First look: Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM Image Quality

brad-man

Semi-Reactive Member
Jun 6, 2012
1,673
580
S Florida
I had a go with the RF50 yesterday and my god what a lens! I’m buying for sure! The IQ at 1.2 is almost not rivaled by anything larger than f2.0 in any lens ever. It’s amazing.

And I did not notice a lot of vignetting at all, so I don’t know how TDP got theirs to show four stops. I say it’s very close to the 85 f1.4 L.

And the lack of aberrations even in the extreeeeme cornes is crazy. It’s sharper at 1.2 by quite some bit than my 35 L II... AF is instant and so certain. It made my 85 L IS seem like a toy. Also much lighter than I expected.
And therein lies Canon's marketing prowess. They aren't going to force you to switch over to mirrorless, the're going to make you want to...
 
Upvote 0

Talys

Canon R5
CR Pro
Feb 16, 2017
2,127
451
Vancouver, BC
On the wide end, the RF 50mm 1.2 not only blows away the EF 50mm 1.2L but is impressive against other lenses including the excellent EF 24-70mm 2.8L II (50mm at f/2.8).

It had better blow the 24-70 out of the water... that's a prime vs a zoom that's substantially cheaper :D

The EF50/1.2 was never a sharp lens (heck, just compare it with a 50/1.8STM), but that's not why anyone bought it. On the other hand, if you compare RF50/1.2L IS with EF 85/1.4L IS, they are both razor sharp.
 
Upvote 0
Dec 13, 2010
4,932
1,608
It had better blow the 24-70 out of the water... that's a prime vs a zoom that's substantially cheaper :D

The EF50/1.2 was never a sharp lens (heck, just compare it with a 50/1.8STM), but that's not why anyone bought it. On the other hand, if you compare RF50/1.2L IS with EF 85/1.4L IS, they are both razor sharp.
I think he meant 50 vs 24-70 both wide open. And that’s true the 50 is sharper. The 35 L II matches the 24-70 at 35 both wide open.

I’m sorry to disappoint you, but the 85 f1.4 L IS isn’t even remotely close to the wicked sharpness of the RF50 both wide open...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
May 4, 2011
1,175
251
The 85 1.4 is super sharp at apertures f2.8 and narrower. It also produces decent results at f2 - on the 5DSR no less - and if you put your subject in the center, even wide open at 1.4. The fact that this lens is stabilized puts it at a major advantage, IMO. At least until Canon finally comes out with an IBIS R body.

The RF 50 looks like a winner...I have been waiting for a decent 50 from Canon ever since I started shooting their DSLRs. Just hate that I can’t get it for use on my 5D cameras!
 
Upvote 0
Dec 13, 2010
4,932
1,608
Couple of sample shots, I didn't want to use center, but see more in high contrast and typical problem areas with corner performance. I love how easy it is to use extreme corner focus.

Nothing special, but I think they show what I wanted to know, CA, sharpness in the extreme corners, vignetting, bokeh and focus etc..

Everything at "0" in Lightroom, except some added sharpness.

f1.2 sample
f1.2 extreme left upper corner focus
 
Upvote 0
Dec 13, 2010
4,932
1,608
Nice. One of the issues I have with the EF version - two, actually - is consistency of focus at 1.2 with outer points (i.e., away from the center), and focus shift when stopped down, particularly between 2.8 and 4. Does the RF version suffer from these setbacks? Some reviews mentioned occasional backfocus at 1.2. Honest opinions...
All the shots I took were spot on at least. It wasn’t more than a hundred or so, but 77 of them would have been off with a DSLR and the EF 50:p

The focus shift was due to lack of a floating element in the EF version, and is almost the only lens in the EF lineup that suffers that bad with it.

I didn’t shoot at any other aperture than 1.2, so I can’t say for certain. But considering all the cr@p Canon got for the 50 L they surely have corrected it all in RF.
 
Upvote 0
A straight EF version would be even better! I know the adapter thing was a joke, but I wonder if Canon is really only going to make an RF version of this lens.


Physically impossible. The whole reason this type of lens with this particular performance exists is due to the reduced flange distance. That's the whole reason behind the new mount. New options for lens designers never before possible. With this new mount, Canon is going to wipe the FF mirrorless floor with everyone. If they can create legends in the past with a huge flange distance/mirror box space, imagine what they can do with the rear element right up against the sensor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
A straight EF version would be even better! I know the adapter thing was a joke, but I wonder if Canon is really only going to make an RF version of this lens.

Seek to use RF lenses to EF? Unfortunately, it will not work because of the RF lenses' flange focal length was 20mm compared with EF lenses are 44mm. It means the RF lenses must inside the EF camera body by 24mm. If you can recall an incident by Canon changed FD lenses, 42mm to EF caused an incompatible situation. Canon did again twice at this time with flange situation. DO NOT buy any RF lenses or Canon R camera bodies. They are worthless!!! Canon will have to redesign RF lenses to EF in the coming future.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
2,383
1,064
Davidson, NC
This one, yes!
For a little slice of the image, mainly. With the background so blurry, that should make the part in focus seem sharper. I have a 55mm f/1.2 for my film camera. I must have got it with the body to start off with. I haven’t used it in so long that I don’t recall any particulars about it or how I used it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0