Review: Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro

docsmith said:

Looks like a great little lens.
...
Ignoring the 0.5x "macro" part, this seems like an R version of the EF 35 f/2 IS, which is a great lens. Then throw in the 0.5x macro as a nice bonus.

Click to expand...

josephandrews222 said:

An important paragraph (as far as image quality is concerned) from the review:

"The very popular Canon EF 35mm f/2 IS USM Lens, shown to the left above, seems to be the most relevant lens to compare. In the image quality comparison at f/2 (using discernment regarding the test camera resolution difference), these two lenses appear to be about the same. The RF lens shows slightly less flare and the EF lens shows slightly less distortion. Neither difference seems decision-making."

I wasn't sure what to make of the reviewer's opinion of the focusing characteristics of the RF lens.

Click to expand...

josephandrews222 said:

I wasn't sure what to make of the reviewer's opinion of the focusing characteristics of the RF lens.

Click to expand...

• The focus ring is sometimes difficult to distinguish from the control ring, especially with gloves on.
• There's a framing shift that occurs when changing focus directions.
• The variable focus ring and linear focus ring sensitivity settings seem to produce the same results.
  Subjects change size moderately while focusing.
• Focusing sounds may be picked up in video recordings, but focusing changes are smooth.

• The bokeh of the 35LII is considerably softer. I did some test pictures with the camera on a tripod, focused on a subject close by, and compared the bokeh in the background. I´d say the 35LII has 2/3 stops advantage bokeh wise. By that I mean that the 35LII is as soft at f2.5 as the RF 35 is at f2, and the difference seem to apply to the whole f1.8 to f4 range (that I compared).
• When pixel peeping, it is no doubt that the 35LII is sharper at f1.4 than the RF 35 is at f1.8. But the RF 35 is very good at f1.8, all the way to the edges. By f.2.8 it is hard to tell the lenses apart sharpness wise, over the entire frame. The corners are sharp.
• The RF35 has pretty bad coma at f1.8, but it is for all practical purposes gone at f2.8. The 35LII is much better in that regard.

Larsskv said:

...
All things summarized. I think the RF35 is good enough that it might push me to sell of the 35LII. If it wasn't for the difference in bokeh performance, it would already be up for sale.

Click to expand...

Maximilian said:

thanks, Lars, for sharing your impressions!

For you it's a hard decission as you already own the 35LII. But for others it shows how good the RF 35 already is.

For you I'd say wait some time until you decide if to sell the 35LII. Enjoy both lenses.

Click to expand...

Larsskv said:

I've been using the RF 35 f1.8 during the weekend, and today I have done some comparisons to the 35LII, both mounted to the EOS R.

My overall impression of the RF 35 is that it is very good indeed, and every EOS R owner who likes shooting primes should consider it. The small size and light weight is very compelling.

After seeing the results I got this weekend, I did consider selling my 35LII, since I can see myself pick up the RF 35 much more often (due to size and weight). The images I got in indoors "family" situations, with kids playing around, was absolutely great. I think the rendering (depth perception) is very nice, and the bokeh is pleasing - I believe the bokeh of the RF 35 is significantly better than the 35 f2 IS I owned some years ago. Focusing was good, but considerably less fantastic than the RF 50L. I appreciate the close focusing abilities. It makes the lens more flexible in use. My real world impression after using this lens, was that I loved the pictures I got. They are plenty sharp, has a nice depth rendering, and bokeh is pleasing.

After comparing the RF 35 to the 35LII, I can say the following:

• The bokeh of the 35LII is considerably softer. I did some test pictures with the camera on a tripod, focused on a subject close by, and compared the bokeh in the background. I´d say the 35LII has 2/3 stops advantage bokeh wise. By that I mean that the 35LII is as soft at f2.5 as the RF 35 is at f2, and the difference seem to apply to the whole f1.8 to f4 range (that I compared).
• When pixel peeping, it is no doubt that the 35LII is sharper at f1.4 than the RF 35 is at f1.8. But the RF 35 is very good at f1.8, all the way to the edges. By f.2.8 it is hard to tell the lenses apart sharpness wise, over the entire frame. The corners are sharp.
• The RF35 has pretty bad coma at f1.8, but it is for all practical purposes gone at f2.8. The 35LII is much better in that regard.

I didn´t really test for vignetting or chromatic aberration. I am not bothered much by either. The RF35 has noticeable vignetting at f1.8. I don't see much difference in vignetting between the f2.8 and f5.6 shots, so I guess it clears up pretty good by f2.8. I can't seem to find any chromatic aberration. If the RF35 has any, it shouldn't be a real world issue.

One thing I haven't been able to make an opinion on yet, is the colors you get from this lens. Usually I find L lenses to be far better with color and clarity, than non L lenses. It is dark and bad natural light in Norway at this time of year, so I cannot tell you how vibrant (or not) the colors this lens produces, but I have no issues with the clarity.

All things summarized. I think the RF35 is good enough that it might push me to sell of the 35LII. If it wasn't for the difference in bokeh performance, it would already be up for sale.

Click to expand...

jd7 said:

Interesting little review! Much more positive about the RF 35 than I would have expected after reading the TDP review ... At this point I'm certainly not convinced I'd be willing to trade my 35 Art for the RF 35, but I do like the idea of a small, light 35mm - and having IS would have it's uses too of course - so we will see (assuming I end up with an RF mount camera at some stage!)

Click to expand...

Larsskv said:

Unless you need f1.4, or if you need good wide open coma performance, I don’t think you would miss the 35ART for a second if you got the RF35. As far as I could tell from the sharpness comparison at TDP, the 35ART and RF35 seem to perform equally good.

Click to expand...

jd7 said:

Thanks Larsskv. I have to say I do like having f/1.4 at 35mm (and at 50mm), and I've recently tried a few nightscape shots and the coma on RF 35 doesn't look good at all. Apart from that though, I just haven't seen any examples from the RF 35 (at least so far) which have blown me away, eg the bokeh hasn't impressed me (and I see bokeh is one of the reasons you are considering keeping your 35L II). While the RF 35 is clearly a very good lens, what I've seen so far makes me think it's very good in similar way to the EF 35 f/2 IS, ie very good for its size and weight, but the size and weight savings do cost something (beyond just costing more money!). Still, the fact you are considering letting go of the EF 35L II for the little RF 35 does make me think about it. I'll be keeping an eye on reviews and sample images as more become available.

Click to expand...

Larsskv said:

The problem I have with finding photos is that they rarely have a meaningful resolution. Further, especially with wide angle lenses, the subjects are often too far away, not filling the frame properly. This makes it hard to tell how the lens will do for your (my) own needs, as I always try to get fairly close when shooting wide angles.

Click to expand...

Larsskv said:

I've been using the RF 35 f1.8 during the weekend, and today I have done some comparisons to the 35LII, both mounted to the EOS R.

My overall impression of the RF 35 is that it is very good indeed, and every EOS R owner who likes shooting primes should consider it. The small size and light weight is very compelling.

After seeing the results I got this weekend, I did consider selling my 35LII, since I can see myself pick up the RF 35 much more often (due to size and weight). The images I got in indoors "family" situations, with kids playing around, was absolutely great. I think the rendering (depth perception) is very nice, and the bokeh is pleasing - I believe the bokeh of the RF 35 is significantly better than the 35 f2 IS I owned some years ago. Focusing was good, but considerably less fantastic than the RF 50L. I appreciate the close focusing abilities. It makes the lens more flexible in use. My real world impression after using this lens, was that I loved the pictures I got. They are plenty sharp, has a nice depth rendering, and bokeh is pleasing.

After comparing the RF 35 to the 35LII, I can say the following:

• The bokeh of the 35LII is considerably softer. I did some test pictures with the camera on a tripod, focused on a subject close by, and compared the bokeh in the background. I´d say the 35LII has 2/3 stops advantage bokeh wise. By that I mean that the 35LII is as soft at f2.5 as the RF 35 is at f2, and the difference seem to apply to the whole f1.8 to f4 range (that I compared).
• When pixel peeping, it is no doubt that the 35LII is sharper at f1.4 than the RF 35 is at f1.8. But the RF 35 is very good at f1.8, all the way to the edges. By f.2.8 it is hard to tell the lenses apart sharpness wise, over the entire frame. The corners are sharp.
• The RF35 has pretty bad coma at f1.8, but it is for all practical purposes gone at f2.8. The 35LII is much better in that regard.

I didn´t really test for vignetting or chromatic aberration. I am not bothered much by either. The RF35 has noticeable vignetting at f1.8. I don't see much difference in vignetting between the f2.8 and f5.6 shots, so I guess it clears up pretty good by f2.8. I can't seem to find any chromatic aberration. If the RF35 has any, it shouldn't be a real world issue.

One thing I haven't been able to make an opinion on yet, is the colors you get from this lens. Usually I find L lenses to be far better with color and clarity, than non L lenses. It is dark and bad natural light in Norway at this time of year, so I cannot tell you how vibrant (or not) the colors this lens produces, but I have no issues with the clarity.

All things summarized. I think the RF35 is good enough that it might push me to sell of the 35LII. If it wasn't for the difference in bokeh performance, it would already be up for sale.

Click to expand...

JoFT said:

And please compare color rendering... For me the colorendering of the 35LII is implessive....

If you have the R, the RF35 is a lens to have!!!

Click to expand...