Review: Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM

rbr

EOS M50
Sep 11, 2010
72
1
#21
Anyone who wants a 50 IS should look at the Tamron 45 f/1.8 VC. Sharp to the corners wide open, weather sealed, good VC implementation, quick and accurate AF, and good bokeh. It does have some CA wide open (easily fixed in post) and only goes to f/1.8 (a bit less background blur), but is excellent in every other respect.
I agree. I just got one a couple of months ago after wanting Canon to come out with something similar for years. I'm sorry that I waited so long to get it. At its current price it's a bargain. It is built like a tank and sharp corner to corner. The CA wide open is most noticeable up close with bright highlights and not really a substitute for a real macro lens, but I'm thrilled with it in every other aspect. I've owned all the current Canon 50's at one time or another as well as others for different camera brands. I wouldn't trade any of them for the Tamron.
 
Last edited:

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,479
117
#22
Please don't be offended when I ask, but are you certain that Peripheral Illumination Correction (found in the Lens Aberration Correction menu) is turned off in-camera as well as your RAW converter? By default, it's enabled on the EOS R. If it's enabled, you won't be seeing the natural vignetting of the lens.
No offense taken. But yeah I disabled everything in Lr and had as clean as possible raw file ...
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,479
117
#23
To make it short : stop focusing about how many stops. Too many variables to take into account.
No it isn’t ... I get the same exact results as Bryan regarding every other lens and lens defects, so I’m not prepared to accept “it’s the way it is”. There is and explanation and if I’m paying 2300 dollar for a lens and the vignetting is important to, I’m gonna find out who’s right;)
 
Likes: FramerMCB
May 22, 2013
96
4
Bergen, Norge
#24
Am I being shallow thinking this lens is not very attractive looking? (i.e. "styled" like the EF 100 2.8L IS Macro) I understand function over form here, but the extending (or retracting..?) front element, which is smallish, ugh,-I feel shallow. I want to love it (!),-and my EF 50 1.2L is the definition of a love-hate relationship -- but damn it the new lens just isn't sexy (really nice IQ, but...). What a world, eh?
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,479
117
#26
Looks like this forum is able to turn one of the world's best lenses into a piece of crap.
I wonder why...
Who said it was no good?

With green banding when using flash is happening at 1.65 stops and the corners are four stops darker, you do the math:p
 
Apr 1, 2014
21
4
#30
Yup , basically the same results.
What focus distance are you conducting the vignetting tests at? Ours vignetting tests are performed at infinity focus.
Could you take a picture of a blank (or nearly blank) white wall at f/1.2, infinity focus with the EOS R + RF 50 and share the RAW file with me? I'd be interested in seeing it. You can use https://wetransfer.com/ to email us the RAW image at info@the-digital-picture.com.
 
Likes: Viggo

eyeheartny

EOS R | 50 1.2 RF
Sep 3, 2018
44
21
#31
Am I being shallow thinking this lens is not very attractive looking? (i.e. "styled" like the EF 100 2.8L IS Macro) I understand function over form here, but the extending (or retracting..?) front element, which is smallish, ugh,-I feel shallow. I want to love it (!),-and my EF 50 1.2L is the definition of a love-hate relationship -- but damn it the new lens just isn't sexy (really nice IQ, but...). What a world, eh?
You're being shallow. I own the lens. It's a stunningly good performer. It balances well despite its weight. It feels incredibly solidly built, noticeably more so than the 85 1.4 IS. If you're actively and regularly shooting with it rather than looking at it sitting on a shelf, who gives a flying f&ck what the front element looks like? Lens "sexiness" is about how they feel in your hand and how they perform, not about what they look like. It feels great and delivers unbelievably good performance.
 
Likes: AE-1Burnham

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,479
117
#32
What focus distance are you conducting the vignetting tests at? Ours vignetting tests are performed at infinity focus.
Could you take a picture of a blank (or nearly blank) white wall at f/1.2, infinity focus with the EOS R + RF 50 and share the RAW file with me? I'd be interested in seeing it. You can use https://wetransfer.com/ to email us the RAW image at info@the-digital-picture.com.
I only tried it for a little while on a Canon Roadshow and didn’t do any scientific testing, but don’t think I kept most of the shots after seeing the vignetting wasn’t at all as bad as I feared. For the record, I did use it mostly outside.

But I am getting one in the near future so hopefully it will shoot like the one I tried and not like in your vigneting test.

It may well be that infinity focus and my 20-40m away makes a big difference, I don’t know..

Did you find it to have much less at “normal” distances? I’ll be shooting much more at 2-10 meters than aall the way at infinity so that might work.

I always use TDP as a reference and I’ve always found the same results as you guys do, so that’s why I was so surprised with this. And, kind of surprised a new high end 50 with new mount etc would actually be worse than the EF version...

Thanks for replying :)
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,479
117
#35
Here's just a screen shot from a non-corrected raw i Lr at f1.2. I just don't see any bad vignetting. It isn't non existent, but much more like the 85 L IS.
Skjermbilde 2018-11-07 kl. 19.22.01.png
 
Apr 1, 2014
21
4
#36
Here's just a screen shot from a non-corrected raw i Lr at f1.2. I just don't see any bad vignetting. It isn't non existent, but much more like the 85 L IS.
My guess is that the different focus distances and detailed frames (not a blank space) have contributed to the discrepancy you're seeing. There's definitely some vignetting visible in your sample pic; it gets pretty dark in the extreme corners. My guess is that if you had photographed the pavement looking straight down, you'd notice a larger difference in brightness between the very center of the frame and the extreme corners.

Unfortunately, there's no way to truly evaluate vignetting unless you do so under very controlled circumstances. A scene with lots of details and varied lighting can hide the effects of vignetting, especially if there's a pretty gradual transition going toward the darkened corners. Of course, we can spot vignetting when the circumstances make it apparent (clear skies and blank walls are great for that), but otherwise, even significant vignetting can often go unnoticed in a detail-filled composition.
 
Likes: Viggo

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,479
117
#37
My guess is that the different focus distances and detailed frames (not a blank space) have contributed to the discrepancy you're seeing. There's definitely some vignetting visible in your sample pic; it gets pretty dark in the extreme corners. My guess is that if you had photographed the pavement looking straight down, you'd notice a larger difference in brightness between the very center of the frame and the extreme corners.

Unfortunately, there's no way to truly evaluate vignetting unless you do so under very controlled circumstances. A scene with lots of details and varied lighting can hide the effects of vignetting, especially if there's a pretty gradual transition going toward the darkened corners. Of course, we can spot vignetting when the circumstances make it apparent (clear skies and blank walls are great for that), but otherwise, even significant vignetting can often go unnoticed in a detail-filled composition.
Hopefully it won’t bother me too much in actual shots. I’m still getting it, I was just hoping it would be around two stops (very minor). And simply better than the EF50L.

It’s way off topic, but did you guys see banding with flash that you didn’t see without flash? I spoke to Broncolor and they didn’t seem very eager to fix it. I can’t figure out if it’s the camera or flash trigger and it’s driving me mad:LOL:
 

eyeheartny

EOS R | 50 1.2 RF
Sep 3, 2018
44
21
#38
Goodness gracious, this is a silly thread. If @SeanS claims you need controlled conditions to see the "worst" vignetting, isn't this just a lot of hullaballoo about nothing consequential in actual real-world terms?
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,479
117
#39
Goodness gracious, this is a silly thread. If @SeanS claims you need controlled conditions to see the "worst" vignetting, isn't this just a lot of hullaballoo about nothing consequential in actual real-world terms?
Well, it’s only in recent history I learned the conditions for those results and they didn’t match my real world results. I said I would find what the reason was and now I have. Easier to accept.
 
Likes: eyeheartny