then come out with gear that make their loyal base run for the (Nikon and Sony) hills. A good example is the 24mp R1 and their proprietary attitude with their technology. I could have bought their RF lenses for use on other manufacturer’s camera bodies because I don’t like the low megapixel sensor of the R1 and R3 even though I would otherwise have bought either of those cameras because I want a pro gripped body. And now here is a VCM Z35mm f1.4 as being the only 1.4 option. Hey maybe I didn’t check B&H’s website properly, maybe there really is an RF35mm f1.4 without the VCM.
samhurdphotography.com/canon-35-1-4-vcm-lens-review-its-really-not-for-photographers/
I am very happy with my EF 35mm f1.4 L ii (with BSRO, also on the RF 85mm f1.2 L) on my R5, plus if I want ND I have a Breakthough drop-in variable ND (1.5-11 stops) that I can use.
Please, review versus Voigtlender 50mm f1 RF vs Canon Rf 50mm f1.2
I noted you said you can put a rear ND filter on the back. How is this possible?
Even the Sigma 35 DG DN Art has a de-clickable aperture ring. Why not this one?
Yes I agree it’s a bit odd but it has the A option to control from the camera. Didn’t really bother me as much as I thought it would
Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this lens!
No prob
Interesting routes Canon and Nikon both took here. You talked a lot about not having a lens that is too sharp for video and I think of the Nikkor 35 1.4 Z lens for less than half the price of the Canon version.
@@Ben_Stewart yes it’s definitely interesting especially price. This Canon is really designed for video and photography versus the Nikon which would be photos only I feel
It is a great video as always. It would be even greater if it can be shot side by side to the canon ef 35mm usm ii and also the canon rf 28-70mm f2 to compare the image quality from them. Thank you.
@@tacotaco7658 thanks. I no longer have the lens but if I do get it back with the others will test
@@btonelli Thank you kindly
Thank you for your honest review, you really can't get on TH-cam to see an honest review from anything Canon anymore, except for a few. The ones that are being honest get commenters that are trying to bring down the honesty with negative comments. All cameras and lens have their quirks. Anything Canon all they need is to find one thing and they blow it out of proportion. I really don't get it... Anyways, stay honest with all gears no matter the brand. Thank you for your hard work on these reviews
@@shawnlabranche6852 thanks a lot really appreciate the kind words.
I really don’t understand the hate. There’s a dude on here that calls this lens shit, and I wonder what a decent lens is to him
The human eye doesn't see straight lines. We see all lines bended in fact. So a certain degree of barrel distortion looks natural to me. I don't know why everybody is so freaked out by it.
@@claudianreyn4529 same here. Seems like a lot of unnecessary drama
I had the Ef 35mm F/1.4 L for years. I loved that lens. Unfortunately it was stolen from me.
@@alfabravo80 oh no I’m sorry to hear that. It’s a hard lens to get second hand still.
@@btonelli Yup. Although this new 35 L looks like a great successor. Btw, I really like your reviews. Keep up the good work.
@@alfabravo80 thank you for the kind words 🙏🙏
That lens is a jewel. I hope you get another copy.
I think there's a number of reasons why the new RF 35 f1.4 is getting heavily criticized. First, the plastic built took some time to get used to, now the L lenses are going to rattle? The build quality could've been better. Secondly, Canon shooters were waiting almost 5 years for a 35mm L series lens. Canon is arguably the leading company in imaging. 5 years for this, is a little anticlimactic, especially since Sigma just released a 28-45 f1.8. Lastly, the camera community is very passionate and opinionated, anything less than a perfect Canon RF 35mm f1.2, they would've probably hated it.
This is probably a fine lens, and I'm sure creators will give it a chance. Canon has not opened the mount up for full frame yet, what choice do they have? Great video!
@@marcgilles4520 thanks. I really don’t get it. It feels the same as the 85 and 50 f1.2 in terms of build quality, it’s smaller, less expensive (that’s what a lot of people complained about) and it’s a fast!
Seems like a lot of the complaints are a bit unfounded
Plastic build? Nothing new, Sony have been doing that for years with GM line, and so have Canon even on EF mount... Rattle? Non issue, it's meant to be like that because of how the elements are positioned, it's not a build quality thing. Don't know what people are complaining about TBH. You're getting a lens that significantly outperforms the more expensive 35 f/1.4 L II in a smaller form factor at a lower launch price. Woe is you!
@@marcgilles4520 All RF prime lenses are plastic, so why is this something “ to get used to”? 😝
@@salvamando1Leave it to Canon to make a polarizing product lol. Like I said , once creators give it a chance, it’ll be looked at more favorably.
@@marcgilles4520agree.
subbed my man! Good video!
Thank you Max 🙏
appreciate the concise vid here 👌 for photos looks great, but the omission of IS esp for video is a dealbreaker. all the test vids I've watched on it shows it to be very prone to the already-bad IBIS wobble. Bobby with your handheld tests, have any mitigation points to offer?
i think it's easy to talk yourself into buying a lens like this, but at the end of the day when i look at the photos I've gotten with 15-35 at 1/2 sec+ handheld, it just makes me sad this lens doesn't have stab on it. Canon IS is tremendous, and makes this lens a bit meh
Thanks for watching.
Most primes below 100mm don’t have IBIS like this. Canon doesn’t, Nikon doesn’t, Leica doesn’t etc.
Most of the full frame Canon cameras have a wobble. This was shown a while ago even with the 15-35. Peter McKinnons vids would have this and others talked about it.
When I was using it I didn’t notice any wobble but I’m doing slow movements, not vlogging or walking with the lens.
I read all these comments prior to testing and was looking out for many of these things, I just didn’t see it or perhaps the way I tested didn’t yield those results.
I've been eyeing the Canon as my first camera, but I'm so tired with Canon RF lens selections. I hated Sony for not making a FF camera with CFexpress Type-B. So I'm going to wait for the Nikon Z9 Mark II and use the Megadap ETZ21 Pro. Nikon Z9 II + Sony FE 14mm f/1.8 GM + CFexpress Type-B = Perfect for Real Estate or Interior Video. If the Sony a7s IV or Sony FX4 beat Nikon Z9 II sensor I might consider choosing them over Nikon because of their light weight for traveling. So I'll wait for Bob's review in the future.
Canon is beating out Nikon AF and usability by a long shot. Own Canon, Owned Nikon (and prefer their image IQ) but Nikon has a very, very long way to go. Also Z8/Z9 omitting mechanical shutter is a no go for certain photography...like studio, commercial, events. No matter what people say, the banding is horrendous at times and the 1/200th max strobe sync speed funny.
For this price this lens is an insult. Not just does canon force consumers to buy their extremely expensive lenses now their L lenses are even subpar 🤦♂️
Just curious, how is this lens at 1.5k USD an insult? Especially when you see the prices of all their other L primes. Honest question
Please explain how this is an insult when it's already proven to be one of the best 35 1.4s ever made, as it significantly outperforms the 35 f/1.4 L II which was extremely well regarded - and it does it at a lower price. See the CameraLabs comparison.
@@btonelli you get for less money a sigma 35mm F1.2 and for half the price the 1.4 version both way better deals than this atrocious lens.
L lenses should be absolute top end lenses now we get slightly cheaper yet still ultra expensive lower tier L lenses that aren't worth the money. You still pay way more than for third party lenses but get worse performance. Makes absolutely no sense.
@@DriveCancelDC lol what? One of the best 35mm ever made? What are u even talking about? The price performance ratio is horrendous!
This tells me everything i need to know that this lens is not worth it's money:
th-cam.com/video/_a0A1R_xikU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=k8Uzaz2g-EoXgxu6
@@bamhamerhave you tried the Sigma 35mm f1.2? It’s slower AF and massive. Also not made for RF.
Look, I’ve tried every 35mm on the market and I would rank this in the top 5 or so.
It’s crazy fast for AF, image quality is good, sharp enough at 1.4 and well corrected for the most part. No lens is perfect but Canon did a good job here when you take away the noise and actually use the lens
How do you put ND filters on the rear of the lens?
@@alienwisconsin there is a ND holder for the rear of the lens that allows you to put one on
This lens should be ignored if you have the EF version because it performs poorly regarding chromatic aberration and longitudinal chromatic aberration compared to the EF version. Inexplicably, Canon omitted the BR Optics element. Just use the 35mm f/1.4L II with an adapter.
I disagree but I guess you tried it?
That's not true at all, I have both. The RF version performs better in all areas. Have you even tried it or just spewing nonsense.
Very interesting, as always, and nice shots of Chinatown (Singapore). I like to photograph the old men (not a fetish !) playing Chinese chess.
@@crispin8888 thanks! They are getting more protective now it seems. When I ask they say no now
@btonelli Unfortunately, you are right. I just stand still for perhaps five minutes, 'blend in', and take a photograph.
@@crispin8888 I’ll try that but being ang moh a bit tough lol!
@btonelli Same here. Sorry for the 8888 misdirection ! 🤓
I don't think you really needed the fetish caveat here 😆
Sounds like you're making lots of excuses for an expensive flawed lens.
TH-cam shilling has to stop.
Perhaps you should try the lens
@@btonelli I wont spend 2000CAD on that! Thx no thx.
@@stephangauthier911 it’s okay! I’m not asking you to buy or not buy. Just reviewing
I'd say it's sharp enough from what I've seen, but you don't want distortion when you shoot raw video, and you don't want LOCA either...
I didn’t see much distortion in that way. In terms of LOCA I would say depends, as there are plenty of people that film with vintage lenses that have loca and it’s part of the look. Again if you want optically perfect then I guess a different story. But it has a look to me that didn’t bring up much concern
@@btonelli Really? Check James Readers review: uncorrected distortion is horrible for a Lseries prime!
@@btonelli I like the sharpness and colour rendition of this RF 35 1.4L, but LOCA can be very annoying for portrait shoots - this is why I also traded my otherwise brilliant EF 85 1.4L for the RF 85 1.2L.
I checked it and based on my images I don’t see what he is seeing to that extent. I’m not adjusting distortion or anything like that or reducing vignetting. If I did see it I would say but at least my copy performed well in those ways.
Honestly I think some people just over analyse for the sake of it instead of just going out and taking photos. If the composition and subject is on point not many people care about the small things.
@@tom_k_dSo correct it. A few clicks. Who cares?
Lots of criticism on this one , wondering if it’s worth the upgrade from the 1.8 for 4x cost. I was hoping this would smoke the other brands 35 out of the water and be a no brained :/
One is a 35 kit lens so to speak and one is an L Lens. It’s less than the 50 1.2, 85 1.2 and smaller, performs better than the Sigma 35 1.4 but there is no Sigma RF version so doesn’t matter, priced comparable to Sony 35mm f1.4 and yet some say it’s expensive.
I find it funny I’ve watched a few videos, minimal examples. Maybe a handful of images and then they judge.
Take it out and photograph with it. Real world usage is much better than pixel peeping
If you start looking at it in terms of dollar value and worth, you are gonna quickly find that almost all expensive lenses are terrible value for money vs. the cheaper options. I think your expectations are too high, this lens already outperforms the EF 35 f/1.4 L II which is one of the best 35mm lenses ever made. Does it outperform the Sony GM? Haven't seen any comparisons, but even if it's only on par with it then that's still amazing as the GM is probably the best 35 f/1.4 on the market.
Before the Sony 35 GM, I think the EF 35 f/1.4 L II was the best 35mm out there, or top 3, so considering this lens beats that and also beats the Sigma 35 f/1.2 it's hard to complain too much I think. We're talking about some of the best 35s ever made here.
There's a very strange smear campaign going on against this lens lol, any positive reviews on B&H are being downvoted. Never seen anything like it. It's just a lens people.
Agree. Very odd.
Maybe cuz its flawed and their asking price is insane for what it is?
I respect both sides, but it's not a smear campaign if people have been waiting 5 years for a 35 L lens and it's a very hefty price for a lens that has flaws that shouldn't be there. It wasn't shown properly in this video, but some people have invested in extensive testing (and I expect more to come). My Nikon 35 1.8 S didn't have this kind of colour fringing, vignetting and distortion and is legit half the price. I think the camp that loves this lens (which is fair) can at least acknowledge the pricing and waiting time factor.
It’s not a good lense at all, the sharpness sucks
@@gtotalman disagree. It’s not the sharpest but it has a nice balance for video and photos
The enthusiasm for this overpriced average lens feels like betrayal. Heavily distorted, heavy vignetting, high colour fringing, lots of CA. What exactly is this lens good for, for the price? Focus motors? Ludicrous.
I’m sorry but it’s not any of these things. I tested the lens and I looked at every image and saw nothing of the sort.
Is there some fringing in extreme situations? Sure, but outside of harsh backlight I didn’t see it.
In addition I didn’t see the vignetting and distortion that others say the see.
I don’t own a Canon camera and have no skin in the game. I just call it like I see it
Bud why are you lying about this lens? The only thing it has in your list of claims is the distortion but we are truly in the era of digital corrections now. Move with the times or stick to film lenses.
High vignetting on mirrorless prime lenses is extremely common btw. Where have you been the last 10 years?!
@@DriveCancelDC well, you shoot Sony. Enough said
Nothing that you said here was accurate. What experience do you actually have with the lens? Because your comments suggest absolutely none. This lens distinctly outperforms my Sigma 35mm Art lens and the EF 35mm f/1.4L II.
Thank you. For the review. Will avoid this lens. Thx
Thanks for watching
Your loss
@@dastumpinator agree