A Little Bit of Info on the Canon RF 20-50mm f/4L IS USM PZ

[yankiefrankie]

I would have been excited for this lens if it were a 2.8. I briefly owned a Sony A7C and the Tamron 20-40mm 2.8, and that lens was awesome (though I hated the camera). It’s small and light at 365g and, in my opinion, the best one-lens solution for ultimate compactness. I did wish it was a bit longer. If Canon offered something similar in a 2.8, but slightly larger and heavier to accommodate 40-50mm, I’d buy it right away. With this upcoming Canon f4 version, I’d still need to bring something faster, and it’s still going to be larger and heavier than the Tamron.

 

[Del Paso]

I just got a 67mm B+W T-Pro 007 clear filter for my not yet delivered RF 20-50.
Instead of those soft pouches, they now ship them in square metal boxes. A much better choice (protection!).
Edit: At least in the EU.

 

[Del Paso]

A naive question: Will this lens be internal zooming because it is a PZ design? I assume that it would be and I very much prefer a compact reasonably fast internal zoom covering 21, 28, 35 , and 50 mm focal ranges.

There's nothing naive about your question!

 

[neuroanatomist]

I just got a 67mm B+W T-Pro 007 clear filter for my not yet delivered RF 20-50.
Instead of those soft pouches, they now ship them in square metal boxes. A much better choice (protection!).
Edit: At least in the EU.

In the USA, too. They switched from the leather pouches to the metal alloy boxes some time in the second half of 2025. Despite stating in 2022 that, "From now on, all B+W filters will be delivered in high-quality cases made of genuine leather. The leather cases not only protect against scratches and dirt but can also be reused for storage and transport."


I dunno, maybe they got some blowback on using genuine leather from a group like PETA (of which I'm an affiliate...no, not that PETA, the other one...People who Eat Tasty Animals).

The 67mm Master 007 clear that I ordered on the same day that I ordered the 20-50/4L came in the metal box, as did the 43mm Master 007 clear that was delivered today alongside the RF 16/2.8.

Out of curiously, what made you go with the T-Pro instead of the Master? I've stuck with the Master line, which has the same spec as the prior XS-Pro mount. The T-Pro mount is very slightly thinner, but I find the XS-Pro to be more than thin enough, and I'll pass on the titanium-colored coating instead of the black coating on the same brass; I also prefer the knurling on the Master over the smooth T-Pro edges.

 

[AlanF]

View attachment 229944
I dunno, maybe they got some blowback on using genuine leather from a group like PETA (of which I'm an affiliate...no, not that PETA, the other one...People who Eat Tasty Animals).

Not a PITA - People Imbibing Tasty Alcohol?

 

[neuroanatomist]

Not a PITA - People Imbibing Tasty Alcohol?

Yes, that one, too.

 

[Del Paso]

In the USA, too. They switched from the leather pouches to the metal alloy boxes some time in the second half of 2025. Despite stating in 2022 that, "From now on, all B+W filters will be delivered in high-quality cases made of genuine leather. The leather cases not only protect against scratches and dirt but can also be reused for storage and transport."

View attachment 229944
I dunno, maybe they got some blowback on using genuine leather from a group like PETA (of which I'm an affiliate...no, not that PETA, the other one...People who Eat Tasty Animals).

The 67mm Master 007 clear that I ordered on the same day that I ordered the 20-50/4L came in the metal box, as did the 43mm Master 007 clear that was delivered today alongside the RF 16/2.8.

Out of curiously, what made you go with the T-Pro instead of the Master? I've stuck with the Master line, which has the same spec as the prior XS-Pro mount. The T-Pro mount is very slightly thinner, but I find the XS-Pro to be more than thin enough, and I'll pass on the titanium-colored coating instead of the black coating on the same brass; I also prefer the knurling on the Master over the smooth T-Pro edges.

Actually, I prefer the smoother knurling of the T-Pro version, especially when cleaning the filter. Besides, I never use any other filters on my lenses, so an easier removal has no importance to me. The clear filter stays on all the time. The boxes will be used for small camera screws or other parts.

 

[Del Paso]

Not a PITA - People Imbibing Tasty Alcohol?

Or did you perhaps mean People Inhibiting Tasty Ardbeg?
If so, I'm an active member of the sect!
Edit: "Imbibing". (I wasn't imbibed when I wrote "inhibiting", no idea why)

 

[AlanF]

Or did you perhaps mean People Inhibiting Tasty Ardbeg?
If so, I'm an active member of the sect!

I have never thought of you as a PITA.

 

[AlanF]

Or did you perhaps mean People Inhibiting Tasty Ardbeg?
If so, I'm an active member of the sect!
Edit: "Imbibing". (I wasn't imbibed when I wrote "inhibiting", no idea why)

Le Canon Français - Look at our headline news today about you Alsatian Canon guys.

France's 'patriotic' banquets rile hard left

The feasting phenomenon run by Le Canon Français has become a hot political issue.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Del Paso]

Le Canon Français - Look at our headline news today about you Alsatian Canon guys.

France's 'patriotic' banquets rile hard left

The feasting phenomenon run by Le Canon Français has become a hot political issue.

www.bbc.co.uk

I am not at all concerned! Not only because I hate such mass-meetings.
This beer-wine-food orgy took place in the Haut-Rhin region, while I live in the Bas-Rhin (High vs. low Rhine). We are by far the better part of Alsace!!!!!!
We don't very much like each other, the Haut-Rhinois are famous for being "über-patriotic", which mustn't be considered a quality.
But please, take my comment with a huge, an enormous, an elephantesque grain of salt...

 

[Del Paso]

TDP`s page shows that the RF 20-50mm will be another very good lens, optically speaking.
Good news for all of us who ordered it !
I can't wait to get mine!

 

[candyman]

TDP updated the review (06/20) with more info about image quality.

TDP review RF 20-50mm f/4L IS USM

Compared to RF 14-35 and RF 10-20 @20 this RF 20-50 shows less contrast especially in the mid-frame and periphery. Also sharpness is less in the mid-frame and periphery. All at f/4.
It performs better in the mid-frame and periphery compared to RF 24-105 @ 24, 35 and 50mm

 

[Del Paso]

TDP updated the review (06/20) with more info about image quality.

TDP review RF 20-50mm f/4L IS USM

Compared to RF 14-35 and RF 10-20 @20 this RF 20-50 shows less contrast especially in the mid-frame and periphery. Also sharpness is less in the mid-frame and periphery. All at f/4.
It performs better in the mid-frame and periphery compared to RF 24-105 @ 24, 35 and 50mm

I don't rely on TDP's or D. Abbott's chart pictures, among other reasons because they are taken at a distance which doesn't necessarily match my photography habits.
I have also noticed in the past that lenses I found exceptional performed badly for chart photography.
Therefore, I will test mine, and keep it or send it back. Yet, I'm quite convinced I'll keep it!

 

[candyman]

I don't rely on TDP's or D. Abbott's chart pictures, among other reasons because they are taken at a distance which doesn't necessarily match my photography habits.
I have also noticed in the past that lenses I found exceptional performed badly for chart photography.
Therefore, I will test mine, and keep it or send it back. Yet, I'm quite convinced I'll keep it!

I can fully understand that. Testing it yourself works best for decision-making.

I also read Richard's article from CanonNews about the RF 20-50's MTF. His explanation of the MTF confirms that the mid-frame and periphery are not as good as the center. Based on my own tests, I want to see what this means for architecture photography (indoor and outdoor) and landscape photography. I certainly believe this is a great lens for street photography.

 

[neuroanatomist]

...I want to see what this means for architecture photography (indoor and outdoor) and landscape photography. I certainly believe this is a great lens for street photography.

For me, the use case for the 20-50/4 will be as a walkaround lens on the R8. That will often include architecture, but just casual shots (for 'serious' shooting, I come back at blue hour with a tripod and a TS-E lens...for example (14-35/4 on the left, TS-E 17 on the right).



I'll have to choose between the 20-50/4 and the 24-105/4 for any given trip/outing, but in most urban settings the 20-50mm range will be more useful to me.

 

[candyman]

For me, the use case for the 20-50/4 will be as a walkaround lens on the R8. That will often include architecture

That is my use case as well. Combined with the R8.
Often, I don't have the opportunity to return to the location very quickly, or to stay there longer. So, I try to get the most out of it. I notice that traveling with a combination of R5 II, TS-E, 24-105, and 14-35 has a bit more impact on endurance during a day of city walking. So, I try a lighter (smaller) combination. But naturally, I want to sacrifice as little quality and flexibility (focal length choices) as possible. However, if the subject is worthwhile, and the result of the smaller/lighter setup is inferior (and I don't think this will be dramatically), then I put it on the list to go back to. But first, it remains to be seen how satisfied I am with the 20-50. So, just a little more patience.

 

[Del Paso]

I can fully understand that. Testing it yourself works best for decision-making.

I also read Richard's article from CanonNews about the RF 20-50's MTF. His explanation of the MTF confirms that the mid-frame and periphery are not as good as the center. Based on my own tests, I want to see what this means for architecture photography (indoor and outdoor) and landscape photography. I certainly believe this is a great lens for street photography.

Sure, mid-frame , periphery and corners are never as good in general as the centre. The Rf 20-50 shares this
characteristic with 99% (or more?) of all photo lenses.

 

[asingleredcactus@h]

I don't rely on TDP's or D. Abbott's chart pictures, among other reasons because they are taken at a distance which doesn't necessarily match my photography habits.
I have also noticed in the past that lenses I found exceptional performed badly for chart photography.
Therefore, I will test mine, and keep it or send it back. Yet, I'm quite convinced I'll keep it!

When it comes to video the amount of resolution required is vastly overstated...