Disabling the Continuous AF in camera menu page 7 makes things much better. I'll spend some time shooting this way to verify. I might just keep this lens. I need it.
Upvote
0
Disabling the Continuous AF in camera menu page 7 makes things much better. I'll spend some time shooting this way to verify. I might just keep this lens. I need it.
Since when did a 1:2 become a true macro lens. My understanding is that macro lenses are 1:1 on a full frame sensor or greater. I've seen 5:1 but never 1:2 considered macro. Sounds like a marketing ploy using cheaper materials than the L line
Since when did a 1:2 become a true macro lens. My understanding is that macro lenses are 1:1 on a full frame sensor or greater. I've seen 5:1 but never 1:2 considered macro. Sounds like a marketing ploy using cheaper materials than the L line
You do understand that it's not an L lens, right?Since when did a 1:2 become a true macro lens. My understanding is that macro lenses are 1:1 on a full frame sensor or greater. I've seen 5:1 but never 1:2 considered macro. Sounds like a marketing ploy using cheaper materials than the L line
Since when did a 1:2 become a true macro lens. My understanding is that macro lenses are 1:1 on a full frame sensor or greater. I've seen 5:1 but never 1:2 considered macro. Sounds like a marketing ploy using cheaper materials than the L line
In live view mode camera still focusing at the widest available aperture. This is my understanding happy to be corrected.The huge deal here is FOCUS SHIFT, rendering this lens total garbage.
For those who don't know, your AF selects accurate focus @ f1.8, then as you take the photo the lens stops down to your selected aputure (say f2.8) and the focus point changes due to the aputure change... It's not till you get enough DoF (ie f4.0) to cover the shift that everything is 'all right' again.
The only way to avoid it is to use live view, so your aputure doesn't change after focus.
Since when did a 1:2 become a true macro lens. My understanding is that macro lenses are 1:1 on a full frame sensor or greater. I've seen 5:1 but never 1:2 considered macro. Sounds like a marketing ploy using cheaper materials than the L line
since when is a 35mm lens a “macro”? What genius thinks they can light a subject two inches from the lens?
If they are accurately describing the specs then the huffing is unjustified
A small close focusing distance is always useful whether you're doing "macro" work or not
The huge deal here is FOCUS SHIFT, rendering this lens total garbage.
For those who don't know, your AF selects accurate focus @ f1.8, then as you take the photo the lens stops down to your selected aputure (say f2.8) and the focus point changes due to the aputure change... It's not till you get enough DoF (ie f4.0) to cover the shift that everything is 'all right' again.
The only way to avoid it is to use live view, so your aputure doesn't change after focus.
Very clear explanation. I sought to replicate this with a flat subject at 30" from the lens. f1.8, 2, 2.8, 4, 5.6, 8. All indistinguishable at full magnification of the finder. Is this something rarely encountered like the RF70-200 near close focus error? I'd like to understand this better before I dismiss the concern as irrelevant to my usage (like the to-be-fixed RF70-200 focus error).
With a foreshortened ruler I thought I might have seen some shift, but had a hard time replicating (if it isn't repeatable, it isn't science).
I'd be happy to see a link to anyone who has published tests I can replicate.
I’ve just shot a real world test of sunlit toddler with eye focus and all apertures are eyelash sharp. If it can do that I don’t care much about some bloggers lab results.It's a non-existent problem. The lens focuses flawlessly in both autofocus and manual modes. Some reviewers just like to come up with something to discuss. It's a natural optical phenomenon with wide aperture lenses that generally causes no-real world effects, as you have seen in your own tests. Feel free to enjoy your lens worry-free about AF issues. If it actually had this problem, it wouldn't be rated so highly almost universally. Perhaps most importantly, the ultimate test of a lens's performance is how well it works for you. If it works great for you and gives you the results you want, that's all that matters.
If it can do that I don’t care much about some bloggers lab results.
I too would like a menu option to limit focus range. My 100mm f/2.8 macro has the switch which is great when I am shooting above water but not accessible when in an underwater housingNote that on RF lenses the focus ring is complete controlled by software, there are a few options in the camera to tweak it, one of which is the direction. Maybe it has a section for sensitivity as well?
DPReview TV did an item a few weeks back about software controlled focus limiting, a thing I would very much like to have.
But I want it for the reverse: lock it down from MFD to 1 meter so it stays in macro mode. It's very annoying when you try to focus on an insect and it grabs the background instead.
Out of curiosity, what do you like better about the RF 35 over the EF 35/2 IS?Here's my verdict on the lens: It is one of the best values among all 35mm lenses. With EOS R, it can AF in almost complete darkness, is very sharp even at f1.8 (at least at distances where it matters), it has IS, it focuses fast, it has 1:2 magnification, it is fairly light and small for such a lens and it is dirt cheap when bought with a body (I bought in Norway). I didn't notice that bad vignetting and CA is OK (not bad, not the best). I had EF 35mm f2.0 IS USM as well and this lens is better than that already great lens.