OpticalLimits (formerly photozone.de) has published its review of the Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L IS VCM. This is a lens that most have been waiting breathlessly for, and it does not disappoint. OpticalLimits (like myself) have a strong aversion to digital correction. So when a lens scores 8/10 WITH digital correction, you know they think it's pretty good.
OpticalLimits is pretty critical when it comes to lens testing and to be frank – not many 35mm lenses for mirrorless have passed his critical eye – which is why I certainly like reading his reviews. Doing a quick look through OpticalLimits indicates that this is the best-performing mirrorless 35mm lens they have tested to date.
Also the price. The Canon EF 35mm F1.4L II IS USM was $1750 when it was announced in 2016, which adjusting for inflation comes in at around $2300. The Canon RF 35mm f1.4 VCM is $1500. So not only is the new lens optically excellent, but it's also far cheaper than the EF model it's replacing.
Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM in Stock
We also have to always consider that lens designers are working with parameters that roughly look like this when they are developing a new lens. If you have read as many patents as I have, you'd realize that the designers agonize over optical quality versus weight, and you can be sure that management is concerned about cost. These three main design considerations make up the delicate balancing act that Canon and other lens manufacturers have to balance.
In the case of this lens, Canon decided that cost size and weight are important, and had to implement software correction to have the desired optical quality.
Key features of the Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM include:
- Full-Frame Format | f/1.4 to f/16
- Extremely Fast Design, Advanced Optics
- Voice Coil Motor (VCM) for Rear Focus
- Nano USM for Fast Floating Autofocus
- Manual Iris/Full-Time Focus Rings
- Air Sphere (ASC) Coating
- Two Aspherical Elements, Two UD Elements
- Rounded 11-Blade Diaphragm
- Weather-Sealed Design
- Attachable Rear Gel Filter Holder
Scoring Results
- Optical Quality: 8/10
- Build Quality: 9/10
- Price / Performance: 7/10
Conclusions
The performance of the Canon RF 35mm f/1.4 L VCM is a bit difficult to summarize into a single figure. If image sharpness is what you value the most, this is certainly a lens for you. It's sharp at f/1.4 already and downright superb from f/2 to f/8. It's also resistant to flare, and auto-correction does a good job of correcting vignetting and distortion. The lens does, however, rely heavily on a correction profile to achieve this, which is a bit disappointing for a $1500 USD lens. The correction profile doesn't help with the high axial CAs, and the focus shift is a bit of a concern in manual focus mode, at least. The quality of bokeh is good for such a lens.
https://opticallimits.com/canon/canon-rf/canon-rf-35mm-f-1-4-l-vcm-review/
Overall I think this is a very good test result from a reviewer that has a long history of being accurate over decades of test results.
Canon RF 35mm f/1.4L VCM in Stock
Source: OpticalLimits
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Here's how it works. |
My primary use case would very low light bar/venue live music with no augmented lighting. I’ve used trinity 2.8s in these scenarios and the noise from digital corrections is quite apparent in my RAWs so I’m still waiting for reviews in this use case but it’s good news none the less.
Still hoping for a 1.2 stills oriented version with less reliance on post optical corrections and wouldn’t mind a heavier lens if it meant I could get better IQ. In the meantime I’ll continue to use the RF 50 1.2…
Thank you, @photozone.de.
Seems to be a lens worth saving for, if you want a compact, high quality OEM 35/1.4.
But agreed that hopefully we can get a f/1.2L at some point or Canon lets Sigma release their 35mm f/1.2 Art for RF.
I have no wish to put thousands of distorted images through Lightroom or DPP first before having to put them in another library.
I\'ve already fallen into this trap with my RF14-35mm.
Other than that, great, accurate lens that is sharper than the EF mkii version.
what kind of raw converter in 2024 doesn't have basic corrections?
some of that is fundamentals of mirrorless and short flange distances and not actually as much the optical design.
Not sure why some people are apparently losing their sh!t over half a stop (or claiming it’s 2 stops), I guess people like to complain or want to justify not spending the money.
they don't .. but then they increase the size of the lens and complexity of the lens then.
everything is a tradeoff somewhere.
:)
I'm always asking why and would love to hear more details, @Canon Rumors Guy . I've gotten some good answers for digital correction of vignetting, if you have a scene that absolutely demands the full DR from the center and the very deep corners, though the only practical examples I've heard of so far are astro.
But is this the only digital correction you're referring to? Or do you have specific issues with other correction? I'd legit like to know what these issues are but no-one actually has been able to take the time to explain it to me.
Vignetting comes from many sources. One is called cos^4 vignetting and is due to photons hitting a sensor at a fairly strong angle imparting far less energy to the sensor, the same way a 100mph fastball hitting a glancing blow would hurt a batter far less than one that hit him full-on and stopped. The closer the lens's "exit pupil" is to the sensor, the greater that angle. The "exit pupil" isn't necessarily the rear lens element though, instead it's the point that the light appears to be coming from: if you look through a lens from the back, at an angle, the bright circle you see is the exit pupil and it generally appears inside the lens. But the two tend to move hand in hand.
My worry is more about mechanical vignetting, where the effort to make a lens smaller and cheaper results in it making football-shaped out-of-focus highlights instead of full circles. If that highlight shape is only half the area of a normal full circle in a similar out-of-focus highlight in the center of a shot, that will make that part of the photo a stop darker. Generally speaking I don't like these and would love to make a lens that doesn't have them. But, this has nothing to do with mirrorless or short-flange.
Not an apple fan boy, been using Aperture/Photos for over 20 years as main viewing library. Always have Lightroom if needed.
Wish Apple would invest a bit more into it.
Disappointing that there is no similar review yet of the Sony 35/1.4 GM which is $100 cheaper than the new Canon lens, and is likely why Canon couldn't get away with charging $2300 for a 35/1.4L prime anymore.