James, I just wanted to really really thank you for your amazing work doing these detailed reviews of the Canon's R series and RF lenses! It's primarily due to your presentation and ability to preview RAW files and judge the image quality and character by myself that I ended up with two Canon R8s - one is using either a 28mm f2.8 or the 50mm f1.8, and another is with the 70-200mm f4. I have no words to describe how happy I am with this small setup, and I've shot my best shots ever in the past few months (coming from Canon 350D, 100D and 90D). Keep up the amazing work, sir! Best wishes to you and your wife aka model aka teammate aka second camera person ;-)
That's amazing, thank you so much Artemiy. I really appreciate the kind words of encouragement and thank you for the support! It really means a lot to both of us.
I like the way you do this comparisons, including previous videos. Calm Presentation and exactly (!) the points of interest for me. Thank you very much 👍👍
Another fantastic comparison video, James. Your many videos like this have been essential to my lens shopping process. Thanks to you, I'm very happy with the buying choices I've made.
Thank you for the comparison, James! I was going back and forth on the 50mm f1.4 due to its video advantage despite already owning the 50mm f1.2. I'll stay with my 50mm f1.2 I suppose!
The 1.4 & 1.2 are in a different league. but this just proves how capable the 1.8 really is! glad i kept with it even though it doesn’t get much use these days after getting the 35 1.8. i wonder what the narrative would be if the 1.8 was the LAST 50 to be introduced. thanks for the great vid as always! looking forward to the review of the new 16-28 2.8!
What a great, informative video! I appreciate the amount of work you put in here, showing the lenses for the purpose they are most often used for. I was considering the f/1.2, but as I mainly shoot portraits in a studio I'm more often stopped down a bit, so the f/1.4 might actually be a better buy for me.
You nailed all the points I had. I was a little disappointed in the field of view on the 1.4 only because I love to shoot at 35mm, but I’ve found I shoot the new 1.4 50 now compared to my 35 1.4. The autofocus and weight had me keep the 1.4 and sell my 1.2. I have an 85 1.2 if I want to shoot portraits.
Thank you very much for your review. Well done, it encourages me to keep my RF 50 1.2. My main concern is the best possible look. I don't want to give that up, even if the 1.4 looks very good otherwise.
Again an excellent review! You had great weather in Lisbon. I don't know if it was on purpose, but the color of Rachel's dress works perfectly for the first comparison shots. Beautiful. The 1.2 is the best lens to me when it comes to portraits. The 1.4 has all the typical improvements Canon's recent lenses have. And the small price difference with the recent non L zooms really confuses me. The 1.4 is therefore very tempting as you say. But for walking around and shooting at leisure, the 1.8 on an R8 is the one I will bring and not leave at home. They all are good products.
I loved the F1.2 after renting it, but I'm pretty positive that's not the lens for me given the size and price. Really looking forward to trying the F1.4 this year, and always happy to see your results and hear your takes.
As always, great, insightful review! I don’t shoot videos and will put up with the weight of my most beloved RF 50 1.2. 80% of the time it is on my R5. Thanks James!
When I compare the new 28-70 F2.8 with the 50mm F1.4 VCM, i found that I need to match their focal length at 45mm-46mm of the 28-70mm. I think the "big" difference of the bokeh may be caused by this factor also. It would be great if you can match the "exact" focal length of the 1.2 and the 1.4VCM in order to compare their bokeh again ~! BTW, this is the best comparison I have ever seen, Thanks!!
The 24mm 1.4 has some serious vignetting issues when you have too many stops with your ND filter to deal with bright sunny days but it's so sharp and the autofocus is so smooth and quick. I've been looking at this 50mm 1.4 with it's more affordable price. I will probably skip the 35mm
a big thank you for this superb comparison and very well explained and detailed because for novices like me, apart from the price, it is difficult to form a good opinion I have the 1.8 and I do not regret it for the moment, only doing small landscapes and no portraits but I also like it for its weight and its size! But when I move on to portraits, the 1.4 will be very welcome Thanks again and thanks to the model
Fantastic review (as all your videos, I allways realy enjoy including your very nice photographic style & color grading, although I'm a professional photographer & film maker myself). Others sold their RF 1.2 but I kept it, because it's such a master piece and will never give it away but I as well love the new VCM primes and bought them all for travel and light gimbal setup work .
Thank you so much, I really appreciate it! I agree the 1.2 is special, hopefully one I will always hang on to. The VCM primes really are amazing though, I'm hoping to buy the 24mm very soon
@@JamesReader 24mm 1.4 VCM same story, super sharp, nice bokeh and appr 8% eff. shorter (eff. 22mm) like the 35 1.4 (eff. 32mm) and the 50 1.4 (eff. 46mm) I use them together with the 10-20 4.0 and 28-70 2.8 (but unlike the 50 1.2 here I'm selling the 24-70 2.8) for travel with the RS3 Mini, as I can change all these lenses without new re-balancing the gimbal due to the same size and weight. thinking about the upcoming 16-28 2.8 for the same purpose but unlike the 24-70 2.8 I would then keep the 15-35 2.8 for client work like I kept the 50 1.2. Looking forward to your next great TH-cam video!
My 50 1.4 just arrived and love the lens, was thinking of buying the 1.2 but the weight and slower AF was something i just could not ignore, besides if i want crazy bocke i own the 85 1.2 RF.
thank you James ! excellente présentation in real life des caractéristiques de chacun de ces objectifs. le 50 1.8 reste, grace à son prix ( exactement 1/10 e de celui du 1.4 😱) la meilleure option pour moi. dans mes rêves, le 1.4 canon coutait 5x le prix du nifty fifty, et était tout juste deux fois plus encombrant. le 1.4 n'arrivera donc pas jusqu'à mon sac photo....
You can do this type of review with RF28-70mm F2.8 as it is great at 50mm F2.8. Recently I bought it after watching all the reviews including yours. I found a razor-sharp image in 35mm and 50mm in the new RF28-70mm F2.8. This lens is a true contribution and will be unavoidable if Canon fixes it at 999 USD.
@@JamesReaderI only ordered it yesterday but should arrive in the post in a couple of days and will leave some feedback once I’ve had a chance to use it. Will you be reviewing the 24mm 1.4vcm anytime soon? Looking for a fast 24/28mm for my Japan travels!
Same. Price was not the deciding factor. I will be traveling with this lens, and the 1.4 is nearly half the weight. Step a tiny bit closer to the subject to make up for focal length difference and the bokeh difference becomes even smaller. The 1.2 is a fantastic lens, but between significantly lighter weight, size, faster focus, and small difference in bokeh the 1.4 made more sense (for me). Besides, who is going to shoot at 1.2 all the time? I want the entire face in focus not be worried about that. Even the 1.4 I will shoot at 1.8 for half length or face portraits. Full body might go to 1.4. As a walk around lens for landscapes or cityscapes, the slightly shorter focal length will be better.
great review, I have rented the 50mm 1.2 and on the R5 in cropped mode it can double up "almost" as an 85mm, it's so handy. I think the 1.4 would be good enough for me as I'm not a full time pro. I have the Sigma art 50mm and EF 1.2L at the moment, and I'm not sure which to sell. Both have pros and cons.
As Ken Rockwell said once "A f1.2 lens is just for bragging rights, the f1.4 is better" and I have to agree with that legendary reviewer. I have many f1.2 50's and they are fun and amazing but all my best wide open shots come from f1.4 50's. Great review mate.
Why are the wide open shots from a 1.4 50mm better than a 1.2? lmao. What if you shoot the 1.2 at 1.4? That makes zero sense. This video literally showed how the 1.2 is better.
@@EvilSardine084The stop difference is 1/3rd. The difference you’re talking about is complicated, why? Because the magnification is different the f1.2 lens is actually around 52mm whereas the 1.4 is about 48.5mm. That magnification along with the bokeh advantage the 1.2 has will favour the f1.2 lens. However in real world photography the difference is really not material in most situations. The f1.4 outperforms the 1.2 with sharpness across the frame corner to corner even if you match the stops until about 2.8 where there is no discernible difference. I take it you have not tested the new f1.4 lens because I have and own all three and will be keeping all three. The 1.2 lens is the best wedding or portrait lens but its marginal at best. The 1.4 lens is easily the best video lens hands down and is a really good portrait and wedding photographer wanting both.
Ken Rockwell is just a moderately talented jpeg photographer who, in my opinion, doesn't know much about photography. I've never understood why people care so much about his opinion.
on EF, I always found myself gravitating towards the 85 1.2, shot better and yielded better results. alllll that changed with RF lol, there is something so damn special about the 50 1.2. for photo or video, it's absolutely incredible and honestly revived my faith in that focal length. can't wait to test drive the 1.4, thanks for the vid.
great comparison as always. as much as I want the 1.2, the 1.4 seems just about as good while being a good amount cheaper and lighter. If I want really dramatic backgrounds the longer focal lengths make more sense anyway
The RF 50mm f1.4L VCM out of the three is the Swiss Army knife much better suited for video shooters and if not comparing side by side with the f1.2 lens the bokeh will not garner any complaints. Another thing to mention if your a video shooter the trio of VCM primes are a much better bet for gimbal photography. The RF 85mm f1.2L is the bokeh monster sweet spot for portraiture although for people on a budget the older EF 85mm f1.4L IS USM produces great results.
Thank you very much for the video. I would like to take this opportunity to ask you, or perhaps invite you to include in your analysis a comparison between the old 50mm 1.4 versus the RF 1.8. It would be interesting to see if it is worth going for that old lens or perhaps opting for a new one. Regards.
Now I’m not that sure about sidegrading from 1.2L to 1.4L. The weight of 1.2L was always a small ick for me, but I love the output. But the size/weight, AF speed and side button made me to place an order on 1.4L. I’m now a little on the edge about cancelling said order. Dammit, choices choices…
I have RF 50mm 1.2 and it’s a beast for photos. It is heavy as hell though. I might still consider the RF 50mm 1.4 because of the weight reduction. Customers wont recognize the difference in bokeh.
Hey James, I noticed (like others have) the slight magenta shift in the photos taken with the new 50mm 1.4 VCM, and also noticed with the 24-105mm 2.8 in your comparison against the 28-70mm f2. Could it be that Canon are trying something with their optical formula/coatings with these newer lenses?
Hey! It's certainly possible, there' s definitely some colour differences between the older primes and these new ones. Canon are definitely trying to make these new hybrid primes and zooms match as close as possible colour wise so it must be intentional.
I was getting a bit nervous when the F1.4 was presented, because I bought the F1.2 last year, but hell I am so glad I did it :D Would take my 1.2 over the 1.4 any day of the week.
I was only asking you about this Lens a few days ago 😊. Think I’ll stick to my 1.2, was hoping I’d have a lighter faster focusing 50mm but I can see the 1.2 magic even with TH-cam compression. Thanks again James
situations are pretty strange in Korea, where the 2nd hand 50.2 is slightly cheaper than the brand new 50.4. So I went with the 50.2 with no hesitations 😂 Thanks for the video again, you always come with the comparison I always wanted to watch
@JamesReader IT never gets slept on, I always carry it with me for a good reason though. Whenever I review the pictures on my phone, the pictures that makes me think "wow what lens did I use for this picture?" it was always the 50.2
I owned the 50 1.2 for a year and I agree that it’s phenomenally a great lens, but too heavy to lug around. The 1.4 is just perfect for my use and I am very happy with it.
Great video once again! That 50 1.4 looks like a nearly perfect lens aside from the price. It's around $2300 in Canada ($2000 plus tax) which is really insane to me for an "affordable" prime. The 1.2 is well over $3000. Ack! I'm actually surprised that the difference between the 1.2 and 1.4 in terms of bokeh is as large as it is.
In regards to bokeh, the slight difference in focal length adds to the effect caused by aperture differences alone, as at larger distances the 1.4 seems a little wider.
@ The RF 1.2 clearly shows focus breathing, the vcm version is corrected in that regard - I guess this causes the difference in focal length at higher distances.
In addition to the bokeh rendering and the subject separation, I prefer the colors on the 1.2 as it pertains to skin tones. I love my 1.2 for majority of my shooting
I will try to explain why realy like you and your style. Firts of all you bring all the new lenses and you make so many different test with the lenss. The comparison of lens i think you are one of the best in youtube even if ypu dont have 1 million followers like some stupid idiot people who never ever give the right information to the people who looking for that. I learn a lot from you. Comparison of the lenses from different place different situation make your style uniqe! Thanks a lot!
Thanks for the comparison. But I have skepticism regarding the closeup photos. The DOF is razor thin. There's just too many variables with a handheld camera and non-stationary subject. Unless your wife's head is leaning on a wall and your camera is on a tripod with eye AF and continuous focus engaged, it's not really a fair comparison, especially when pixel-peeping. Also, it would be nice if you mentioned the shutter speed of the images. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks John. I appreciate the feedback, there’s only so much I can do with these comparisons there are always going to be variables I cannot completely control. You can check out the RAW files I took on a tripod, but again not perfect because the field of view of these lenses are different
You are the best. You always know how to make the comparisons that people really want to see. For professional use: RF 50mm f1,2. Although I consider the Sony 50mm f1,2 better. For hobby: RF 50mm f1,8. I don't see use for RF 50mm 1,4. Maybe just for video? I don't know. Thanks for the excellent work.
I was wondering if you would be comparing all three 50mm lenses. I have all three and my former professional life was at Panavision and I’ve literally tests thousands of lenses over the years. One thing that really alters the way you perceived the f1.2 & 1.4 lenses is the magnification if you adjust to show similar magnification then the differences are much harder to notice. Granted I would agree the 1.2 lens had slightly better bokeh than the f1.4 lens and certainly for portrait or wedding photographer every little helps. One area I don’t agree though it could be marginal differences in individual lenses is the sharpness difference is not discernible and I could not call it for one or the other in the centre. The f1.4 lens is shaper across the frame into the corners than the f1.2 lens until 2.8 when there is nothing in it. The lack of focus breathing on the f1.4 lens means for video shooters this lens is a better choice along with the faster & quieter focusing and the separate iris de-clicked ring. Both the f1.2 and 1.4 lenses don’t handle flare with sunlight directly into the lens as well as the Sony 50mm lenses do with the f1.4 lens showing green flares. The fact is both the L lenses are good all round lenses and the cheaper lens (f1.8) for its price is a steal.
Thank you! Wow, must of been great to work with all those legendary cinema lenses. I must admit I couldn't really decide on a winner in regards to the sharpness, but the 1.4 is definitely the better performer overall across the frame. I love the video features they have included on the VCM lenses and totally agree, one of the biggest downsides of my 50 1.2 is the handling of flare. Total loss of contrast, after a bit of testing I did think the 50 1.4 VCM performed a little better but haven't tested them side by side.
1.2L still has better separation on full portrait shot. I also love the 1.2L sharpness, even 1.4VCM look sharper, but she look dry and slightly blown highlight. No doubt, 1.2L still a great Canon portrait lens.
Once again a great video. I find the path taken by Canon with their VCM lenses very interesting, bringing lenses for both video and photo to the market. As a photo purist, however, I would always choose the lenses optimized for photography - such as the Canon RF 50mm F/1.2. I hope that Canon will not only develop hybrid lenses in the future - for me personally, such lenses make too many compromises. But in the end, the sales figures will decide. 🙂
The new 50 VCM is the better lens for video in my opinion. Between the 35 and 50 they are both great, just depends on our preferred focal length. I like the 35 best for video, just a little bit more of a versatile focal length for video.
50mm 1.4 cause of price, weight and performance. I agree though from your video and photo samples there is magic in that 1.2 lens, but on an r8 which I own I think it will be too uncomfortable. The 50mm 1.8 has ino bad build quality. Owned it for several days and there was already dust under the front lens element. Never got that with any lens or perhaps it was just bad luck put me off that 50mm. Still use a 50mm 1.4 ef version, but this 50mm 1.4 may replace it in due time.
Great comparaison. Honestly, I was able to see some difference in sharpness between the 1.4 and 1.2. The 1.2 is really a perfect lens. That said, if you have the 1.4, you’re golden. I for one will keep my 50 1.2 despite the difference in size and weight. Once again, you keep dropping gems!! Love watching your videos, James!
Hey James, great video comparison! I have a question regarding RF 50mm f1.4 and the RF 24mm f1.4 - the RF 35mm f1.4 rattles quite a bit. Is that the case with the new 50 and 24? All these 3 lenses seem to have very similar build quality, but I haven't seen any review talking about this.
I sold the RF 50 1.2. Too heavy. Too big. The RF 50mm 1.4L VCM produce not equal but similar results. On hiking it reduces the backpack weight significantly.
I have the 1.8 and to me its nearly all I need. Sadly the one thing it lacks is the image quality. Pretty much makes it useless for me. My zooms are way sharper and I rather take the extra weight of the 24-105mm f4 or even the 28-70 f2. Just for the IQ. I still dont have the 50 1.2. The 1.4 seems good at first look but ive been looking at several tests and there is pretty bad onion rings in the bokeh. Something all new vcm lenses seem to suffer from for some reason. Tbf in this video it didnt look too bad, compared to the 1.8 atleast.
Unless you’re shooting portraits in the daytime, the f1.8 is garbage. AF is abysmal, especially in lower light. If you’re considering a 50mm and have the budget, don’t waste your time and money on it. Put that cash into f1.4 or f1.2
Great comparison, and god bless your wife for sitting still for all these tests!
Thank you so much Marc!
Your comparison videos are so so good compared to the others. Much appreciated!
Thank you so much!
James, I just wanted to really really thank you for your amazing work doing these detailed reviews of the Canon's R series and RF lenses! It's primarily due to your presentation and ability to preview RAW files and judge the image quality and character by myself that I ended up with two Canon R8s - one is using either a 28mm f2.8 or the 50mm f1.8, and another is with the 70-200mm f4. I have no words to describe how happy I am with this small setup, and I've shot my best shots ever in the past few months (coming from Canon 350D, 100D and 90D). Keep up the amazing work, sir! Best wishes to you and your wife aka model aka teammate aka second camera person ;-)
That's amazing, thank you so much Artemiy. I really appreciate the kind words of encouragement and thank you for the support! It really means a lot to both of us.
I like the way you do this comparisons, including previous videos. Calm Presentation and exactly (!) the points of interest for me. Thank you very much 👍👍
The video I’ve beeen waiting for!!!
Another awesome review James, thanks.
Another fantastic comparison video, James. Your many videos like this have been essential to my lens shopping process. Thanks to you, I'm very happy with the buying choices I've made.
That's so awesome, thank you so much!
Thank you for the comparison, James! I was going back and forth on the 50mm f1.4 due to its video advantage despite already owning the 50mm f1.2. I'll stay with my 50mm f1.2 I suppose!
Thank you for watching! It’s hard to beat the 1.2 lens, it’s really a special prime.
Another great video, James! Thank you.
Thank you Drew!
Your presentation and knowledge is in perfect focus. You present with very little noise and spot on exposure.
Thanks so much David, that really means a lot!
The 1.4 & 1.2 are in a different league. but this just proves how capable the 1.8 really is! glad i kept with it even though it doesn’t get much use these days after getting the 35 1.8. i wonder what the narrative would be if the 1.8 was the LAST 50 to be introduced. thanks for the great vid as always! looking forward to the review of the new 16-28 2.8!
Thanks so much for watching! Hoping to get my hands on a 16-28 soon
I like that the skin is a lil bit less red on the 1.2. But the new 1.4 lenses are really good. The smooth focus falloff is so nice
What a great, informative video! I appreciate the amount of work you put in here, showing the lenses for the purpose they are most often used for. I was considering the f/1.2, but as I mainly shoot portraits in a studio I'm more often stopped down a bit, so the f/1.4 might actually be a better buy for me.
Thank you so much!
Your model (the most frequently starring in your videos) is just a marvellous :-)
Thanks for this very helpful comparison, good info from you as always!
Thank you Steve!
I recently did a portrait shoot with the 5mm 1.4 VCM and our of 600 photos I only had 4 out of focus shots , indoors as well, and even better in video
That's awesome! It definitely has incredible AF
You nailed all the points I had. I was a little disappointed in the field of view on the 1.4 only because I love to shoot at 35mm, but I’ve found I shoot the new 1.4 50 now compared to my 35 1.4. The autofocus and weight had me keep the 1.4 and sell my 1.2. I have an 85 1.2 if I want to shoot portraits.
Great review as always James
Thank you Nigel!
Great, well detailed, video. I'm impressed. Thank you. 🙏🔥🔥🔥
Thank you so much!
Thank you very much for your review. Well done, it encourages me to keep my RF 50 1.2. My main concern is the best possible look. I don't want to give that up, even if the 1.4 looks very good otherwise.
Thank you for watching!
Again an excellent review! You had great weather in Lisbon. I don't know if it was on purpose, but the color of Rachel's dress works perfectly for the first comparison shots. Beautiful.
The 1.2 is the best lens to me when it comes to portraits. The 1.4 has all the typical improvements Canon's recent lenses have. And the small price difference with the recent non L zooms really confuses me. The 1.4 is therefore very tempting as you say. But for walking around and shooting at leisure, the 1.8 on an R8 is the one I will bring and not leave at home. They all are good products.
I loved the F1.2 after renting it, but I'm pretty positive that's not the lens for me given the size and price. Really looking forward to trying the F1.4 this year, and always happy to see your results and hear your takes.
I think you'll really like the 1.4 Dan, let me know what you think when you manage to try it!
As always, great, insightful review! I don’t shoot videos and will put up with the weight of my most beloved RF 50 1.2. 80% of the time it is on my R5. Thanks James!
Thanks so much!
When I compare the new 28-70 F2.8 with the 50mm F1.4 VCM, i found that I need to match their focal length at 45mm-46mm of the 28-70mm. I think the "big" difference of the bokeh may be caused by this factor also. It would be great if you can match the "exact" focal length of the 1.2 and the 1.4VCM in order to compare their bokeh again ~! BTW, this is the best comparison I have ever seen, Thanks!!
Interesting! I figured it was around 48mm and the 50 1.2 was around 52mm. Thank you for watching!
Thanks for making this video! Well done comparison. Would love to see the EF 50L mixed in.
Thank you!
Great video once more!
Thank you so much!
wait this comparison so long, Thx !
Hope you found it useful! Thanks for watching
Thanks!
Another great review. as always.
Thank you so much!
Thanks James, very valuable comparison - this makes me want Canon to release a RF35 1.2 even more - and I'll keep the 50 1.2...
Thank you Tom, I really appreciate it. I really hope we see that RF 35mm 1.2.
The 24mm 1.4 has some serious vignetting issues when you have too many stops with your ND filter to deal with bright sunny days but it's so sharp and the autofocus is so smooth and quick. I've been looking at this 50mm 1.4 with it's more affordable price. I will probably skip the 35mm
Wow that f/1.2mm lens is just incredible. Noticeably better overall to my eyes. For now though, I'll persevere with my f/1.8 ! :)
a big thank you for this superb comparison and very well explained and detailed
because for novices like me, apart from the price, it is difficult to form a good opinion
I have the 1.8 and I do not regret it for the moment, only doing small landscapes and no portraits
but I also like it for its weight and its size!
But when I move on to portraits, the 1.4 will be very welcome
Thanks again and thanks to the model
Thank you so much for watching!
Fantastic review (as all your videos, I allways realy enjoy including your very nice photographic style & color grading, although I'm a professional photographer & film maker myself). Others sold their RF 1.2 but I kept it, because it's such a master piece and will never give it away but I as well love the new VCM primes and bought them all for travel and light gimbal setup work .
Thank you so much, I really appreciate it! I agree the 1.2 is special, hopefully one I will always hang on to. The VCM primes really are amazing though, I'm hoping to buy the 24mm very soon
@@JamesReader 24mm 1.4 VCM same story, super sharp, nice bokeh and appr 8% eff. shorter (eff. 22mm) like the 35 1.4 (eff. 32mm) and the 50 1.4 (eff. 46mm) I use them together with the 10-20 4.0 and 28-70 2.8 (but unlike the 50 1.2 here I'm selling the 24-70 2.8) for travel with the RS3 Mini, as I can change all these lenses without new re-balancing the gimbal due to the same size and weight. thinking about the upcoming 16-28 2.8 for the same purpose but unlike the 24-70 2.8 I would then keep the 15-35 2.8 for client work like I kept the 50 1.2. Looking forward to your next great TH-cam video!
My 50 1.4 just arrived and love the lens, was thinking of buying the 1.2 but the weight and slower AF was something i just could not ignore, besides if i want crazy bocke i own the 85 1.2 RF.
That’s awesome! Glad to hear you are liking the 1.4. It’s amazing.
I get the 1.4 and sell 1.2 and 1.8 already... thanks for your video.
Thank you!
thank you James !
excellente présentation in real life des caractéristiques de chacun de ces objectifs.
le 50 1.8 reste, grace à son prix ( exactement 1/10 e de celui du 1.4 😱) la meilleure option pour moi.
dans mes rêves, le 1.4 canon coutait 5x le prix du nifty fifty, et était tout juste deux fois plus encombrant.
le 1.4 n'arrivera donc pas jusqu'à mon sac photo....
Thank you so much Igor!
You can do this type of review with RF28-70mm F2.8 as it is great at 50mm F2.8. Recently I bought it after watching all the reviews including yours. I found a razor-sharp image in 35mm and 50mm in the new RF28-70mm F2.8. This lens is a true contribution and will be unavoidable if Canon fixes it at 999 USD.
Great review as always. I ended up going with the 1.4 over 1.2 due to the weight difference!
Thank you! Are you liking the 1.4 so far?
@@JamesReaderI only ordered it yesterday but should arrive in the post in a couple of days
and will leave some feedback once I’ve had a chance to use it. Will you be reviewing the 24mm 1.4vcm anytime soon? Looking for a fast 24/28mm for my Japan travels!
Same. Price was not the deciding factor. I will be traveling with this lens, and the 1.4 is nearly half the weight. Step a tiny bit closer to the subject to make up for focal length difference and the bokeh difference becomes even smaller. The 1.2 is a fantastic lens, but between significantly lighter weight, size, faster focus, and small difference in bokeh the 1.4 made more sense (for me). Besides, who is going to shoot at 1.2 all the time? I want the entire face in focus not be worried about that. Even the 1.4 I will shoot at 1.8 for half length or face portraits. Full body might go to 1.4. As a walk around lens for landscapes or cityscapes, the slightly shorter focal length will be better.
great review, I have rented the 50mm 1.2 and on the R5 in cropped mode it can double up "almost" as an 85mm, it's so handy. I think the 1.4 would be good enough for me as I'm not a full time pro.
I have the Sigma art 50mm and EF 1.2L at the moment, and I'm not sure which to sell. Both have pros and cons.
As Ken Rockwell said once "A f1.2 lens is just for bragging rights, the f1.4 is better" and I have to agree with that legendary reviewer. I have many f1.2 50's and they are fun and amazing but all my best wide open shots come from f1.4 50's. Great review mate.
Thank you! Yeah the 1.2 is definitely an unnecessary luxury in most cases and the 1.4 is the right choice for the majority of people.
Why are the wide open shots from a 1.4 50mm better than a 1.2? lmao. What if you shoot the 1.2 at 1.4? That makes zero sense. This video literally showed how the 1.2 is better.
@@EvilSardine084The stop difference is 1/3rd. The difference you’re talking about is complicated, why?
Because the magnification is different the f1.2 lens is actually around 52mm whereas the 1.4 is about 48.5mm. That magnification along with the bokeh advantage the 1.2 has will favour the f1.2 lens. However in real world photography the difference is really not material in most situations.
The f1.4 outperforms the 1.2 with sharpness across the frame corner to corner even if you match the stops until about 2.8 where there is no discernible difference.
I take it you have not tested the new f1.4 lens because I have and own all three and will be keeping all three. The 1.2 lens is the best wedding or portrait lens but its marginal at best. The 1.4 lens is easily the best video lens hands down and is a really good portrait and wedding photographer wanting both.
1.4 for me, smaller, lighter and quick AF
Ken Rockwell is just a moderately talented jpeg photographer who, in my opinion, doesn't know much about photography. I've never understood why people care so much about his opinion.
on EF, I always found myself gravitating towards the 85 1.2, shot better and yielded better results. alllll that changed with RF lol, there is something so damn special about the 50 1.2. for photo or video, it's absolutely incredible and honestly revived my faith in that focal length. can't wait to test drive the 1.4, thanks for the vid.
great comparison as always. as much as I want the 1.2, the 1.4 seems just about as good while being a good amount cheaper and lighter. If I want really dramatic backgrounds the longer focal lengths make more sense anyway
Thank you! Yeah totally, if I didn’t have a 50mm prime and was looking to pick one up it would be hard to ignore the 1.4 VCM
The RF 50mm f1.4L VCM out of the three is the Swiss Army knife much better suited for video shooters and if not comparing side by side with the f1.2 lens the bokeh will not garner any complaints. Another thing to mention if your a video shooter the trio of VCM primes are a much better bet for gimbal photography.
The RF 85mm f1.2L is the bokeh monster sweet spot for portraiture although for people on a budget the older EF 85mm f1.4L IS USM produces great results.
Lisbon is really amazing city! 🇵🇹
Absolutely, one of my favourite cities.
Thank you very much for the video. I would like to take this opportunity to ask you, or perhaps invite you to include in your analysis a comparison between the old 50mm 1.4 versus the RF 1.8. It would be interesting to see if it is worth going for that old lens or perhaps opting for a new one. Regards.
Thank you ! I’ll definitely try to compare those in the future
Now I’m not that sure about sidegrading from 1.2L to 1.4L. The weight of 1.2L was always a small ick for me, but I love the output. But the size/weight, AF speed and side button made me to place an order on 1.4L. I’m now a little on the edge about cancelling said order. Dammit, choices choices…
I have RF 50mm 1.2 and it’s a beast for photos. It is heavy as hell though. I might still consider the RF 50mm 1.4 because of the weight reduction. Customers wont recognize the difference in bokeh.
Hey James,
I noticed (like others have) the slight magenta shift in the photos taken with the new 50mm 1.4 VCM, and also noticed with the 24-105mm 2.8 in your comparison against the 28-70mm f2. Could it be that Canon are trying something with their optical formula/coatings with these newer lenses?
Hey! It's certainly possible, there' s definitely some colour differences between the older primes and these new ones. Canon are definitely trying to make these new hybrid primes and zooms match as close as possible colour wise so it must be intentional.
I was getting a bit nervous when the F1.4 was presented, because I bought the F1.2 last year, but hell I am so glad I did it :D Would take my 1.2 over the 1.4 any day of the week.
I was only asking you about this Lens a few days ago 😊.
Think I’ll stick to my 1.2, was hoping I’d have a lighter faster focusing 50mm but I can see the 1.2 magic even with TH-cam compression.
Thanks again James
Thank you for watching Andelos!
Am quite surprised that in VCM lenses that are oriented for video, the is no IS
I would choose the f/1.4 lens as favourite.
Same filter size as the new f2.8 zooms. That is VERY convenient indeed...
Great point!
situations are pretty strange in Korea, where the 2nd hand 50.2 is slightly cheaper than the brand new 50.4.
So I went with the 50.2 with no hesitations 😂
Thanks for the video again, you always come with the comparison I always wanted to watch
Thank you for watching! That sounds like a great deal on the 1.2. Are you enjoying the 50 1.2?
@JamesReader IT never gets slept on, I always carry it with me for a good reason though. Whenever I review the pictures on my phone, the pictures that makes me think "wow what lens did I use for this picture?" it was always the 50.2
Great comparison! Do you think Canon will release an updated version of the STM lens anytime soon?
It would be awesome if they did, but unfortunately I've not heard any rumours yet.
canon rf 50 f1.2 has a 3D effect, unlike other lenses and this plays to the better side. I realized that I want exactly f1.2
Totally agree!
I owned the 50 1.2 for a year and I agree that it’s phenomenally a great lens, but too heavy to lug around. The 1.4 is just perfect for my use and I am very happy with it.
Yeah absolutely, you do really feel the weight reduction in the 50 1.4
Great video once again! That 50 1.4 looks like a nearly perfect lens aside from the price. It's around $2300 in Canada ($2000 plus tax) which is really insane to me for an "affordable" prime. The 1.2 is well over $3000. Ack! I'm actually surprised that the difference between the 1.2 and 1.4 in terms of bokeh is as large as it is.
Thank you DRIS! Hopefully we see that price come down soon.
In regards to bokeh, the slight difference in focal length adds to the effect caused by aperture differences alone, as at larger distances the 1.4 seems a little wider.
@tom_k_d Interesting
@ The RF 1.2 clearly shows focus breathing, the vcm version is corrected in that regard - I guess this causes the difference in focal length at higher distances.
How about a comparison between the rf50 1.2 and the ef50 1.2😊
In addition to the bokeh rendering and the subject separation, I prefer the colors on the 1.2 as it pertains to skin tones. I love my 1.2 for majority of my shooting
Did you test on a body without focus breathing correction?
I didn't have it turned on, I always avoid using it.
I will try to explain why realy like you and your style.
Firts of all you bring all the new lenses and you make so many different test with the lenss. The comparison of lens i think you are one of the best in youtube even if ypu dont have 1 million followers like some stupid idiot people who never ever give the right information to the people who looking for that. I learn a lot from you. Comparison of the lenses from different place different situation make your style uniqe! Thanks a lot!
That’s amazing! Thank you so much for the kind words. It really means a lot.
Thanks for the comparison. But I have skepticism regarding the closeup photos. The DOF is razor thin. There's just too many variables with a handheld camera and non-stationary subject. Unless your wife's head is leaning on a wall and your camera is on a tripod with eye AF and continuous focus engaged, it's not really a fair comparison, especially when pixel-peeping. Also, it would be nice if you mentioned the shutter speed of the images. Just my 2 cents.
Thanks John. I appreciate the feedback, there’s only so much I can do with these comparisons there are always going to be variables I cannot completely control. You can check out the RAW files I took on a tripod, but again not perfect because the field of view of these lenses are different
You are the best. You always know how to make the comparisons that people really want to see.
For professional use: RF 50mm f1,2. Although I consider the Sony 50mm f1,2 better.
For hobby: RF 50mm f1,8.
I don't see use for RF 50mm 1,4. Maybe just for video? I don't know.
Thanks for the excellent work.
Thank you so much, I really appreciate the kind words!
I was wondering if you would be comparing all three 50mm lenses. I have all three and my former professional life was at Panavision and I’ve literally tests thousands of lenses over the years.
One thing that really alters the way you perceived the f1.2 & 1.4 lenses is the magnification if you adjust to show similar magnification then the differences are much harder to notice. Granted I would agree the 1.2 lens had slightly better bokeh than the f1.4 lens and certainly for portrait or wedding photographer every little helps.
One area I don’t agree though it could be marginal differences in individual lenses is the sharpness difference is not discernible and I could not call it for one or the other in the centre. The f1.4 lens is shaper across the frame into the corners than the f1.2 lens until 2.8 when there is nothing in it.
The lack of focus breathing on the f1.4 lens means for video shooters this lens is a better choice along with the faster & quieter focusing and the separate iris de-clicked ring.
Both the f1.2 and 1.4 lenses don’t handle flare with sunlight directly into the lens as well as the Sony 50mm lenses do with the f1.4 lens showing green flares. The fact is both the L lenses are good all round lenses and the cheaper lens (f1.8) for its price is a steal.
Thank you! Wow, must of been great to work with all those legendary cinema lenses. I must admit I couldn't really decide on a winner in regards to the sharpness, but the 1.4 is definitely the better performer overall across the frame. I love the video features they have included on the VCM lenses and totally agree, one of the biggest downsides of my 50 1.2 is the handling of flare. Total loss of contrast, after a bit of testing I did think the 50 1.4 VCM performed a little better but haven't tested them side by side.
Świetny film! Pozdrawiam z Polski ;-)))
Thank you!
1.2L still has better separation on full portrait shot. I also love the 1.2L sharpness, even 1.4VCM look sharper, but she look dry and slightly blown highlight. No doubt, 1.2L still a great Canon portrait lens.
Once again a great video. I find the path taken by Canon with their VCM lenses very interesting, bringing lenses for both video and photo to the market. As a photo purist, however, I would always choose the lenses optimized for photography - such as the Canon RF 50mm F/1.2. I hope that Canon will not only develop hybrid lenses in the future - for me personally, such lenses make too many compromises. But in the end, the sales figures will decide. 🙂
Thank you so much!
The 50mm f1.4 actually has 3D POP!!! Someone alert the guy from Camera Conspiracies! He obsesses about it!
Totally! The rendering is amazing on the 1.4
@ if I still used Canon R cameras I would totally buy the 50 f1.4L
great video! do you think you will replace your 1.2 with the 1.4?
I think I'm gonna hang on to my 50 1.2 for now. It's too hard to let go of!
Wich 50mm is better for videos? and then 35mm or 50mm
The new 50 VCM is the better lens for video in my opinion. Between the 35 and 50 they are both great, just depends on our preferred focal length. I like the 35 best for video, just a little bit more of a versatile focal length for video.
Beautiful ❤
I would never give up my rf 85 1.2 for portraits
Hard to beat that lens for sure!
2:31: [1] RF 50mm F/1,2 [2] RF 50mm F/1,8 [3] RF 50mm F/1,4
Nailed it Julian!
I traded in my 1.2 to get the 1.4 for the weight and better usage for video.
The 1.4 sure is a lot quieter for video eh? And no focus breathing at all!
Can't deny how good the 1.4 VCM is video. Amazing lens
I will keep my EF 50 1.2 then :)
I'm personally waiting for an 85mm 1.4
Okay
Id get f1,2 used😅
A lente 50mm 1.2 RF é a opção 1
Correct!
50mm 1.4 cause of price, weight and performance. I agree though from your video and photo samples there is magic in that 1.2 lens, but on an r8 which I own I think it will be too uncomfortable. The 50mm 1.8 has ino bad build quality. Owned it for several days and there was already dust under the front lens element. Never got that with any lens or perhaps it was just bad luck put me off that 50mm. Still use a 50mm 1.4 ef version, but this 50mm 1.4 may replace it in due time.
Man, just think how good Ansel Adams' photos would have been if he only had an f/1.2 lens!!!
Totally agree, the zoom is fantastic. Canon did a great job with that lens throughout the focal range.
1 - 1.2, 2 - 1.8, 3 - 1.4 is my guess
Not a guess!! You are absolute!!!!
Nailed it!
Great comparaison. Honestly, I was able to see some difference in sharpness between the 1.4 and 1.2. The 1.2 is really a perfect lens. That said, if you have the 1.4, you’re golden. I for one will keep my 50 1.2 despite the difference in size and weight.
Once again, you keep dropping gems!! Love watching your videos, James!
Totally agree! Thank you so much man, really appreciate the kind words.
Man we splittin hairs now
If i didn’t have the 1.2 i would have gotten the 1.4
Would love the swap my 1.8 for the 1.4.... 1.2 is just expensive, bulky and slow(er) focus.... let's go summer cashback canon! :)
1.
Btw it should not be surprising that 1.2 is “that much better”. it’s a full stop faster than 1.8.
Wow, thanks so much for the support Artemiy!
№1 - 1.2
№2 - 1.8
№3 - 1.4
Perfect !
@@JamesReader I guessed it only by the blur ))
Another great video comparing these lenses! One question: are you keeping the 1.4 vcm?
Thank you Gustavo! I’ll be keeping the 1.2.
Hey James, great video comparison!
I have a question regarding RF 50mm f1.4 and the RF 24mm f1.4 - the RF 35mm f1.4 rattles quite a bit. Is that the case with the new 50 and 24? All these 3 lenses seem to have very similar build quality, but I haven't seen any review talking about this.
Hey there! That's right, all of these primes have a rattle. I think it's the nature of the VCM technology.
Number 1 seems to me the 1.2
edit: I was wrong hahahaha
You were right!
I sold the RF 50 1.2. Too heavy. Too big. The RF 50mm 1.4L VCM produce not equal but similar results. On hiking it reduces the backpack weight significantly.
The price tag Canon puts on 1.4 does not make it "a lens for everybody" at all. Not even close mate
By everybody I meant both photo and video shooters. Grab yourself the 1.8 it’s great 👍
I have the 1.8 and to me its nearly all I need. Sadly the one thing it lacks is the image quality. Pretty much makes it useless for me. My zooms are way sharper and I rather take the extra weight of the 24-105mm f4 or even the 28-70 f2. Just for the IQ. I still dont have the 50 1.2.
The 1.4 seems good at first look but ive been looking at several tests and there is pretty bad onion rings in the bokeh. Something all new vcm lenses seem to suffer from for some reason. Tbf in this video it didnt look too bad, compared to the 1.8 atleast.
Just consider the nifty 50 as a 2.8 lens. Always shoot it at 2.8 where it shines. This video has just confirmed my findings :)
In Russia RF 50 1.2 is cheaper than 1.4 on 25-30% (even on 35%) !!! rf 50 1.2 = 1900$ and rf 50 1.4=2400$
wow! That seems like a great deal on the 50 1.2
@@JamesReader Yes its true and you can check it !)) Its open information.
The size of these lenses is idiotic!
Unless you’re shooting portraits in the daytime, the f1.8 is garbage. AF is abysmal, especially in lower light. If you’re considering a 50mm and have the budget, don’t waste your time and money on it. Put that cash into f1.4 or f1.2
Its a shame rf mount doesnt have a high quality small 50mm lens. 50 1.8 has too many compromises. Especially with bokeh and autofocus Motor.