This is an honest and accurate review of these two lenses. I used the EF 50 1.2 for over 10yrs to shoot weddings and as my go-to walkaround lens. I have owned the RF 50 1.8 for the last year and recently sold the EF-50L because there just isn't that much of an optical advantage to the EF in real world use on modern mirrorless sensors. The RF 50 1.8 does have a noticeable advantage in AF speed and accuracy. It should be noted, I no longer shoot weddings, but if I did, I still would have ditched the EF-50L (but replaced it with the RF-50L). The RF-50 1.8 is the best option for non-professionals and/or those who don't want to spend $2k on the RF-50L.
RF50 is sharper yes. That is not an advantage for a portrait lens. Take a portrait of a grown up lady with both and ask her opinion on the results :D Also, the bokeh of rf 50 1.8 is a disgrace to photography related optics as a whole. It is a step backwards way beyond the early '90 where the EF50 1,2 is from. Cheap RF line is manufactured e-waste in my opinion. I regret buying the 16 mm and the 50mm as I have never regretted buying anything in my life.
@@NGC1433 The RF50mm f1.8 is an excellent lens for shooting and pointing. I use it on an R6II. The RF50mm f1.2 at f4 is the same as the RF50mm f1.8 at f4. Both from f4 makes no difference. The best cheap lenses are third-party lenses. That's why it's better to use Sony cameras than to use lenses from other companies.
@@NGC1433 The statement regarding the Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens seems to reflect a strong personal opinion but doesn't fully acknowledge the broader context and purpose of this lens in the photography world. Firstly, it's important to understand that the RF 50mm f/1.8 is not positioned as a high-end lens but rather as an affordable, versatile prime designed for enthusiasts and professionals who appreciate its value proposition. Its compact size, lightweight design, and relatively wide aperture make it an accessible and practical option for many photographers. Criticizing the bokeh of the RF 50mm f/1.8 as a "disgrace" overlooks the fact that bokeh is highly subjective. While it may not produce the creamy, smooth background separation of higher-end lenses like the RF 50mm f/1.2L, it still offers pleasing bokeh for its price point, especially when used correctly. The lens's seven-blade diaphragm contributes to this bokeh, and when combined with its f/1.8 aperture, it allows for decent background separation, particularly in portraits and close-up shots. Furthermore, the assertion that the RF 50mm f/1.8 represents a "step backwards" ignores the technological advancements in lens design and manufacturing. The RF mount, with its shorter flange distance and wider diameter, enables better optical performance even in more affordable lenses. The RF 50mm f/1.8, while budget-friendly, benefits from modern coatings, faster autofocus, and a refined optical formula compared to older EF lenses. Regarding the comparison to the EF 50mm f/1.2, it's essential to recognize that these lenses serve different market segments. The EF 50mm f/1.2L is a premium lens with a price tag to match, catering to professionals who need the absolute best performance. The RF 50mm f/1.8, on the other hand, is designed to offer excellent value and performance at a fraction of the cost, making high-quality optics accessible to a broader audience. Calling the RF 50mm f/1.8 "manufactured e-waste" is not only hyperbolic but also dismissive of the lens's value and utility. It fulfills its purpose exceptionally well, offering solid performance in a small, affordable package. For many photographers, especially those just entering the RF system or looking for a lightweight, everyday lens, it provides a significant upgrade over kit lenses and a useful tool for creative expression. In conclusion, while the RF 50mm f/1.8 may not satisfy every photographer's needs, it is far from a disgrace. It is a well-crafted lens that delivers respectable performance for its price point, and it plays a vital role in the Canon RF ecosystem by making high-quality photography more accessible.
I bought the EF 1.2 used in great condition for ~800€ when I already owned the RF 1.8. Still 4x the price, but worth it in my opinion. I took the EF into harsh conditions in scandinavian Lapland recently, so the WR came in clutch. The RF is still a great lens, I will bring it along every time as a back-up or when I want a smaller camera-setup in nice conditions. I can recommend both lenses :)
The EF 50mm 1.2 was the definition of a "dreamy" lens, especially if you were doing tight portraits wide-open. However, the lack of eye detect back in the day meant that you needed to manually overrule the tendency of your Canon body to use "nose detect" for focusing. I found myself mostly focusing manually or using one specific focusing point out of the 9 I had (yep, 5D MKII) which is closest to my desired composition. A worthy option for those EF users who might want something sharper and don't mind manual focus is the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 T* Plannar, it take gorgeous images and I used to prefer it over the 50mm for more serious shoots.
I did it! I sprung about two weeks ago and got the RF 50mm 1.2 for portraits, weddings and event stuff. Man I love it! It's just an awesome lens. For casual shooting the RF 50mm 1.8 is awesome and I love it for that indeed.
I have both these lenses and use the EF most of the time but use the RF for portability when using my R8 as that combo fits in my jacket pocket. I will always keep my 50mm EF lens as it has an ethereal quality just like the EF 85mm 1.2 that the RF lenses although more advanced do not have. In years to come I envisage photographers going back to EF lenses to capture that creamy artistic effect, just as some photographers are now going back to film.
You're probably right. I sold my EF 50 for the RF 1.2 a while back, and I really regret that decision :( I love the RF but wish I had my EF for film bodies, and for a different look.
Great video Zach. To me it's just incredible to have such a sharp, light and inexpensive lens (got it even cheaper used) paired with my R5. I'm currently traveling and it's so convenient to have that lens. I recently tested the RF 50mm f1.2 on a photoshoot and even tho it is incredible for sure... but the size and comfort of the small lens is much more important to me. I would love Canon to release more compact and inexpensive lenses like that maybe down to a 1.4 aperture. That's bright enough. And it's incredible what quality they are able to produce at that price point.
I love the 50 1.2 EF. I’m weird and moved from the R series back to the DSLR in the form of a 5dsr and 1dx. To me, they balance better ergonomically than the R series and I like the IQ of both over the Eos R I had. Plus I really like OVF. I really wish canon would commit to a HIGH build quality, weather sealed, compact series of lenses in RF. That would be amazing and I would likely grab another R series for travel especially.
I believe that experience helps... Canon has come a long way with it's EF range of bodies and lenses and have never gone wrong. Hence, I, having used the 1Dx series of bodies since the past 6 years added the R6 along with all the Royal Red Ring L 1.2, 2.0 and 2.8 aperture lenses using with the original basic Canon RF adapter; I feel so confident still with the EF 50mm 1.2 lens and the 1dx mark 2 combo for every shoot I move to. Have used a few RF lenses directly mounted to my R6, but still don't get the feel of the 1dx mark 2 somehow; even though the R6 is amazing when I get going as a solo body and no looking elsewhere.
@@vpan1982 If you want to reinforce your love for DSLR's you should live for a year with the original EOS R. "...have never gone wrong..." Yep they did. And it's not even the touch bar thing. That is not a problem at all. But why in the world can't one go to Auto ISO rotating the control ring? It went [Auto, 100, 200, 400 ....] ever since auto ISO was invented. But on EOS R to get back to auto Iso you have to open the screen, get the menu and scroll the stupid ribbon on touchscreen to auto.
Glad to see new videos on the regular. While I love my EF50 1.2 it’s definitely a lens I have to be patient with. I did end up getting the RF50 1.2 which is on such a next level and has incredible lens flare but it’s not cheap. I’ll always recommend the canon nifty 50 to anyone looking to mess with fixed focal length especially coming off a kit lens. 50 is such a great focal length.
Thanks for an honest review of these lenses. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder - even though I know 50. f1.2 is super dreamy lens, on your examples I actually liked 50 f1.8 more! Ha! As yourself, I'm also a guy that loves 50mm, both on crop and FF. Each have their own strengths. I'm also emotionally attached to my EF50 f1.4. I just love its sparkly bokeh at 1.4 and softer focus. For now, I will keep on using it on my 5Dmk4 and new RF 50mm 1.8 on my R7.
It's really a good idea to test before buying anything. Mainly because all of us have their own preferences. For portraits I keep using pretty much 95% of the time vintage Minolta lenses from 1970-71. Specifically the minolta rokkor 58mm f/1.2 and minolta rokkor 55mm f/1.7. At F2 I don't think you can beat the 58mm Minolta vintage lens in the 50mm range of lenses. That said, these are manual focus lenses but with how good focus peaking is in Canon cameras, with some practice you will have most of your shots in focus even really open wide like F1.2 or F1.7.
Thank you for producing this video. It was very well done with side by side comparisons. My recommendation, keep your EF lenses because eventually, people will look for lenses that produce something different from all the other photos. The popularity of "vintage" Canon EF glass will be sought after just as vintage Soviet Russian lenses and other 20th century lenses are now.
You got that very right and those are very sought after, the elements that those lenses were made from is a big deal and man talk about organic images they produce. when all the sharpness fad dies out we will see very high value in these glasses we already seeing it already.
my 10th time coming back to this video, i really want the RF 50mm1.2 but i will rarely use it like my rf 85mm1.2, to save some money was considering the ef 50mm 1.2 but my rf 50mm 1.8 is holding up quite nicely and noone will notice any difference to be honest at websizes. thanks for this great video!
Hi! Comparing the samples and i feel like the ef looks more natural and less digital It is gorgeous even if it is a bit soft it doesn't really matter I have the rf 1.8 witch is good but i'm in love with what i see Do you still use it or you switched to rf Thanks you
I wonder how much it would improve the 1.8 if you added a pro mist/bloom filter. Deffo help with highlight rendering and remove some of that overly corrected look it has
i shoot with both my 5d mk iv and my new r6 mk ii- that being said- i just picked up a 1.2 EF 50mm instead of RF because i still use my 5D mk iv all the time and can easily go back and forth with that instead of buying a RF 50 mm 1.2 at 2x price but then another adapter on my 5d mk iv..
My EF 50mm 1.2 L lens works beautifully on my R5 and I've compared it to the RF 1.8. In terms of an investment, quality EF glass is now heavily discounted and completely compatible with the RF system and will likely always be so with an adapter. No doubt that some of the better RF glass has more advanced electronics and generally benefits from advances in computer modeling and manufacturing. I suggest purchasing at a local camera store. They will let you compare both lenses on your camera body. Bring your laptop and use your results to drive your decision.
When I searched for this specific comparison - I was like "who is going to be thinking this but so happy to find your video and really enjoying your channel your work is beautiful! Thank you, Zach! ...just waiting for sigma to create some RF lenses and im feeling like I might be waiting awhile...
Zach, Ok, am back on your channel watching this video one more time before laying the plastic down to buy it. Just a suggestion for future lens discussions. I appreciate you focus on portraits. But when trying to illustrate a lens' capabilities, please consider adding in a few photos of, say, landscapes and smaller apertures and shots as close as possible to it's MFD to show how clear and sharp it is at that point. Just a suggestion. Thanks again for your videos. Craig
I had the EF 50mm 1.8, it was the second lens I ever bought. I loved it a lot. Especially on APS-C, that was around 70mm. When I switched to the R5, I also bought the 50mm 1.8 RF version, I love the small package, but in the end, my real love is for the RF 70-200 2.8. I love the focal range. But if there is a day I "don't want to shoot" I will slap the 50mm on and throw my camera in my bag. The lack of an adapter + small size / weight make it very appealing. I think it's a lens almost everyone should own, regardless of your system (canon, sony, nikon).
One thing I realize as I was watching is that I don't pull out my 50 mm that much so paying for an uber-expensive lens doesn't make sense for me and with your review and a few others I can see myself putting the rf-50 mm 1.8 in my bag just for times when I need that specificity! Thank you for an awesome review - take care and be safe out there....
I own the RF50 F1.8 and I love it. It’s on my camera pretty much all the time as my standard/walk around lens. It’s great. Love the stuff I get out of it. That said, if I had the extra scratch to dump into an expensive prime, I’d buy the EF in a heart beat. Great vid!
Ended up shooting a quincenera party with an r6, a flash, a rf 35.18 and 50 1.8. you'd never know the difference! but I still spend money on that 1.2 lol.
Hi! I'm struggling with the decision making process whether to buy 50 1.2 or stay with my nifty fifty 50 stm. The longer I watch all the clips on yt the more confident it makes me that I'll be able to justify the purchase! Great video on the matter, you've just made me one step closer to getting one of those bokeh monsters! By the way, what kind of retro camera bag do you use? It looks awesome!
Love this review, love the I.ages you've taken with both lens, for my casual shooting and posting on social media, Noone would notice the difference but man one day, I'll get the rf 50 1.2 , one day, first world problems
I have the EF 50mm f/1.2. I was expecting it to be sharper when I bought it. Although, it's sharp enough. The thing I absolutely hate with it is actually the lens flare and weird internal reflections. It's not bad at daytime but it gets annoying at nighttime. Even a small hilight could introduce dozens of internal reflections. My other lenses are mostly Zeiss and they don't have this behavior in the dark, even if they tend to have strong lens flares otherwise.
I got the canon 50MM F1.2L and I did have the 50MM F1.4 2 times and they break easily when is knocked against something and the 50MM F 1.8 Mark 2 is better and works well and my 50 MM F1.2L works well and I get SHARP photos all the time as long as I USE the the SHUTTER SPEED to the RIGHT F no
CA is terrible with EF lenses. But the extra stop wide open is always worth it. Especially whole body shoot, the scenario that 50 1.8 will show its weakness
I think everybody at this point already sort of figured that the modern 50 1.8 would be sharper than the 50 1.2 and of course it's going to be faster.Think of how much glass has to get moved around with that old motor.
Thank you for this thoughtful review. I recently bought the R6 Mii...(love it).. If I didn't already have the EF 50 1.2, I would be more interested in the RF 50 1.8. I really appreciated your comparisons.
They say 24 is the closest to human eye sight. 22-24mm.. definitely not 50mm. That would be some freakish handicap having vision that tight and zoomed. Thank god our vision is not anything near 50mm.
I think 50mm is close to what you can easily observe. According to Wikipedia the peripheral vision is commonly thought to start around >=60 degrees in dia. Which would mean that the naturally looking lens should be somewhere between 35mm and 50mm. Personally I feel that 50mm is bit tight and 35mm looks more right to me. 24mm already feels slightly odd to me. I don't think there can be scientifically correct answer to this question because we don't have the technology to make sensors mimicking the human eye construction. Also such a sensor should be stereo paired.
the focal plane of the 1.8 will gather more detail compared to a 1.2 focal plane so it will appare sharper however it completely further from the truth. The focal plane vs focal plane the 1.2 will be sharper than that rf lens any given day you aint paying all that money for nothing. I saw it in the images here completely different planes of focus. the 1.8 is perfect for folks on a budget that's for sure.
To be honest, I'd say get both - the RF F1.8 is sooo cheap, you could get both, but if your preference is for RF mount then well - stick with the RF F1.8 anyway or sell your kidney to buy the RF F1.2
You should stop using the word CHEAP! ( less expensive ) would be a better choice. no one like cheap anything CHEAP!. Do you like cheap stuff or less expense wise buying choice?
This is an honest and accurate review of these two lenses. I used the EF 50 1.2 for over 10yrs to shoot weddings and as my go-to walkaround lens. I have owned the RF 50 1.8 for the last year and recently sold the EF-50L because there just isn't that much of an optical advantage to the EF in real world use on modern mirrorless sensors. The RF 50 1.8 does have a noticeable advantage in AF speed and accuracy. It should be noted, I no longer shoot weddings, but if I did, I still would have ditched the EF-50L (but replaced it with the RF-50L). The RF-50 1.8 is the best option for non-professionals and/or those who don't want to spend $2k on the RF-50L.
Thanks for the great points & thanks for watching!
RF50 is sharper yes. That is not an advantage for a portrait lens. Take a portrait of a grown up lady with both and ask her opinion on the results :D
Also, the bokeh of rf 50 1.8 is a disgrace to photography related optics as a whole.
It is a step backwards way beyond the early '90 where the EF50 1,2 is from. Cheap RF line is manufactured e-waste in my opinion. I regret buying the 16 mm and the 50mm as I have never regretted buying anything in my life.
@@NGC1433Not many people can afford $2,000 lens, so, professional and amateur alike will look for a cheaper option if they are on a tight budget.
@@NGC1433 The RF50mm f1.8 is an excellent lens for shooting and pointing. I use it on an R6II. The RF50mm f1.2 at f4 is the same as the RF50mm f1.8 at f4. Both from f4 makes no difference. The best cheap lenses are third-party lenses. That's why it's better to use Sony cameras than to use lenses from other companies.
@@NGC1433 The statement regarding the Canon RF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens seems to reflect a strong personal opinion but doesn't fully acknowledge the broader context and purpose of this lens in the photography world.
Firstly, it's important to understand that the RF 50mm f/1.8 is not positioned as a high-end lens but rather as an affordable, versatile prime designed for enthusiasts and professionals who appreciate its value proposition. Its compact size, lightweight design, and relatively wide aperture make it an accessible and practical option for many photographers.
Criticizing the bokeh of the RF 50mm f/1.8 as a "disgrace" overlooks the fact that bokeh is highly subjective. While it may not produce the creamy, smooth background separation of higher-end lenses like the RF 50mm f/1.2L, it still offers pleasing bokeh for its price point, especially when used correctly. The lens's seven-blade diaphragm contributes to this bokeh, and when combined with its f/1.8 aperture, it allows for decent background separation, particularly in portraits and close-up shots.
Furthermore, the assertion that the RF 50mm f/1.8 represents a "step backwards" ignores the technological advancements in lens design and manufacturing. The RF mount, with its shorter flange distance and wider diameter, enables better optical performance even in more affordable lenses. The RF 50mm f/1.8, while budget-friendly, benefits from modern coatings, faster autofocus, and a refined optical formula compared to older EF lenses.
Regarding the comparison to the EF 50mm f/1.2, it's essential to recognize that these lenses serve different market segments. The EF 50mm f/1.2L is a premium lens with a price tag to match, catering to professionals who need the absolute best performance. The RF 50mm f/1.8, on the other hand, is designed to offer excellent value and performance at a fraction of the cost, making high-quality optics accessible to a broader audience.
Calling the RF 50mm f/1.8 "manufactured e-waste" is not only hyperbolic but also dismissive of the lens's value and utility. It fulfills its purpose exceptionally well, offering solid performance in a small, affordable package. For many photographers, especially those just entering the RF system or looking for a lightweight, everyday lens, it provides a significant upgrade over kit lenses and a useful tool for creative expression.
In conclusion, while the RF 50mm f/1.8 may not satisfy every photographer's needs, it is far from a disgrace. It is a well-crafted lens that delivers respectable performance for its price point, and it plays a vital role in the Canon RF ecosystem by making high-quality photography more accessible.
I bought the EF 1.2 used in great condition for ~800€ when I already owned the RF 1.8. Still 4x the price, but worth it in my opinion. I took the EF into harsh conditions in scandinavian Lapland recently, so the WR came in clutch. The RF is still a great lens, I will bring it along every time as a back-up or when I want a smaller camera-setup in nice conditions.
I can recommend both lenses :)
Amazing - this makes a lot of sense to me. Thanks for sharing your experience & thanks for watching! :)
so for you Canon EF 50 1.2 is better and worth it?
The EF 50mm 1.2 was the definition of a "dreamy" lens, especially if you were doing tight portraits wide-open. However, the lack of eye detect back in the day meant that you needed to manually overrule the tendency of your Canon body to use "nose detect" for focusing. I found myself mostly focusing manually or using one specific focusing point out of the 9 I had (yep, 5D MKII) which is closest to my desired composition. A worthy option for those EF users who might want something sharper and don't mind manual focus is the Zeiss 50mm 1.4 T* Plannar, it take gorgeous images and I used to prefer it over the 50mm for more serious shoots.
Awesome! Thanks so much for the input :)
I did it! I sprung about two weeks ago and got the RF 50mm 1.2 for portraits, weddings and event stuff. Man I love it! It's just an awesome lens. For casual shooting the RF 50mm 1.8 is awesome and I love it for that indeed.
Yeah that 50 1.2 is so worth it!!! Thanks for watching
I have both these lenses and use the EF most of the time but use the RF for portability when using my R8 as that combo fits in my jacket pocket. I will always keep my 50mm EF lens as it has an ethereal quality just like the EF 85mm 1.2 that the RF lenses although more advanced do not have. In years to come I envisage photographers going back to EF lenses to capture that creamy artistic effect, just as some photographers are now going back to film.
You're probably right. I sold my EF 50 for the RF 1.2 a while back, and I really regret that decision :( I love the RF but wish I had my EF for film bodies, and for a different look.
i have r8 as well and planning to buy this ef50 1.2 how is the auto focus?
Once again great video Zach.I have both. What do you think of the RF 24mm1.8 STM lens as compared to the RF 35 1.8. Thank you
Great video Zach. To me it's just incredible to have such a sharp, light and inexpensive lens (got it even cheaper used) paired with my R5. I'm currently traveling and it's so convenient to have that lens. I recently tested the RF 50mm f1.2 on a photoshoot and even tho it is incredible for sure... but the size and comfort of the small lens is much more important to me.
I would love Canon to release more compact and inexpensive lenses like that maybe down to a 1.4 aperture. That's bright enough.
And it's incredible what quality they are able to produce at that price point.
Yes, totally! I can't wait to see what they will produce in the future. Thanks for watching!
I love the 50 1.2 EF. I’m weird and moved from the R series back to the DSLR in the form of a 5dsr and 1dx. To me, they balance better ergonomically than the R series and I like the IQ of both over the Eos R I had. Plus I really like OVF. I really wish canon would commit to a HIGH build quality, weather sealed, compact series of lenses in RF. That would be amazing and I would likely grab another R series for travel especially.
Yes, that would be an awesome series of lenses indeed! Interested to see what they bring moving forward. Thanks for watching :)
I believe that experience helps... Canon has come a long way with it's EF range of bodies and lenses and have never gone wrong. Hence, I, having used the 1Dx series of bodies since the past 6 years added the R6 along with all the Royal Red Ring L 1.2, 2.0 and 2.8 aperture lenses using with the original basic Canon RF adapter; I feel so confident still with the EF 50mm 1.2 lens and the 1dx mark 2 combo for every shoot I move to. Have used a few RF lenses directly mounted to my R6, but still don't get the feel of the 1dx mark 2 somehow; even though the R6 is amazing when I get going as a solo body and no looking elsewhere.
@@vpan1982 If you want to reinforce your love for DSLR's you should live for a year with the original EOS R. "...have never gone wrong..." Yep they did. And it's not even the touch bar thing. That is not a problem at all. But why in the world can't one go to Auto ISO rotating the control ring? It went [Auto, 100, 200, 400 ....] ever since auto ISO was invented. But on EOS R to get back to auto Iso you have to open the screen, get the menu and scroll the stupid ribbon on touchscreen to auto.
Glad to see new videos on the regular.
While I love my EF50 1.2 it’s definitely a lens I have to be patient with. I did end up getting the RF50 1.2 which is on such a next level and has incredible lens flare but it’s not cheap. I’ll always recommend the canon nifty 50 to anyone looking to mess with fixed focal length especially coming off a kit lens. 50 is such a great focal length.
I totally agree, Dan. Thanks so much for watching! :)
I just got the ef 50 f1.2 second hand for my eor R and I am excited
Enjoy it! Thanks for watching!
Thanks for an honest review of these lenses. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder - even though I know 50. f1.2 is super dreamy lens, on your examples I actually liked 50 f1.8 more! Ha!
As yourself, I'm also a guy that loves 50mm, both on crop and FF. Each have their own strengths. I'm also emotionally attached to my EF50 f1.4. I just love its sparkly bokeh at 1.4 and softer focus. For now, I will keep on using it on my 5Dmk4 and new RF 50mm 1.8 on my R7.
You're so right! Thank you for watching!
It's really a good idea to test before buying anything. Mainly because all of us have their own preferences. For portraits I keep using pretty much 95% of the time vintage Minolta lenses from 1970-71. Specifically the minolta rokkor 58mm f/1.2 and minolta rokkor 55mm f/1.7. At F2 I don't think you can beat the 58mm Minolta vintage lens in the 50mm range of lenses. That said, these are manual focus lenses but with how good focus peaking is in Canon cameras, with some practice you will have most of your shots in focus even really open wide like F1.2 or F1.7.
Your videos are amazing!! I just picked up the EF 1.2 a couple of weeks ago and love it. After ordering an r6 I'm stoked to see some of photos.
OMG thank you so much! Means a lot :) Thanks for watching!
I just bought the EF lens and got it yesterday and I’m in love with it. Something about it is different than my Ef 50.
Thank you for producing this video. It was very well done with side by side comparisons. My recommendation, keep your EF lenses because eventually, people will look for lenses that produce something different from all the other photos. The popularity of "vintage" Canon EF glass will be sought after just as vintage Soviet Russian lenses and other 20th century lenses are now.
You got that very right and those are very sought after, the elements that those lenses were made from is a big deal and man talk about organic images they produce. when all the sharpness fad dies out we will see very high value in these glasses we already seeing it already.
Thanks for the video. LensRentals has the R6+50 1.8 for about $100 for a three day rental. Pretty fun way to see how one would like it.
Great video. Exactly what I was searching for. Thanks for making it!
Ah fantastic! I'm so glad it was helpful. Thanks so much for watching :)
Once again great video Zach.I have both. Cheers
my 10th time coming back to this video, i really want the RF 50mm1.2 but i will rarely use it like my rf 85mm1.2, to save some money was considering the ef 50mm 1.2 but my rf 50mm 1.8 is holding up quite nicely and noone will notice any difference to be honest at websizes. thanks for this great video!
Thank you so much for watching!
I agree with you >> "noone will notice any difference to be honest at websizes"😊
so for you Canon EF50 1.2 is better and worth it?
@@НатальяСмольникова-у7л I got the rf 501.2 and it's amazing except it's heavy for my liking. Hope that helps
Hi! Comparing the samples and i feel like the ef looks more natural and less digital
It is gorgeous even if it is a bit soft it doesn't really matter
I have the rf 1.8 witch is good but i'm in love with what i see
Do you still use it or you switched to rf
Thanks you
I wonder how much it would improve the 1.8 if you added a pro mist/bloom filter. Deffo help with highlight rendering and remove some of that overly corrected look it has
Could be fun to test for sure. Thanks for watching!
Thank you! You are so calming to watch and helped ease my mind on the 1.8 :)
Ah great!! Thank you so much for watching :)
Confirmation bias is so cozy, right? None of that uncomfortable conflicty truth. Gen z, aren't you?
i shoot with both my 5d mk iv and my new r6 mk ii- that being said- i just picked up a 1.2 EF 50mm instead of RF because i still use my 5D mk iv all the time and can easily go back and forth with that instead of buying a RF 50 mm 1.2 at 2x price but then another adapter on my 5d mk iv..
My EF 50mm 1.2 L lens works beautifully on my R5 and I've compared it to the RF 1.8. In terms of an investment, quality EF glass is now heavily discounted and completely compatible with the RF system and will likely always be so with an adapter. No doubt that some of the better RF glass has more advanced electronics and generally benefits from advances in computer modeling and manufacturing. I suggest purchasing at a local camera store. They will let you compare both lenses on your camera body. Bring your laptop and use your results to drive your decision.
When I searched for this specific comparison - I was like "who is going to be thinking this but so happy to find your video and really enjoying your channel your work is beautiful! Thank you, Zach! ...just waiting for sigma to create some RF lenses and im feeling like I might be waiting awhile...
AH thank you so much for the kind words and thanks for watching! :)
Zach, Ok, am back on your channel watching this video one more time before laying the plastic down to buy it. Just a suggestion for future lens discussions. I appreciate you focus on portraits. But when trying to illustrate a lens' capabilities, please consider adding in a few photos of, say, landscapes and smaller apertures and shots as close as possible to it's MFD to show how clear and sharp it is at that point. Just a suggestion. Thanks again for your videos. Craig
Are the images you've taken with the EF 50 now not as good as they were?
mann, i can see your love toward EF, but you still recommending the RF for the new player. hat's off
I had the EF 50mm 1.8, it was the second lens I ever bought. I loved it a lot. Especially on APS-C, that was around 70mm. When I switched to the R5, I also bought the 50mm 1.8 RF version, I love the small package, but in the end, my real love is for the RF 70-200 2.8. I love the focal range. But if there is a day I "don't want to shoot" I will slap the 50mm on and throw my camera in my bag. The lack of an adapter + small size / weight make it very appealing. I think it's a lens almost everyone should own, regardless of your system (canon, sony, nikon).
Yeah, I can totally agree with this - thanks for watching :)
@@TheZachMendez thank you for making great content!
One thing I realize as I was watching is that I don't pull out my 50 mm that much so paying for an uber-expensive lens doesn't make sense for me and with your review and a few others I can see myself putting the rf-50 mm 1.8 in my bag just for times when I need that specificity! Thank you for an awesome review - take care and be safe out there....
Thank you so much for watching! Glad this resonates with you too!
I own the RF50 F1.8 and I love it. It’s on my camera pretty much all the time as my standard/walk around lens. It’s great. Love the stuff I get out of it. That said, if I had the extra scratch to dump into an expensive prime, I’d buy the EF in a heart beat. Great vid!
Thanks so much for watching & for sharing your thoughts! Makes sense :)
Ended up shooting a quincenera party with an r6, a flash, a rf 35.18 and 50 1.8. you'd never know the difference! but I still spend money on that 1.2 lol.
Haha I know... I feel it haha thanks for watching!
Thank you very much for your comparison! This helped me to not buy the EF lens when I already had the RF 1.8.
Interesting that for so many year photographers complain when lens are too “surgically sharp” like the Canon 100f2.8l but that shifted now.
I'm fully embracing the sharpness haha
Hi! I'm struggling with the decision making process whether to buy 50 1.2 or stay with my nifty fifty 50 stm. The longer I watch all the clips on yt the more confident it makes me that I'll be able to justify the purchase! Great video on the matter, you've just made me one step closer to getting one of those bokeh monsters! By the way, what kind of retro camera bag do you use? It looks awesome!
Zach, would you use the hood at all on the 50 1.2?
Yes, I do use the hoods most of the time now. I think it't an easy way to protect the lens.
i think we can see the difference if we use both on a whole body shoot?
Probably wouldn't be easy to see a difference unless you were comparing side by side
Bravo Zach, interessante questo tuo video, e mi iscrivo anche!
I have venus laova 100 mm macro, beautiful lens for macro photography but even for portraits it's excellent.
Our field of vision is very wide. Much wider than 50mm. Closer to 18mm. Our natural eye magnification is around 85mm.
Love this review, love the I.ages you've taken with both lens, for my casual shooting and posting on social media, Noone would notice the difference but man one day, I'll get the rf 50 1.2 , one day, first world problems
Yes!!!!! Been waiting for this one 👍, haven’t even watched and I’m commenting 😇. I’ve both of these lenses so in EF so can’t wait.
Ah thank you so much for watching & for the comment! Hope you enjoy.
@@TheZachMendez really enjoyed, great video and super useful! Thanks.
I have the EF 50mm f/1.2. I was expecting it to be sharper when I bought it. Although, it's sharp enough. The thing I absolutely hate with it is actually the lens flare and weird internal reflections. It's not bad at daytime but it gets annoying at nighttime. Even a small hilight could introduce dozens of internal reflections. My other lenses are mostly Zeiss and they don't have this behavior in the dark, even if they tend to have strong lens flares otherwise.
I have the EF 50 1.2. Im very happy with it.
It is a fabulous lens! Thanks for watching! :)
I got the canon 50MM F1.2L and I did have the 50MM F1.4 2 times and they break easily when is knocked against something and the 50MM F 1.8 Mark 2 is better and works well and my 50 MM F1.2L works well and I get SHARP photos all the time as long as I USE the the SHUTTER SPEED to the RIGHT F no
Pozdrawiam z Polski! Może porównasz Canon RF 1,8 z Canon RF 1,2... ? Dobry film - gratuluję!!!
0:23 👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
CA is terrible with EF lenses. But the extra stop wide open is always worth it. Especially whole body shoot, the scenario that 50 1.8 will show its weakness
Very nice review. I totally agree
Thanks for watching!
❤ rf 50mm 1.8.
Thank you dude ! looks like I can save a lot of money to just use rf50 :)
Thanks for watching!
0:01 to me, the normal lens is the body, while wide and tele are its wings.
Thanks so much for watching!
I think everybody at this point already sort of figured that the modern 50 1.8 would be sharper than the 50 1.2 and of course it's going to be faster.Think of how much glass has to get moved around with that old motor.
more asmr please
35MM lens focal length 54.4 field of view
Thanks for sharing
Thanks for watching :)
I have the rf 50 1.8 for travel since it’s a whole lot lighter than my sigma 50 1.4 lol… and it definitely does it’s job…!
Makes sense - thanks for watching!
how would you rate the rf50.8 against the sigma 50.4? does the image quality justify the weight and price difference?
Thank you for this thoughtful review. I recently bought the R6 Mii...(love it).. If I didn't already have the EF 50 1.2, I would be more interested in the RF 50 1.8. I really appreciated your comparisons.
They say 24 is the closest to human eye sight. 22-24mm.. definitely not 50mm. That would be some freakish handicap having vision that tight and zoomed. Thank god our vision is not anything near 50mm.
I think 50mm is close to what you can easily observe. According to Wikipedia the peripheral vision is commonly thought to start around >=60 degrees in dia. Which would mean that the naturally looking lens should be somewhere between 35mm and 50mm. Personally I feel that 50mm is bit tight and 35mm looks more right to me. 24mm already feels slightly odd to me. I don't think there can be scientifically correct answer to this question because we don't have the technology to make sensors mimicking the human eye construction. Also such a sensor should be stereo paired.
the focal plane of the 1.8 will gather more detail compared to a 1.2 focal plane so it will appare sharper however it completely further from the truth. The focal plane vs focal plane the 1.2 will be sharper than that rf lens any given day you aint paying all that money for nothing. I saw it in the images here completely different planes of focus. the 1.8 is perfect for folks on a budget that's for sure.
my only lens use on portrait natural and birthday and christening they pay me 40-50$.. hehe
Thanks for watching!
@@TheZachMendez welcome
To be honest, I'd say get both - the RF F1.8 is sooo cheap, you could get both, but if your preference is for RF mount then well - stick with the RF F1.8 anyway or sell your kidney to buy the RF F1.2
Haha totally - thanks for watching!
The RF is too sharp. You can see all the skin imperfections in portraits. I'll take the EF every day!
Super 5% Only Defarent Amount hi
Aaaaand then there is the advantage of filters in the adapter with the 50mm F/1.2 :)
Yes!! Thanks for watching
if it's difficult to find the difference between these lenses - please use your iPhone. You won't be able to tell the difference anyway, why pay more?
You should stop using the word CHEAP! ( less expensive ) would be a better choice. no one like cheap anything CHEAP!. Do you like cheap stuff or less expense wise buying choice?
Yes sir
Shaky footage.