OpticalLimits Reviews the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS Macro STM

[Profit007]

Focus Shift a "non-existent problem " ??? Tell that to all the people who bought the EF50 f1.2 It's a huge problem with that lens if you shoot close to your subject between f1.6 & f2.8.
This is why the reviews of the EF50 f1.2 were always so mixed, lots of people had no idea what was going on but had/have problems vs others who don't shoot up close around f2.0 and have no problems.
On the other hand, the EF85 f1.2 & 1.4 have no focus shift. I've shot many (probably 1000) images up close with the 85 f1.2, something you can't do with the EF50 unless you stick to f1.2 or >f2.8

I don't know if the RF35 has a focus shift design flaw. If it does (as the reviewer claimed), then DPAF should mostly cover it up. If a future RF camera also uses phase detect AF that's when the problems will show.

 

[Travel_Photographer]

Focus Shift a "non-existent problem " ??? Tell that to all the people who bought the EF50 f1.2 It's a huge problem with that lens if you shoot close to your subject between f1.6 & f2.8.
This is why the reviews of the EF50 f1.2 were always so mixed, lots of people had no idea what was going on but had/have problems vs others who don't shoot up close around f2.0 and have no problems.

I don't know if the RF35 has a focus shift design flaw. If it does (as the reviewer claimed), then DPAF should mostly cover it up. If a future RF camera also uses phase detect AF that's when the problems will show.

I was only referring to the 35mm F1.8, where focus shift is not a problem.

As you state, other lenses especially wider aperture lenses (e.g
F1.2) it can be an issue.

 

[Profit007]

I was only referring to the 35mm F1.8, where focus shift is not a problem.

OK, great to hear. Thanks for sharing.

 

[Dantana]

Does anyone here have both this lens and the 35 1.4 L v1? I love the images that I get out of my 1.4, but the size of it with the adapter is kind of funny compared to the 1.8. Curious if anyone has compared the 2.

 

[ozturert]

Out of curiosity, what do you like better about the RF 35 over the EF 35/2 IS?

From what I’ve seen and read, I had the impression the RF 35 may be a touch sharper, and of course it has its macro ability, but the EF has better bokeh (probably not noticeable at close focus distances but noticeable one the subject is a bit further away), faster AF and perhaps slightly less CA. I’ve never shot the the RF myself though, and I haven’t owned the EF for years, so I haven’t tested them head to head myself.

To me, all short lenses' bokeh is distracting if subject is more than 3-4 meters away. I think this RF lens is optically more corrected so it might have slightly more distracting bokeh than 35mm f2.0 IS.
CA in RF lens is never distracting for me. I always process my RAWs and any software can correct it anyway. CA isn't so high to damage the edges as well (like in some lenses). Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 is a great lens but I had huge CA problems in adverse light conditions. In some cases CA was so bad that trying to correct it created very obvious halos.
EF 35mm f2.0 IS USM is slightly faster to AF, but then RF isn't that slow and AF accuracy is perfect so I think RF has the overall edge.

 

[jd7]

To me, all short lenses' bokeh is distracting if subject is more than 3-4 meters away. I think this RF lens is optically more corrected so it might have slightly more distracting bokeh than 35mm f2.0 IS.
CA in RF lens is never distracting for me. I always process my RAWs and any software can correct it anyway. CA isn't so high to damage the edges as well (like in some lenses). Sony Zeiss FE 55mm f1.8 is a great lens but I had huge CA problems in adverse light conditions. In some cases CA was so bad that trying to correct it created very obvious halos.
EF 35mm f2.0 IS USM is slightly faster to AF, but then RF isn't that slow and AF accuracy is perfect so I think RF has the overall edge.

Thanks for the information oztuert. And I know what you mean about the bokeh of shorter focal length lenses.
I like my 35 Art too much to give it up, I think, but I sometimes miss the small size and light weight of my old 35/2 IS, so I do see the attraction in the RF 35/1.8 IS. Glad to hear you are enjoying yours.

 

[Joules]

If it does (as the reviewer claimed), then DPAF should mostly cover it up. If a future RF camera also uses phase detect AF that's when the problems will show.

DPAF IS phase detect AF. It won't cover up anything. As was said before, the Camera could simply take a selected aperture value into account during focusing and thereby make focus shift irrelevant in AF mode.