TDP Review of the RF 15-35 f2.8 L IS

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,352
965
Have you seen Christopher Frost's review? The vignetting and distortion examples begin at 5 mins 30 secs.
yeah I saw that earlier, and it didn’t really convince me it’s worth it. I also saw his review of the 24-70, a lot of vignetting and mustache distortion. Didn’t really compare to the EF 24-70 mk2, but I couldn’t remember it being very poor with vignetting and although barrel distortion, no mustache? Correct me if I’m wrong. So for twice the money you get IS and worse optical performance except marginally better sharpness? Hmm... and with IBIS coming, is there enough reason to get the RF over the EF?
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,792
991
Southeastern USA
yeah I saw that earlier, and it didn’t really convince me it’s worth it. I also saw his review of the 24-70, a lot of vignetting and mustache distortion. Didn’t really compare to the EF 24-70 mk2, but I couldn’t remember it being very poor with vignetting and although barrel distortion, no mustache? Correct me if I’m wrong. So for twice the money you get IS and worse optical performance except marginally better sharpness? Hmm... and with IBIS coming, is there enough reason to get the RF over the EF?
I think you are asking all the right questions! But didn't this heavy vignetting get started with the ef 16-35mm f/2.8L III? Is it really due to chasing sharpness?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Viggo

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,352
965
I think you are asking all the right questions! But didn't this heavy vignetting get started with the ef 16-35mm f/2.8L III? Is it really due to chasing sharpness?
Yeah, I was thinking about a UWA faster than the excellent f4 IS, but the heavy vignetting of the 16-35 mk3 killed it for me. I hate distortion and vignetting the most of all aberations so yeah... ca sucks too, and perhaps distortion is worst and vignetting and CA share second place.

and I think the disappointment is bigger when it’s the new RF glass and I had such high expectations, and especially since I have the two f1.2 primes.

hopefully it’s a bit of the same story as with the 50, vignetting doesn’t look good TDP, but at different focusing distances it’s not that bad at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

Joules

EOS 7D MK II
Jul 16, 2017
583
542
Hamburg, Germany
The R and RP use special micro lenses to deal better with the small distance between the sensor and lens, right? It's the reason Canon calls the respective sensors 'new', despite clearly being the 5D IV and 6D II sensor underneath the filters/lenses.

I wonder if Canon could have some room to make further advancements in the micro lenses, to reduce vignetting? Especially with IBIS coming now, vignetting could actually become more noticeable. Do we have any idea if the beam splitting from the low pass filter also has an impact on vignetting, and if so, if a new low pass filter like the one from the 1DX III could help?
 

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
673
453
The R and RP use special micro lenses to deal better with the small distance between the sensor and lens, right? It's the reason Canon calls the respective sensors 'new', despite clearly being the 5D IV and 6D II sensor underneath the filters/lenses.

I wonder if Canon could have some room to make further advancements in the micro lenses, to reduce vignetting? Especially with IBIS coming now, vignetting could actually become more noticeable. Do we have any idea if the beam splitting from the low pass filter also has an impact on vignetting, and if so, if a new low pass filter like the one from the 1DX III could help?
I think the micro lenses are already their limit, I strongly suspect that that angle is why DPAF only covers 80% of the width and not 100%.