RF 35 f/1.8 or RF 50 f/1.8 ?

Jan 31, 2016
83
61
Québec
Well, the title says it all!

Are these two lenses of equal quality? The 50mm is a lot cheaper, but is it only because of the lack of a dedicated focus ring? Are there other factors at play, here, beside the consumer niches into which Canon wanted to place them?

My local camera store has just reopened, and my money wants to visit it to buy my second RF lens (the first being the 24-105 f/4 kit lens that came with my RP).

Any advice?
 

privatebydesign

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
10,017
4,812
My advice, what differences do the differences in IQ or build matter? The focal length is what you need, either you need 35 or you need 50, get that one.

If you don't know which one you need you don't need either, but if you are still hankering to spend some money then look in your EXIF, Lightroom is great for sorting that, and see which focal length you naturally use more from your zoom.
 

stevelee

FT-QL
CR Pro
Jul 6, 2017
1,990
743
Davidson, NC
I wonder why you aren’t thinking wider than 24mm or longer than 105mm for your first addition.

You must have some use case where the extra couple of stops of a prime would make a difference to duplicate focal lengths you already have covered.
 

dcm

It's not the gear. But it helps.
CR Pro
Apr 18, 2013
928
443
Colorado, USA
We each have different shooting styles and needs. What works for anyone of us may not work for you.

What situations can your 24-105 not handle? I went a while on my original EF 24-105L before I began adding lenses to address wide angle, telephoto, and low light. By then I knew what I shot where 24 wasn't wide enough and 105 wasn't long enough or f/4 wasn't fast enough. That helped me tailor and time my additional purchases to the things that were most pressing. Waiting to find the situation you cannot handle with your current gear can save you a lot of money in the long run.
 
Jan 31, 2016
83
61
Québec
I wonder why you aren’t thinking wider than 24mm or longer than 105mm for your first addition.

You must have some use case where the extra couple of stops of a prime would make a difference to duplicate focal lengths you already have covered.
I already use the EF 16-35 f/2.8 and the EF 70-200 f/2.8, but I'me looking for an inconspicuous lens that can handle shooting inside or when the light is low. My 16-35 is very pleasant to use, but once you add the adapter, the thing becomes quite noticeable and warrants unwanted attention in some settings where I want people to forget about my presence or where security is an issue. The huge and white 70-200 is even worse, but that's another story.

Thanks for you answers, and sorry for my bad english!
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

padam

EOS R
Aug 26, 2015
1,213
878
For shooting inside the RF 35/1.8 is easy to recommend, over two stops brighter than the kit zoom makes a big difference in capturing motion or reducing noise. Outdoors on the street, I have more keepers with a 50 but Canon's DPAF working with so many lenses is so renowned that people don't tend to consider adapting a manual 50 (or a 35 or 28) which are small, light and cheap (the really good ones are more expensive) and it is very rewarding to set a pre-determined distance and snap the picture instantly.
I had the RF 24-105/4L like three times and I just didn't like using it much (even though it balances well, no focus breathing, excellent optical quality, excellent IS and it takes decent images looking back at it, so on these merits it is easy to recommend it)
 

Hobby

RP 6D 90D
Jul 23, 2017
14
11
Belgium
A reason to duplicate focal lengths could be the size and weight? I have a 6D and a RP with the EF 24-70/2.8L. But I am also considering the RF 35/1.8 for the size and Indoor/WalkAround. Am also considering a (used) Tamron SP 45/1.8 VC to leave it ("glued") on my 6D (or adapt it on my RP). Reviews of the Canon RF50 don't make me excited, nor convince me. But perhaps I am wrong. Price of RF50 is okay: it is never a bad buy. You'll certainly use it and like it.
 

Del Paso

M3 Singlestroke
Aug 9, 2018
1,153
1,197
I certainly would not hesitate one second, since I find the RF 50, despite its price, very disappointing at wide apertures.
I expected Nikon or Sony 50 f 1,8 quality from Canon, at a higher price, of course.
The RF 35 mm has better optical quality, plus macro ! and is, unlike the Tamron, compact and lightweight.
An alternative could be the EF 40mm f2,8, excellent optics, lightweight, inexpensive, compact, but: f2,8...
 

jd7

EOS R
CR Pro
Feb 3, 2013
890
258
I certainly would not hesitate one second, since I find the RF 50, despite its price, very disappointing at wide apertures.
I expected Nikon or Sony 50 f 1,8 quality from Canon, at a higher price, of course.
The RF 35 mm has better optical quality, plus macro ! and is, unlike the Tamron, compact and lightweight.
An alternative could be the EF 40mm f2,8, excellent optics, lightweight, inexpensive, compact, but: f2,8...
I probably shouldn't say it since I don't have either the RF 35/1.8 IS or the RF 50/1.8 so cannot speak from personal experience of the lenses, but from what I've seen and read, my feeling is the RF 35/1.8 IS is a decent little lens which is a bit overpriced for what it is, while the RF 50/1.8 is a very ordinary lens which is a bit overpriced for what it is.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hobby

Hobby

RP 6D 90D
Jul 23, 2017
14
11
Belgium
I certainly would not hesitate one second, since I find the RF 50, despite its price, very disappointing at wide apertures.
I expected Nikon or Sony 50 f 1,8 quality from Canon, at a higher price, of course.
The RF 35 mm has better optical quality, plus macro ! and is, unlike the Tamron, compact and lightweight.
An alternative could be the EF 40mm f2,8, excellent optics, lightweight, inexpensive, compact, but: f2,8...
Exactly, I was also considering the EF 40mm f2.8 for my 6D. I always think this lens is a little bit "forgotten". Nobody mentions it. Perhaps it is to tiny to be in the spotlight? So I did not jump, but I am still hesitating.
On the other hand, I use my Tamron 35-150mm f2.8-4.0 a lot, I bought it in 2019, and it keeps surprising me and I am very delighted with that lens. That's the reason why I wanted to buy/try another Tamron (they deserve it) and that SP45mm 1.8VC is in my head now and it is 1.8 and VC. The RF 35mm will be my one and only RF lens for my RP. RF prices are way too crazy for me...
 

FamilyGuy

EOS 90D
Feb 5, 2020
186
312
RF 35 is $399 at the USA Canon store. $100 off.

What you get over the 50 for $200 right now.

A bit wider for shooting in small rooms indoors.

Dedicated focus ring

0.5x Macro capability and close focus distance.

Image stabilization.

And from what I understand, generally better image quality.
 
Jan 31, 2016
83
61
Québec
Thank you, everyone, for your answers.

I decided to buy the RF 35mm… and then learned there was a 150$ rebate on it. Even better!

Now, I'm just waiting for it to arrive at my local photo shop. Can't wait to try it!
 
<-- start Taboola -->