Close Menu

    A look at the Canon RF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM MTF

    By Updated:207 Comments3 Mins Read Canon Lens News
    rfs1018header 1536x518 - A look at the Canon RF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM MTF

    The Canon RF-S 10-18 f/4.5-6.3 IS STM has arrived and issued in the era finally where we can look at the RF-S system as a “system” and not just APS-C Camera bodies with a couple of kit lenses.

    When the EOS-M first came out, the EF-M 11-22mm was “the” lens that got me interested in the system and I wasn't alone in that regard. I suspect that Canon is hoping for the same with the RF-S 10-18mm. Of course, I was immediately curious about how this lens looks compared to its competitor, the EF-S 10-18mm which can be also used on the RF-S camera bodies.

    I think the first thing we have to look at is just how small this lens is, especially when compared to the EF-S 10-18mm, which is the only APS-C UWA Zoom available up to now for the RF-S mount. This sizing is approximate. However, it makes it obvious to which lens is better as a general walkaround ultra-wide lens for the RF-S mount. No questions at all about this.

    image 728x468 - A look at the Canon RF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM MTF

    Special thanks to www.camerasize.com for the original RF 10-18mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM images, and the EF-S 10-18mm. At the time of this writing, they didn't have the RF-S 10-18mm in their database yet.

    Now we could probably just end this article right here, but hey, we have to look at the MTFs because that's just the kind of camera nerd I am. As I mentioned in other places, lens designers are always faced with 3 priorities; size/weight, cost, and optical quality. All three priorities are ones in which the designers have to balance for a lens.

    In this lens, we have an extremely small lens, that is inexpensive and when we look at the MTF we see good image quality, equally as good as the EF-S counterpart. I'd suggest that the resolution is even slightly better in the corners at the business end of the lens, 10mm, with the RF-S lens and also the resolution falloff is much more natural with the RF-S lens.

    That's just insanely great, and a testament to how designers have far more flexibility with mirrorless camera mounts than they did with the SLR EF mount.

    image 1 - A look at the Canon RF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM MTF

    If you were happy with the EF-S 10-18 IS STM, then you will be equally as happy if not more so because of the extremely small size of the RF-S 10-18mm. This lens will be a homerun hit for Canon.

    If you are an UWA bigot like me, and always looking for the bang for the buck lenses, this is it. Get it quickly because it's bound to be stuck on backorder.

    Preorder the Canon RF-S 10-18mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM

    Some of our articles may include affiliate links. If you purchase through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you.

    Go to discussion...

    Share.

    Related Posts

    207 comments

    3. Manual aperture ring on the 24-105 is cool. It's listed as "for video use", but I wonder if it could also be used for photography?

      And the silver ring on the 200-800, instead of the red ring, is cool. I wonder how many more of these we might see in the future?

      Not sure I see this getting into my kit bag - I'm happy with my 24-70 f2.8L, especially the size. But, I'm glad so many people are happy to see this lens. Looks like a fantastic option.
    6. This is about to be the most hater thing I\'ve ever posted on this website, but . . . Is it just me, or is the 24-105/2.8 just a touch ugly looking? Like, what is going on with the wide spacing of the marks on the focus ring? It looks like the EF 200/2.8 L II, released in 1996.
    7. And the silver ring on the 200-800, instead of the red ring, is cool. I wonder how many more of these we might see in the future?
      We’ve seen them in the past. Canon said this about the EF 75-300 III (cheap, low-IQ Rebel kit telezoom): “The front part of the zoom ring now sports a silver ring for a luxury touch.” :rolleyes:
    8. Like, what is going on with the wide spacing of the marks on the focus ring? It looks like the EF 200/2.8 L II, released in 1996.

      Focus Ring with Tactile Feedback​

      As you rotate the focus ring in either direction you'll feel soft click-stops that give you a sense of how much you're adjusting.
    9. The times, they are a-changin’. White, non-L lenses with weather sealing? Hoods included with inexpensive, non-L lenses? Yes and yes.
      Separate case for the 200-800 available which probably makes sense. I wonder how many users of white lenses actually use the case that came with it
      - at least for the smaller ones.
    12. Manual aperture ring on the 24-105 is cool. It's listed as "for video use", but I wonder if it could also be used for photography?
      The aperture ring will work for photos but not on the current RF bodies. The press release I read on DPReview stated it’ll work with upcoming bodies released in 2024 and beyond.

    13. Focus Ring with Tactile Feedback​

      As you rotate the focus ring in either direction you'll feel soft click-stops that give you a sense of how much you're adjusting.

      "Don't knock it 'til you try it," as they say, but I don't imagine I would enjoy this even for video work (the intended use case).

    14. So far the most extensive first take.
      Hopefully, later bodies will fix the distortion correction when fast zooming.
      The centre of the frame drifts a bit when zooming.
      And the power zoom adapter could have been better designed for the price.
      Looks great otherwise, even sharper than the 24-70/2.8
    16. certainly a couple of firsts.... but "break the internet"?
      Regarding the 24-105, the amount of cheers I'm seeing on YouTube video and social media posts are really quite impressive.
    17. I must be the oddbird here, but I'm most interested in the new rf-s 10-18mm, the other two are out of my (justified) price range right now. 200-800 is still something to look after, and might be added to my collection some day.
      Personally not interested in 24-105 F2.8.
      Now I have to wait the reviews of the wonderfully compact, light and small rf-s 10-18mm. And I think it is really going to be very satisfying lens for me. Must be as good as ef-m 11-22, or better, right? And with a hood!! Wow!
    19. Regarding the 24-105, the amount of cheers I'm seeing on YouTube video and social media posts are really quite impressive.
      The early comments on DPR are remarkably good - must still be bedtime for most of their trolls. 3 very impressive looking lenses - although as always the detailed reviews will tell the real story.

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment