Review: Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L USM

Feb 13, 2016
243
29
#41
Great review as usual. The lens looks very big but maybe that's because the camera is small. Bryan needs to spell check the article though. I see some typo's which is unusual of him. I think the lens will drive the EOS-R
The lens looks very big because it is very big, not just because the camera is small.
 

eyeheartny

EOS R | 50 1.2 RF
Sep 3, 2018
54
28
#42
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.
Oh it's not YOU being silly. I think the people complaining about the vignetting are ridiculous. :)
 
Likes: Del Paso

eyeheartny

EOS R | 50 1.2 RF
Sep 3, 2018
54
28
#45
Sep 6, 2018
31
21
#46
Here's the RF 50 1.2 vs the Milvus 50 1.4 on the 5DSR
RF 50 1.2 vs the Otus 55 1.4 on the 1DS MKIII

To my eye the RF and the Otus are comparable in terms of sharpness and correcting for CA. Worth noting the RF is 40% cheaper and has excellent AF vs the MF of the Otus.

The Milvus has visible CA on the 5DSR and the 1DS MKIII.
I wish someone can do a detail comparison between Canon RF 50mm F1.2 vs Zeiss Otus 1.4/55.

I do not think it is fair to compare Milvus 1.4/50 with it. Canon RF 50mm F1.2 should be on the same level with Otus 1.4/55.
 

eyeheartny

EOS R | 50 1.2 RF
Sep 3, 2018
54
28
#47
I wish someone can do a detail comparison between Canon RF 50mm F1.2 vs Zeiss Otus 1.4/55.

I do not think it is fair to compare Milvus 1.4/50 with it. Canon RF 50mm F1.2 should be on the same level with Otus 1.4/55.
I literally gave you exactly what you asked for. It's a side by side comparison of the RF 50 and the Otus. Is the second link not sufficient for you? :mad:
 
Apr 1, 2014
21
4
#48
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:
From Bryan this morning when I asked:

I had not noticed any [banding with flash use], but went looking harder. I can’t see any banding in my butterfly images (Canon flash), even if I push them by 3 stops. I don’t see banding in the +3 noise test results in our tool (hot lights). If I push the image quality test results (lit by Godox AD600Pros) by 3 stops, I see faint noise that perhaps could be considered banding, but that's a stretch.
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,531
150
#49
From Bryan this morning when I asked:

I had not noticed any [banding with flash use], but went looking harder. I can’t see any banding in my butterfly images (Canon flash), even if I push them by 3 stops. I don’t see banding in the +3 noise test results in our tool (hot lights). If I push the image quality test results (lit by Godox AD600Pros) by 3 stops, I see faint noise that perhaps could be considered banding, but that's a stretch.
Okay! That’s actually excellent news. That means it probably isn’t the camera Here’s an example of mine. I noticed that it didn’t show as much in this low res version, but still plainly visible... I pushed a bit more than to just show it, but it still is a big issue..
B09478C9-6044-4093-ABC2-76BA95FD7277.jpeg
 
Apr 1, 2014
21
4
#50
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?
To be clear, I said you need controlled circumstances to evaluate vignetting (from a testing standpoint), not necessarily see it.
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,531
150
#51
I was quite bummed last night, shipped off my sold 35 L II....

Today I’m happy again, a brand spanking new RF 50 on it’s way to me:LOL:
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,531
150
#52
I’m not to familiar with the new forum, is there albums of each lens and/or body still? Where are all the pictures? :p

Is this the thread to post RF50 images?
 

Viggo

EOS 5DS R
Dec 13, 2010
3,531
150
#53
Just a few minutes I got my RF50, what a lens!:D I’ve tried it before and loved it so I knew what it was like.

ONe thing I didn’t remember is that there is NO room for my fingers when using it, I usually release my grip a little when double tapping the screen, and my fingers are stuck, hopefully I will just get used to it, but it feels very weird off the bat... not right..

*EDIT* Got used to it. This lens is incredible...
 
Last edited:

eyeheartny

EOS R | 50 1.2 RF
Sep 3, 2018
54
28
#54
Just a few minutes I got my RF50, what a lens!:D I’ve tried it before and loved it so I knew what it was like.

ONe thing I didn’t remember is that there is NO room for my fingers when using it, I usually release my grip a little when double tapping the screen, and my fingers are stuck, hopefully I will just get used to it, but it feels very weird off the bat... not right..

*EDIT* Got used to it. This lens is incredible...
What did you mean about no room for your fingers? Curious...
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
#59
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.
Another endorsement for the Tamron 45/1.8 from me. Although very sharp it has the softest bokeh.