BEWARE: RF 14-35 f/4L IS USM

LSXPhotog

Automotive, Motorsports, Commerical, & Real Estate
CR Pro
Apr 2, 2015
554
581
www.diossiphotography.com
At this time, the RF 14-35 is largely unusable when shooting RAW and using either Lightroom, Adobe Camera RAW, or Capture One. I'm eager to get this lens profile from Canon ASAP, but as it stands right now, this lens may not usable if you shoot RAW and use the aforementioned software to edit your photos. As someone that is continually working with this gear daily, I just shot test shots with the lens around our lakes in preparation for a large commercial real estate job on Thursday. I knew about the distortion of the lens, but didn't realize Canon and Adobe had not released the lens profiles yet...so once imported into Lightroom, you're met with nearly fisheye distortion and black corners.

I have taken test chart images and have concluded that the RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 is the closest profile for wide angle shots.

In the interim, the profile for the RF 24-105 f/4-7.1...but it's not 100% perfect as it only works for 14-18mm range - especially not suggested for critical architectural work. Keep in-camera lens optimization for chromatic aberration ON, as this looks to be baking itself into the RAW file and is VERY good...the lens is easily corrected for CA.

That said, this lens looks incredible in DPP where correction is fully supported. I'm not afraid of digital correction, but if you are...this is obviously not the lens for you.

ALSO: This does not impact video when you manually enable profile correction. So, for now, I will only be able to use this lens for video work. Hopefully we see the lens supported within the next 30 days.
 
Last edited:

canonmike

EOS R6
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
454
392
At this time, the RF 14-35 is largely unusable when shooting RAW and using either Lightroom, Adobe Camera RAW, or Capture One. I'm eager to get this lens profile from Canon ASAP, but as it stands right now, this lens may not usable if you shoot RAW and use the aforementioned software to edit your photos. As someone that is continually working with this gear daily, I just shot test shots with the lens around our lakes in preparation for a large commercial real estate job on Thursday. I knew about the distortion of the lens, but didn't realize Canon and Adobe had not released the lens profiles yet...so once imported into Lightroom, you're met with nearly fisheye distortion and black corners.

I have taken test chart images and have concluded that the RF 24-105 f/4-7.1 is the closest profile for wide angle shots.

In the interim, the profile for the RF 24-105 f/4-7.1...but it's not 100% perfect as it only works for 14-18mm range - especially not suggested for critical architectural work. Keep in-camera lens optimization for chromatic aberration ON, as this looks to be baking itself into the RAW file and is VERY good...the lens is easily corrected for CA.

That said, this lens looks incredible in DPP where correction is fully supported. I'm not afraid of digital correction, but if you are...this is obviously not the lens for you.

ALSO: This does not impact video when you manually enable profile correction. So, for now, I will only be able to use this lens for video work. Hopefully we see the lens supported within the next 30 days.
Lack of software support is almost always an issue with any new lens release. When Adobe got greedy and switched to a monthly subscription platform, I made the switch to Capture One. Will be interesting to see how long it takes for CO to support the RF14-35 F4L lens.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
26,129
4,730
Lack of software support is almost always an issue with any new lens release. When Adobe got greedy and switched to a monthly subscription platform, I made the switch to Capture One. Will be interesting to see how long it takes for CO to support the RF14-35 F4L lens.
Agreed. Same with DxO PhotoLab, and it applies to both new lenses and new cameras. I just resign myself to using DPP for a few months with a new body, with a new lens I can create a decent profile myself.
 

canonmike

EOS R6
CR Pro
Jan 5, 2013
454
392
Agreed. Same with DxO PhotoLab, and it applies to both new lenses and new cameras. I just resign myself to using DPP for a few months with a new body, with a new lens I can create a decent profile myself.
A good strategy in the interim.
 

HenryL

EOS R3, R5
CR Pro
Apr 1, 2020
321
804
Lack of software support is almost always an issue with any new lens release. When Adobe got greedy and switched to a monthly subscription platform, I made the switch to Capture One. Will be interesting to see how long it takes for CO to support the RF14-35 F4L lens.
Likely a long time before C1 adds a profile for this lens. Even in their latest version they only have profile support for the original 4 RF lenses (35, 24-205, 50 1.2 and 28-70) as well as the 15-35. I'm a fan or Capture One it's my favorite editor overall, but it's Canon lens support is severely lacking. DxO seems to be the fastest to add new RF lenses.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: canonmike

aceflibble

EOS RP
May 8, 2015
355
192
DxO are fastest because they work out the corrections themselves, the moment they can get their hands on a copy. Adobe and C1 wait for Canon to send them the corrections; Adobe usually receive them first, by a small margin.

There are always manual correction options, of course. Often I find the automated corrections are too strong anyway, especially vignette correction, and either dial them back a little or disable them and correct manually. In the case of the 24-107 f/7.1 and 24-240 doing it manually also means you have the opportunity to keep more of the image and retain more sharpness if you don't need a 3:2 format image; with a squarer ratio you can just cut off the worst of the corners, rather than stretching them out, and you'll find that just to get a flat image the resulting crop needs less correction than the full image would. E.G. with a 4:3 or 6:7 kind of crop you can get those lenses to hit an equivalent of 22mm, still look flat, and be sharper than the fully-stretched 3:2 24mm is. I expect the 14-35 will be much the same.
 

jeanluc

EOS RP
Oct 29, 2012
230
132
DxO are fastest because they work out the corrections themselves, the moment they can get their hands on a copy. Adobe and C1 wait for Canon to send them the corrections; Adobe usually receive them first, by a small margin.

There are always manual correction options, of course. Often I find the automated corrections are too strong anyway, especially vignette correction, and either dial them back a little or disable them and correct manually. In the case of the 24-107 f/7.1 and 24-240 doing it manually also means you have the opportunity to keep more of the image and retain more sharpness if you don't need a 3:2 format image; with a squarer ratio you can just cut off the worst of the corners, rather than stretching them out, and you'll find that just to get a flat image the resulting crop needs less correction than the full image would. E.G. with a 4:3 or 6:7 kind of crop you can get those lenses to hit an equivalent of 22mm, still look flat, and be sharper than the fully-stretched 3:2 24mm is. I expect the 14-35 will be much the same.
Any idea of typical time for Adobe to get/release profiles?
 

aceflibble

EOS RP
May 8, 2015
355
192
No, there's never been any kind of schedule. New bodies usually get support within the first two weeks of on-shelf release, but lenses can be anything from a few days before units hit shops, up to a month or even two afterward. It just depends on how fast Canon move, what else they've got on their plate that they prioritise more. Given how slow all development, production, distribution and other fundamental work is going right now (and will continue to be slow until covid is a distant memory), I wouldn't like to try to estimate when a profile will show up. It'll arrive when it arrives.