canon.jp's website - i've used it so much i don't even have to translate, and i don't even know japanese.
Upvote
0
Canon Officially Announces the Canon RF 45mm f/1.2 STM
- Thread starter Richard CR
- Start date
canon.jp's website - i've used it so much i don't even have to translate, and i don't even know japanese.
On the other hand it does do a remarkable job of converting stars into Cylon Raiders, if that's an aspect of photography you've been pursuing.
From:
www.the-digital-picture.com
From:
Canon RF 45mm F1.2 STM Lens Review
Is the Canon RF 45mm F1.2 STM Lens right for you? Learn all you need to know in The-Digital-Picture.com's review!
www.the-digital-picture.com
Upvote
0
I'm ok with the softness but certainly not expected this much CA. Looks like a 50 year old manual focus lens. The Nikon Z 50mm f1.8 S is exactly the same price in UK and there is no question which one is the better lens.
Upvote
0
justaCanonuser
Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Speaking about vintage fast glass look: I just received my ordered RF-M39 (Leica thread mount, LTM) adapter from Novoflex. Works very well on my R5 II. Here is my vintage glass beamed into new digital life.
Canon 50mm f/1.4 rangefinder lens, Model 1961 (really tiny for such fast glass):
And here Canon's 85mm 1.8 rangefinder lens, Model 1961:
First images are quite promising (too private familiy shots to show here). So that's an additional option, of course with manually focusing lenses, but with the magnifying option of the EVF focusing is quite easy if the motif isn't too vividly moving.
Notice the yellowish-brown tang of the lenses - typical for thorium containing glass. Interestingly, this slight tang doesn't interfere with the colors of the images out of the camera. They look totally natural. I knew from color film photography that this tang isn't an issue in real life but I wasn't sure about digital cameras.
Canon 50mm f/1.4 rangefinder lens, Model 1961 (really tiny for such fast glass):
And here Canon's 85mm 1.8 rangefinder lens, Model 1961:
First images are quite promising (too private familiy shots to show here). So that's an additional option, of course with manually focusing lenses, but with the magnifying option of the EVF focusing is quite easy if the motif isn't too vividly moving.
Notice the yellowish-brown tang of the lenses - typical for thorium containing glass. Interestingly, this slight tang doesn't interfere with the colors of the images out of the camera. They look totally natural. I knew from color film photography that this tang isn't an issue in real life but I wasn't sure about digital cameras.
Attachments
Upvote
0
justaCanonuser
Grab your camera, go out and shoot!
Correct - if you shoot mostly stills or nearly fixed people. If you want to use such lenses in the street or join a party, you need servo AF to get reliably in-focus shots with such lenses wide open. Given the lots of light such glass can suck in, even with my old 5D3 that was officially only sensitive to -2 EV in the center AF field (if I remember correctly), I could use AF in surprsingly dark settings. Of course, there were limits, but last but not least photography is based on light, not on the total absence of light
But as I said: if you shoot wide open real people enjoying themselves then you need servo AF. For me these modern AF systems were a sort of revelation, because they made superfast glass really useable. The servo AF setting was a sort of emancipation for these lenses from a very steady, quite frozen world.
Upvote
0
I'm interested in knowing if that still true for R5 MK2 like camera. Because all the videos I saw about configuring the camera said to use Servo AF.
Upvote
0
It really depends on the setting. Disco lights, for instance, can make servo AF very unreliable, because the colors are always changing. Plus, it's not that hard finding venues dark enough that servo AF doesn't work, specially off-centre, where lenses have the most significant vignettes wide open.
I don't mean to sound rude, but I'm confused: you disposed of your time watching videos on how to setup the camera, but didn't bother reading its specifications on the manufacturer's website?
Yes, the asterisks are still there, they'll probably always be.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Not yet, only got it a week ago and didn't had time to read the full manual.
Upvote
0
The aperture dependent focus shift of EF50L is from the undercorrected SA which also gave the lens its character in oof rendition. Which is less of a problem on mirrorless as focusing can work stepped down. But this new 45mm, from what I can see in the sample images actually feels more like overcorrected SA thus having a more vintage look than the EF 50L dreamy look for the bokeh. Which is also part of the reason why I'm disappointed that it is not the patent previously released.
Upvote
0
First of all the weather sealing would be worse (In this case can be fixed by adding a UV filter as the filter thread seem to be on the fixed barrel).
Then as you said the focusing would be less then optimal.
Also all groups moving means it lacks optical compensation for focus breathing and close up IQ degradation. One can argue not a problem at this price point.
Upvote
0
*lol* What a w** dream. Especially with the "L" in it.
But I can help: just add about $500 and in return you'll recieve f/1.4:
Go and buy an RF 50mm f/1.4 L VCM
Upvote
0
Do you think it's a good idea to share the forums across multiple articles? It's quite confusing to me.
Anyways. Thanks for the technical article about the lens and the AF note. Would you mind writing an article about the DPAF in details? The marketing materials don't say much (as usual). Like the info that every pixel is split in two, why it has to be like that instead of using neighbour (or every other) pixels, what's the impact on computing power (obviously there are double the number of pixels needs to be processed), what are the advantages and disadvantages against Sony solution. It also looks like DPAF should be billion times better than the other systems but in reality Sony seems to be just fine with their AF system.. etc. I know it can be explained in a comment but a full article with some pictures and some related info would be nice I think.
Anyways. Thanks for the technical article about the lens and the AF note. Would you mind writing an article about the DPAF in details? The marketing materials don't say much (as usual). Like the info that every pixel is split in two, why it has to be like that instead of using neighbour (or every other) pixels, what's the impact on computing power (obviously there are double the number of pixels needs to be processed), what are the advantages and disadvantages against Sony solution. It also looks like DPAF should be billion times better than the other systems but in reality Sony seems to be just fine with their AF system.. etc. I know it can be explained in a comment but a full article with some pictures and some related info would be nice I think.
Upvote
0
Actually, the 50 VCM is the best optically corrected VCM lens of them all. It vignettes and distorts less than the RF 50mm f/1.2. It's a terrific lens.
Upvote
0
What pointless video features would that entail? All I see is a good photo lens that can also be used in video.
Upvote
0
For a start, an aperture ring which is usable for photography only if you have the two latest (until 3 days ago) and more expensive bodies, while all the other bodies make no use of it. But I admit I didn't really went deep on VCM's features as their price is unreachable for me, so I didn't even bother reading anything specific.
Quick question: does the new R6 III make use of that aperture ring in photo mode? Or it's still reserved for R5 II and R1? I jut searched online but couldn't find any certain answer.
Upvote
0
It’s not reserved to the R5 II and R1, it’s “cameras released in June 2024 and onwards”
So yes, it must work on the R6 III in photo mode.
That’s actually the only difference there is when using a VCM lens with older bodies.
I’m glad that thing has a lock switch, as I’d never use a smooth aperture ring for photography, anyway. I would consider it if it had hard clicks, hard enough to stay in place on the move, but not like that, neither with gentle clicks, as other manufacturers have been implementing.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
@Snapster:
I think, that @m4ndr4ke summed it up perfectly.
It seems you just read VCM, see the aperture ring and think that lens must be bad.
It's still about optics, IQ, contrast, distortion, CA and fast AF. What of that does the 50 VCM miss here?
And what do you think, your "virtual" 50/1.8L would be better at? For unter $1k? Really?
Try the VCM, compare it, but don't complain about something, you don't even really know.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
