Canon RF 35mm f1.4L VCM Review - Worth the wait? (Photo/Video - Free RAW Files)

[@salvamando1]

I’ve had this lens for a week and has not left my R5 since I got it and I’ve used it daily since I’m on a “staycation”! Honestly, the rattling “issue” is way overblown, I stopped paying attention to it since day one, and I’m a pretty dramatic neurotic misophoniac! It’s a beautiful lens, and I’m so happy that it is so light, perfect for walk around and street photography!

[@TerraThink]

I'm happy to hear that the rattle wasn't too bothering because that's my main concern.

[@JamesReader]

Really happy you love it! I do agree about the rattle, I’m already used to it, just a surprising thing for Canon to let fly. Enjoy your new lens and your staycation!

[@davidmpoliveira1]

@@TerraThink Well, it shouldn't be. Canon has stated, since its announcement, that the lens interior is cushioned specifically for the floating elements.

[@TerraThink]

@@davidmpoliveira1 True, but I just worry that the sound will drive you nuts as you walk around lol

[@momenteimlicht3375]

I am a Wedding Photographer as a Main Job. I have used the lens about three weeks now. 5 Weddings. I have to be honest. The end Results are amazing. The bokeh is much much better than the 35 1.8. But the price is hurting... All the flaws are not a bumer for me but i understanf Everyone who is pissed.

[@PetraBreuer]

Due to the strong vignetting at f/1.4, the corners have to be brightened considerably by the correction. I suspect that this could lead to a lot of noise at high ISO values. Haven't you had a problem with this yet?

[@girl1240]

@@PetraBreuerdo you think the ef 35 1.4 ii L lens is better?

[@momenteimlicht3375]

Had no Problems with that for now. ​@@PetraBreuer

[@PetraBreuer]

@@girl1240 I would have guessed, but I don't know. Isn't that it?

[@girl1240]

@@PetraBreuer I was contemplating getting the RF but if it’s not worth it then I’m getting the ef instead.

[@scotta5743]

After waiting six years for a proper 35mm f/1.4 lens from Canon, this release is incredibly disappointing. The annoying rattling sounds, Image Quality - without profile correction barrel distortion is horrendous, severe chromatic aberration, and terrible ghosting made it an instant return for me. Canon's attempt to please both videographers and photographers has resulted in a lens filled with flaws, which is absolutely unacceptable for a $1500 lens.

[@Xirpzy]

The rattling is kinda scary. It still takes great photos despite the flaws but for me the bigger problem is canons slow rollout of lenses in general. We have crazy lenses like the 28-70 f2 and 200-800mm but still no mid range 50/85 f.1.4/f1.8. Such lenses should be the standard on any system and deserve the most attention. How did third party lenses already cover that years ago on RF before canon banned them, yet canon hasnt given us anything? Atleast thats my thoughts.

[@GizmoMaxx]

You waited for 6 years 🥱ok Mr !

[@paulcostache6733]

£1800 in the UK, even worse value for money

[@JamesReader]

Well said Scott! I think Canon will release a photo-centric 35mm 1.2 in the future. But how long will we wait for that?!

[@q5rwi1]

And Nikon's Z 35mm 1.4 is $900 less 😮 Is this lens $900 better? 🤭

[@zenscape]

I previously owned the Sony FE 35mm f/1.4 GM lens before switching to the Canon R system. In my opinion, the Sony 35 GM lens outperforms the RF 35mm f/1.4 L VCM in every aspect except for focus breathing, which can be corrected in the new Sony cameras. I'm not sure what Canon was thinking, considering they had ample time to study the Sony 35mm GM lens before releasing this sub-standard lens. Yes, the Sony FE 35 GM aperture ring on the lens is fully functional when shooting stills and it does not rattle.

[@TerraThink]

Why did you switch from Sony to Canon if I may ask? Always interested to hear.

[@JamesReader]

Yep Sony did a great job with that lens! Same with their 24mm GM.

[@zenscape]

@@TerraThink I shot with Canon for many years prior to Sony mirrorless cameras starting to gain a significant advantage in autofocus performance over Canon DSLRs around the mid-2010s. I then tried out the Sony mirrorless system and was impressed. Canon was dragging its feet; it did not see the need to improve, and this attitude upset most Canon users, including me. It wasn't until the release of Canon's EOS R (2018) and later models like the EOS R5 and R6 (2020) that Canon began to close the gap in autofocus performance with their mirrorless cameras. At that time, I missed the Canon colour, ergonomic designs and better user experience and bought an R5 after selling all my Sony gear. I am very happy with the performance of my R5, which has reliable autofocus, effective IBIS, better user-friendly interface, comfortable grip, intuitive controls, high image quality and detail rendering. I could not be happier. But I cannot deny the fact that Sony has better lens choices, and it is heading towards the right direction of producing smaller, lighter and better quality lenses. My favourite lens is 35mm focal length, and I am particularly disappointed with the new Canon RF 35 mm f/1.4L that was recently launched after 4 years of waiting.

[@girl1240]

I agree switched from Sony to canon also, the gm 35 was great but it always had a green or teal tint I had to correct

[@DriveCancelDC]

This 35 1.4 VCM has been compared to the 35 1.4 II (EF) and outperforms it considerably just like the GM does. So no, the 35 1.4 GM doesn't seem to outperform it in every aspect. Sharpness seems to be astronomically good just like the GM. See the CameraLabs review for more.

[@shawnlabranche6852]

Great reviews as always James, telling the truth and being honest and also talking about the quirks of the lens. Your recommendations are always welcome.

[@JamesReader]

Thanks so much Shawn. That means a lot!

[@paulcostache6733]

I was seriously considering the 35mm 1.4, just saved me £1400 and change… Thanks

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching Paul!

[@TheNewArtSchool]

Get the very first EF 35mm f/1.4 (version1) which goes for around $500-$600 Thats almost a 5th of the price of this lens.

[@ralphsaad8637]

Guys, if you need a cheaper pro grade 35mm lens, you can still adapt the EF 35mm F1.4 Tamron. It is probably just as sharp, has some of the best color and bokeh, is made of metal, has weather sealing, for 699$. Also, it doesn't require that much profile correction, though the combination of the lens and the adapter will make for a bigger and heavier combo. Oh and it's not a rattle snake.

[@jeffkernen1554]

Thank you for the recommendation. My Canon RF 35mm 1.4 is going back. Too much barrel distortion and vignetting correction for me. I'm researching that Tampon lens now.

[@ralphsaad8637]

@jeffkernen1554 watch Dustin Abbott's review of the lens, which is the most comprehensive and thorough review of it. It really is a special lens and represents awesome value.

[@jeffkernen1554]

@@ralphsaad8637 I was just reading his review. Haha. Thanks.

[@unique93obr]

I have that Tamron...it's great...but with adapter is around 1kg...which is a lot...but, if weight is not a problem...it's really great lens. :)

[@ralphsaad8637]

@unique93obr agreed, I love the 28-45mm focal length so I use the pancake 28mm from canon whenever I want to travel light but the tamron gives the extra touch of special when I need it

[@timwoodphoto]

Long time EF 35mm f1.4 mk2 user here. Weddings etc. The release of this lens means there will be a flood of used EF 35mm’s coming. Snap up a bargain people. The mk2 is more than anyone will need professionally for photo use.

[@adam_thomas-w1t]

I shoot Canon and I love the design of their cameras, but their lenses are falling pretty short of their competition. Sony, Sigma and even Tamron are putting out much better stuff. Sony's 35 1.4 is smaller, better corrected, razor sharp and you can click or de-click the aperture ring in both video annnnnnnd photo. Hell even Nikon just put out a 35 1.4 that's smaller at 1/3 the price. This lens is a hard pass for me. Great video though!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching Adam! It’s a shame to see, I love what Nikon have done with their new 35mm. For such a great price too.

[@robharrand]

And they're a lot quieter.

[@dnbcatalina6192]

I may go with 35 mm end of 28 -70 f2. May switch to prime when a 1.2 version released. Any way excellent job again James.

[@paulhenry7]

I am perfectly happy with my EF 35mm f1.4 L ii USM, one of only two Canon lenses with BSRO, the other being the RF 85mm f1.2 L USM.

[@infrarouge75]

Thanks for raw files. You are alone to give us and IS very fine.

[@JamesReader]

You’re welcome! Thank you for watching

[@snowwalker9999]

Thanks again for another great portrait/lens video. For a versatile light portrait package I think this 35mm 1.4, 50mm f1.2 and 70-200mm f2.8 would be great. For something magical and special I would add a 135mm f/1.8 or f 2.0

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much for watching! Agreed! Right now I have the 35 1.4, 50 1.2 and 85 1.2

[@snowwalker9999]

@@JamesReader perfect trio

[@77dris]

Excellent as always! That rattling does bother me for sure. Canon has stated that the aperture ring is only for video and that will not change in the future. Your video samples look incredible, especially that 8K part! I think it has to do with the colour in the frame - so much pop. Thank you for providing raw samples. I want to see how this compares to the 1.8 version.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much DRIS! It’s not really a loss that the aperture ring won’t work in photo but a bit of a strange decision. Glad you liked the clips and hope the RAWs help you in your decision

[@thelookoflifefilms]

Great review as usual. I think I'm going with the 35 1.8 , Honestly 35 MM is probably my least favorite focal length in fact after reviewing the focal lengths in Lightroom I found that when I shoot the 28-70 40MM is my most common focal length

[@poultrypower89]

Have had mine for a week and totally agree with you: a flawed but ultimately excellent lens. I need a 35mm f1.4 in my collection and this is the only native RF option, so will definitely be keeping it. Would just love for it to cost a bit less given all the compromises…. Wonderful review by the way. Love your content. 🎉

[@mousbleu]

And in Europe it's sold 300$ more.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much! Really glad you’re liking the lens.

[@basilbcf]

I hope someday the come out with a RF 50mm f/1.4

[@vacuumandgaspressurecoexisting]

Rumor has it that they will make a 50 and 24 in the same series.

[@JamesReader]

I’m sure they will - hopefully sooner rather than later.

[@hashimqureishi8562]

Excellent James

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching!

[@matthewbrears2129]

For weddings, I use 35mm for 90% of the day. Live by it, so I was waiting for Canon to release this for ages. But then I realised that I didn't actually want photos sharp... that was the point. Why would I pay that much money to reduce the sharpness anyway lol. I'd only get it for the weather sealing tbh

[@foggi6683]

Just bought my new RF35 mm1.8❤ and it’s great💫📸

[@olesjor]

I own Canon ef 35mm 1.4L II. Will probably keep it. my gut feeling is that there will be an RF 35mm 1.2 that is primed for photography. big and heavy🤔

[@kifley19]

I would keep it. This lens should be less than $1500.

[@JamesReader]

I think you could be right! Hang on to that EF version for now. Price will drop on this lens by the end of the year anyway

[@gregoryreneau1052]

That sounds like a very Canon thing to do. Release a purposefully flawed lens that everyone still wants in their arsenal and follow up with the lens everyone actually wanted.

[@tonypalmer.photos]

Another great review James. I don't think difference warrants all the $$$, TBH.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching Tony!

[@blaspayri]

thanks for your much awaited review on this lens. I am interested in buying a light prime lens for video ... and the RF1.8 would be nicer for my needs except the slow autofocus for video .... if only they would update the smaller 1.8 with a more efficient AF motor

[@kifley19]

I agree. The stm motor is trash.

[@TerraThink]

@@blaspayri I have the 35mm f1.8 STM and I can only agree. That lens with fast autofocus & weather sealing would be killer.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching! The RF 35mm 1.8 is a little slow I’m afraid. I don’t mind it so much for my use case but can understand it might be a deal breaker for some

[@KevinJRegan]

Excellent review James. Your videos are really well done. I have been following you since your first video which was great, but they are even getting better 👏 keep it up pal. 📷

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much Kevin! I really appreciate your support.

[@spencehutchinson1904]

Really liking this lens so far.

[@JamesReader]

Me too! There’s a lot to like

[@amandawillingham3396]

Wow. A stellar review. I really appreciate the thought put into this. Best review on the internet.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much!

[@MartinSchwarzmann]

Good review, I have the lens for a week now. What you didn’t touch on, esp with your portrait setup is LOCA - if you have backlight in your image that’s out of focus it gets quite a bit of green fringing - foreground purple. Annoys the heck out of me as I’m used to warm images from my 28-70. Bokeh is a bit weird but I can get used to it - in summary I wished it would have made less compromises for that bs parfocal attribute

[@JamesReader]

Ah interesting! That’s a shame to hear. Thank you for watching.

[@JohnMacLeanPhotography]

15:12 the digital lens corrections are so they can make the lenses lighter and smaller. I agree though, I prefer it corrected exiting the glass.

[@gregmonforton4103]

Lack of image stabilisation is the deal breaker for me. Canon IS is so good and essential for handheld video. Looks like a great photo lens though! The "something's moving in there" rattle also happens to some degree with the 24-105 F4L.

[@musicman8942]

I have an ancient Canon 28-135 EF 3.5 to 5.6 IS lens that has I wouldn't necessarily call it a rattle but clunking when shaken like in the video. I called Canon about when I got the lens all those years ago (for my EOS10D) and was told there's nothing wrong with it. As I understand it my lens is the first one Canon did that had image stabilization which works a treat. Seems like Canon hasn't let the acorn fall too far from the tree with the rattles. Disappointing as you'd think Canon would have learned from the past. And don't get me started on the chromatic aberration and barrel distortion business. All my old EF lenses (L and non-L) come through just fine on my R7 without any in camera digital correction. Disappointing that Canon has unlearned the knowledge they had from the past.

[@JamesReader]

I can kind of accept that a lens with IS will have some rattle, makes sense. Didn’t expect it on this lens! I do think IS would of made a lot of sense in this lens and made it really attractive to R5C owners

[@ryanpallotta5]

most of the sonys dont have IS

[@PetraBreuer]

We are surprised on 7/17/2024 at the announcement of the R5 MII with an announcement for a superior RF 35mm 1.2L USM (shipping August 2024)... :) :) :) (I hope so much)

[@andyhewitt1]

After watching your review, I decided to cancel my order. The build, the distortion, It is such a weird choice to me. I loaded your raw files into my capture one, the distortion is so obvious and I don’t even have a correction profile because I am using the old standalone version. Oh well, I guess I need to wait for their more photo centric 35 lens.😢

[@JamesReader]

Sorry to hear that! Glad the RAWs were useful though. Hopefully we see that 35mm 1.2 soon

[@andyhewitt1]

@@JamesReader I desperately searched for raw files to test on my CO the day before. Then, a day later, your video magically showed up on my timeline. I really appreciate your upload.

[@SEAME7]

Sad that you need to hear a youtuber to make a choice ! 🙈

[@andyhewitt1]

​@@SEAME7 Maybe you are right, I shouldn't. I tried the lens in a shop and need to take back what I said about the build quality and the rattling. It is very subtle and dampened unless you really pay attention to it (I tried it on some Sony lenses, and I am surprised that some of those also make this rattling sound). The lens itself is very sharp on my R6 Mark II, but the distortion is still too much for me.

[@dillonencinia2729]

I had just searched your channel earlier looking for the review. Just my luck!!

[@JamesReader]

Awesome! Thank you for watching.

[@ItsBerg]

The rattling is because of the new engine.. when there’s no power to the lens the motors can move and they are buffered so it’s not damaging anything when it rattles. Canon’s official video on it says to expect it and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with it.

[@JamesReader]

That’s reassuring to hear, thank you! I’m used to the rattle already, doesn’t bother me much

[@ItsBerg]

@@JamesReader I have older af lenses that do this and for those I was worried. I was relieved also when I heard Canon officially address this behavior. I preordered one and I’m patiently waiting for it to come, can’t wait!

[@diegoeidelman]

Good review, James! As usual we can get very useful material to compare. I'm a RF 35mm f/1.8 user, mostly for video. I like the f/1.4 extra detail and contrast on the samples I've downloaded. However, I see some moirée present on the dress. Sometimes, sharpness on R6 and R62 produces this undesirable effect on patterns and clothes. Thank you for this video!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much Diego! Glad the files were helpful - well spotted regarding the moire I managed to miss that. Things are getting almost too sharp!

[@Galeidan]

Im still kinda hoping that Canon makes 35mm version of their 85mm f 1.2 L USM lens. No IS, no video features, no rattle and preferably not relying on digital corrections either. Just state of the art 35mm f 1.2 L USM lens. As good or even better than their RF 85mm L lens is. Emphases on image quality and bokeh over everything else. I would gladly pay a small fortune for that lens. This feels way overpriced especially comparing to Nikon Z 35mm f 1.4 (although it's not their S series lens) More like 1000-1200 € lens max, not +2000 € like in some countries here in Europe. RF 35mm f 1.8 Macro IS STM is way better value in my honest opinion.

[@JamesReader]

I think Canon will do exactly that, I really hope so at least. Hopefully next year? Nikon have done a great job with their next 35mm 1.4.

[@Soul_Visuals_Photography]

Thanks for the RAW’s I have this lens coming and I’m even more excited now.

[@JamesReader]

Awesome! Glad they were useful. You’re gonna love this lens

[@alexmaccape8411]

Awesome lens, have had it for a week now. Rattle is the only downside I can think of, but it’s not a big deal by any means. The things I prioritize are truly something great - size, image quality, autofocus speed. And fun factor, which is important for me as well.

[@JamesReader]

Glad you’re liking it! I’m really happy with it too. So glad we finally have this lens.

[@QKvox]

Great review as always. I can’t see myself picking this up over the 1.8 any time in the near future, I could buy an X100V for the same price and get something way more fun. I’m thinking of getting a Pergear 35mm f1.4 which is the cheapest full frame f1.4 lens on the RF mount and has lots more character which is more suited to my style over something more clinical like this lens. This lens will be perfect for some people though.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching! Let me know how you like that Pergear lens if you get it. Looks interesting!

[@lisawilliams1750]

You have the best content, thanks for the reviews!

[@Vaquero_interestelar]

I definitely look forward to when you release a new video with great quality sample files. Thank you so much. PS: At this point the Canon R5 Mark II is already out. Maybe you can bring it to the channel. Greetings.

[@TerraThink]

The rattle is the main thing turning me off from getting this lens. I want to bring it everywhere and to constantly hear a rattle as I walk might be too much to bear.

[@JamesReader]

I wouldn’t worry too much, I’m already used to it! Maybe hire it if you can, see if it’s something that would bother you in the long run.

[@davidmaxfieldgolf]

I love the 35 f1.8 and it's amazing value but the comparison between the 2 here shows exactly why one is a professional lens and the other is not. great video

[@JamesReader]

Thank you David!

[@YOUAREMYKIN]

Such a thorough review! ✨ Seems great for photos, but shooting RAW video, the distortion is gonna be a shocker.

[@JamesReader]

Very true! Thank you for watching

[@alkincvg1267]

Waaa…. Waaa…. Waaa! Let’s see, fast, light, sharp, takes beautiful images. All for $1,500? And, that’s a problem? I don’t design, or build camera lenses. I only look at the images a lens gives me, and I’ve already got this one ordered.

[@alkincvg1267]

Oh, one more thing…. Sitting in front of your l computer for 20 minutes, using Photoshop, to create the perfect print is OK. But, a one click lens profile correction is just horrible! Give me a break….

[@ErisedMediaCo]

If this lens relies so much on corrections, what’s it like for RAW video shooters? It sounds like it would be awful…

[@JamesReader]

Probably not great! If I remember I’ll record some RAW on my R5 and add it to the Dropbox over the next few days

[@boostedgixxer]

I think Canon is trying to cut cost a bit too much. They are relying on digital lens correction and padding in the lens to stop the moving elements from being damaged instead of just putting in a bit more engineering effort. I’m not a Sony fanboy, but Sony makes much smaller lenses that are super high-quality without rattles. I still love the rf mount and some of the cool lens that have come from it. But they do need to do better.

[@lidoneva]

hello! I appreciate you making a review with models. There are lots of videos with street, nature and food footage

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching!

[@rixomatrx]

Excellent review James! I’m debating between this and the RF 50mm 1.2. Would love to see a comparison video. Thanks!

[@edwincollins5847]

50 1.2 without question lol. The 35mm has the rattling canon says it’s normal. But the 50 goes to 1.2.

[@rixomatrx]

I know the 50 1.2 image quality is spectacular. The main reason I’d prefer the 35 over it is the weight and whether it’s too heavy to be a regular walk around lens

[@edwincollins5847]

@@rixomatrx not at all. Or maybe it’s because I got the 50mm after I bought the 28-70. And let me tell you about that friggin. It’s bulky and heavy where it hurts my shoulder from carrying it in a bag. So when I got the 50. It was definitely by go-to lens for casual stuff. But it isn’t heavy at all. I recommend it

[@edwincollins5847]

@@rixomatrx and if you want the 35, I suggest the 15-35mm 2.8. The lens is big. But you get more out from it than this prime 35mm lens

[@JamesReader]

Got plans to put together a bit of a comparison between the two! I must admit I still love that 50 1.2.

[@salvamando1]

Beautiful photos and model!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much!

[@stew_redman]

I don't see why the "rattle" is disappointing when it doesn't happen in use. A lot of smart phone cameras have a "rattle" when the camera is not in use too - it's down to the electromagnets that are used for image stabilisation not being powered and holding the lens elements in place. Long-term I very much doubt it will cause any issues with the lens that normal physical abuse wouldn't cause anyway.

[@JamesReader]

I think you’re right in most cases but this lens has no image stabilisation. My RF lenses with built in IS rattle a whole lot less than this lens. Maybe I’ve made it into a bigger deal than I should have, I’m already used to the rattle and more than happy with the lens! Thank you for watching.

[@stew_redman]

@@JamesReader Must just be the focus motors then. Keep up the great work.

[@gerardneedham]

My god Canon, just let the people want they want! Sigma DG DN primes.

[@gerardneedham]

Great review by the way James mate, photos looking fire 🙌🙌🙌

[@JamesReader]

Cheers Gerard! That means a lot 🙏

[@TheNewArtSchool]

Thats why Canon users must purchase the very first EF 35mm f/1.4 (version1) which goes for around $500-$600 Thats almost a 5th of the price of this lens.

[@gregoryreneau1052]

I had a second shooter use this lens on their R6 and it does not look that great imo, at least for professional use. The flaws really show up. For the used price, that's still hard to beat though. The VII on the other hand is still super nice.

[@TheNewArtSchool]

@@gregoryreneau1052 It does have flaws and a very analogue feel. However the 3d pop of version 1, is insane. A tough lens to master, but fully capable of amazing and professional results. After all it is an L series lens.

[@kurtisa4703]

I’ve owned that lens and the 35mm 1.8 rf mentioned in this video is better in my opinion and cheaper.

[@LesterLaVonne]

I was waiting for you to make this review! Thank you

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching!

[@JaredHoyman]

It’s probably psychological but the rattle on a select few of my lenses bothers me too. Although this 35 1.4 looks great I think I want to try out the 135 1.8 RF and see how that looks. Between my 15-35, 14-35, 24-70 and 24-105 I have the 35mm focal length covered. Obviously not as wide open as a prime though. Any experience with the 135 1.8 RF James?

[@salvamando1]

The RF 135 1.8 is spectacular. I have this new 35mm, and it is also great, but that 135 is so special!

[@JamesReader]

Yeah my RF lenses with IS in particular do have some rattle. But this 35mm is on a new level! RF 135 is excellent, optically fantastic and amazing rendering, I think you would really like it

[@tom_k_d]

Hi Jared, RF 135 1.8 is one of my best lenses: it stands up to the RF 1.2 primes. I can easily hand hold 1/30 at the R5, and it's quite sharp corner to corner. 135mm is a bit of a niche focal length, but still it gets quite some use here, mainly for landscape and outdoor portraits. AF motor is very fast, so it's nice for moving subjects like running dogs, too. When compared to my 70-200 2.8 @135mm the main differences are: more than one stop more light, plus much better contrast wide open.

[@JaredHoyman]

@@tom_k_d thanks Tom! It’s been one of those lenses I keep thinking about but putting off trying.

[@JaredHoyman]

@@JamesReader if only we had an unlimited budget ;). I’m waiting to see what the R5 II will offer before I spend anymore money on gear.

[@kikipratama1]

Judging by the design, they could've made it to F1.2. But I guess they just wanted to tease us with something somewhat odd.

[@saptarshidas2245]

Regarding the rattle, Canon has mentioned in their launch video that it's 100% normal for a lens with a VCM motor.

[@JamesReader]

That’s reassuring to hear!

[@LukeSchaeferFilms]

Great video James. And lol at everyone crying over this lens. It’s great. If you are a pro and the price isn’t an issue (which for a pro it shouldn’t be) and you need a fast native Rf 35mm1.4, it is a must have. I love this with my 851.2. This lens really shines for video. I am still struggling going from shooting nothing but 85 and 135 primes to a 35. For video it’s not an issue but I have to learn how to take 35mm portraits lol

[@JamesReader]

Really glad you’re liking it! I love it so far. Hell of a combo paired up with the 85

[@DriveCancelDC]

I don't really know why people care that much about corrections personally, this is just the way it is now. If it means the sharpness suffers significantly because of aggressive correction I get it, but in this case even with corrections the RF 35 1.4 outperforms the EF 35 1.4 II and that lens was extremely well regarded (this is not a comment aimed at James just a wider observation)

[@JamesReader]

It’s a fair point. If the final results look great I suppose the rest doesn’t matter! And I’m really liking the end results from this lens. Definitely keeping mine!

[@DriveCancelDC]

​@@JamesReader Canon have been relying on digital corrections for a while now too, a bunch of the RF lenses (even L) have quite a bit of distortion! If people wanna get mad about expensive gear having some heavy distortion they should check out the Leica Q2 lens. I think this is just an evolution of camera technology, if this was possible in the film days we'd all be very used to lenses designed around digital corrections. The fact this outperforms the EF 35 even with the corrections is very impressive to me. The 35 GM 1.4 might end up being an overall better lens but I'm not using Sony anymore and we would be splitting hairs, the RF 35 1.4, EF 35 L II, Sigma 35 1.2 and 35 GM are like 4 of the best 35mm lenses in existence...

[@blackbugmedia]

Seems to me, this is more for video. Hope they make a photo specific lens soon, with bigger diameter and bigger barrel,(similar to RF 50/1.2) so that there’s less reliance on digital correction. In fact, they should’ve made that first.

[@JamesReader]

Totally agree! Really hope we see a more photo centric RF 35mm 1.2

[@BW_Maher]

Very nice rendering. I think there is a lot to like about this lens. I don't need it bad enough to pay Canon's early adopter tax but I expect I'll be picking one up when I can get a better price in a year or so. I already have a few 35's but I think I'd prefer this one to most of the others. That being said, I've never owned the EF 35L II and I would love to add on of those to my kit if the price every come down significantly. Maybe the new RF 35mm will shake a few loose.

[@JamesReader]

Can’t go wrong with either! The EF version is amazing too.

[@seansiquig]

great video! was super excited for this lens, thanks for the video

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching!

[@EastCoastDigs]

Thanks for comparing to the 1.8. It’s hard to justify 4x the price. This lens would be a go for me at 1200, will hold off for now. 1.8 is still one of the best deals out there imo. I would love to see lens flaring on the 1.4 vs 1.8 I assume it’s better?

[@JamesReader]

Flaring seems a little better on the 1.4. I think we will see the price come down pretty heavily in this lens by the end of the year.

[@EastCoastDigs]

@@JamesReader Ill try to hold off til Black Friday, any idea off the top of your head how flaring compares to 24-70, currently have the ef vii

[@tomjkelly]

Nice video James 👍🏻

[@JamesReader]

Thank you Tom!

[@EvilTeddie23]

Make a similar 85mm F1.4 and I'll be very happy. Good as the 1.2 lenses are technically, the 85mm 1.2 is just too damn heavy. So yes, it's a compromise but I personally like this direction from Canon.

[@JamesReader]

I hope they do! Would love to see a smaller L series 85 prime

[@Jarovit88]

The lens rattling may be related to the stabilizer. Perhaps you disconnect the lens from the camera too quickly and the stabilizer does not have time to turn off. This happens on some lenses.

[@JamesReader]

There’s no stabilisation in this lens, I think the rattle is something to do with the focus system.

[@dillonencinia2729]

Test on the R7!!

[@philipthao8527]

Just picked up an 85 f1.2 and sold my 24-70 2.8. I kind of want this one now, even though I have the 1.8. Maybe after October I finish my runway gig I'll sell my 70-200 f2.8 for it. 😂😂😂😂😂

[@PhilippeDHooghe]

Wow, thanks James, great video! A lot of really good information and at the same time an entertaining video with a wonderful smooth cinema look, this is unique. You sold me on the RF 35mm f/1.8 actually :-). Not that I plan to buy it any time soon, but it is on my shortlist. I also noticed there is no sponsor ad on this one, did you changed your approach? Today I just shot a grandkid video on a stage with spotlights using R7 and the standard settings, no CLOG. The result isn't good, bwah! I need to learn CLOG3. What you are doing here is really nice and soft to look at, so much better than what I did today. Though sometimes just a tad too saturated with a bit of a magenta cast... maybe that is the lens? But I'm whittling hairs here, this video is really nice to look at!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much Philippe as always! I think you’ll really like the RF 35 1.8. Very underrated lens. I have decided against sponsored segments on these longer comparison videos as I feel sometimes they can interrupt the flow of the video. It also lets me release videos on new products much quicker (sponsors usually like you to release on certain dates) The standard settings aren’t very forgiving in terms of exposure, I think you’ll find CLOG 3 much easier with a bit of practice. The magenta cast is often because I’m shooting in very green environments, sometimes I over correct the colour cast.

[@PhilippeDHooghe]

Thank you, James. I'll take some time this year to learn working with CLOG3. Another thing you helped me with!

[@Soul_Visuals_Photography]

Fab. Hoping. My preorder comes soon

[@JamesReader]

Thank you! Fingers crossed you get yours soon

[@benjaminporee8444]

Great video. What’s the name of the first model ? Is she have an Instagram ? Thanks

[@tphccsun]

I understand it's a great lens but since I have the RF14-35 lens, I'm still not sure if I should invest in F1.4...

[@JamesReader]

Tough choice! Do you shoot a lot of portraits or high ISO photography? If not either stick with your awesome zoom or maybe consider the RF 35mm 1.8

[@johnmbaria7223]

hey thanks for this review good job i may just get it this year !!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching!

[@infrarouge75]

Hello. Raw files with R6II are very soft. My raw files with rf 35mm f1.8 or rf 24-70 L are more sharp. Very surprise.

[@KailashPurohit-wv2uf]

so finally which you will suggest 35mm 1.8 or 1.4 (this lens) ???

[@Abdi_Mohamed_]

Am surprised you keep going back to the R6ii for portrait photography.. even though you have the R5

[@JamesReader]

I did use the R5 for my first shoot with this lens but I’ve had some front focusing issues with my R5 lately so really didn’t want to mess up any comparisons. I’ve really been enjoying using the R6 II though.

[@chesterjohnson4504]

@@JamesReader I am somewhat new to ML cameras. I thought ML cameras were not supposed to have front focusing issues. I am just asking as I came from a DSLR user to ML with the understanding ML has no issues with such issues.

[@maiigophotography]

Is it worth it? It's the only RF L 35 option. Of course its worth it.

[@JamesReader]

We could have had it sooner though! Thank you for watching.

[@markokompic7617]

Compare it to the Tamron SP 35/1.4 and you will see that it is not worth it. And the Tamron was available for several years.

[@arturmlodzianowski1345]

Please compare this lens with tamron 35 f1.4

[@JamesReader]

Legendary lens! Quite hard to get a hold of one in the UK but I will try!

[@ShawnLPorterPhotography]

Great detailed review!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much Shawn!

[@ShawnLPorterPhotography]

@@JamesReader 💪🏾

[@bangtao6593]

Hi James. Great video thx. But it miss something or iI missed it; What about the flare ?

[@officialbrandoncoleman]

maybe they are going to make a 35mm 1.2 next!!! Hopefully lol 😅😅😅

[@JamesReader]

I think we will see a photo centric RF 35mm 1.2 down the line! But who knows when haha

[@kenandcamera]

Knowing Canon....2035.

[@officialbrandoncoleman]

@@kenandcamera 🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@ajbroo]

great video and pics. man i have to agree with other people, this lens is good but could have been better. with a price tag like that

[@robbie154]

Was contemplating switching to canon when the r5 ii comes out. But G Master primes are just too good and canons are meh. (Yes the 50 and 85 1.2 are optically great but the focus is horrendously slow compared)

[@bngr_bngr]

My Leica 35/1.4 is tiny next to this beast.

[@TerraThink]

But does it have autofocus? Manual lenses can be tiny.

[@bngr_bngr]

@@TerraThink of course not. Yet my Nikon 50/1.4 AF for DSLR is smaller. Thats what I hate about mirrorless almost all fast primes are big. Except the 400/2.8 it actually weights significantly less.

[@martyn420]

The older EF 35mm f/1.4L II more effectively suppresses longitudinal chromatic aberration than this rattling cola bottle.

[@e11apak]

Hi! Love this video and your work! Could I ask what was used to record this post? Thank you so much!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you! Do you mean the behind the scenes video? Mainly the LUMIX S5IIX

[@shinzychan5117]

What’s the camera bag ? Looks cool

[@JamesReader]

The green one is the Nomatic Luma 18L camera bag. The black one is Nomatic McKinnon Camera Backpack 25L.

[@shinzychan5117]

@@JamesReader thanks mate

[@Climate.Realist]

I wasn't interested in the RF 35 specifically anyway...But I am in desperate need of a wide angle prime lens that has weather sealing, is sharp and can be used for almost everything. So I was very looking forward for the 24mm version. Right now...not anymore. So I'll probably have to ditch my need of weather sealing and go for an EF lens so that I have something to use for the next few years until Canon gets their shlt together and releases something for the RF that can be used for Astro. Just disappointed.

[@giganadiradze]

Canon officially said that this lens is a "rattler" lens but you are not saying anything o_O And second question and the most important )) I have 24-70 and now I am thinking to buy one of the primes by canon, As far as I am shooting both - photo and video I don't know which one is sexier for both work )) so which one do you advice as a sharp and useful? 35, 50 or 85?

[@kernzilla]

damn ibis wobbles at :38 was all i had to see. feck

[@bibekadhikari7677]

According to ruddy it’s supposed to rattle 😅

[@McCurleyFries]

Autofocus speed aside, it seems the value for money isn’t there and I should get the 1.8 for now

[@JamesReader]

The 1.8 is really underrated. Hard to beat for the price.

[@NickDelDuca]

You should try the new GFX cameras. GFX 100sii.

[@JamesReader]

I really want to. They look incredible.

[@ryansublermedia]

Is this a good first prime? I have an ancient 50 1.4 from 93 with insane color fringing, and I like it, but sometimes I like being wider. I don’t really want to go old as I’m trying to get the best of the best glass. And trying to build a native arsenal. I like that it’s $1.5k and not $2.8k and up like the others too. Are the ef versions THAT much sharper?

[@ranishubham-oq4zb]

Please use this lens in r8 in video

[@ThroughJoesLens]

My copy has significant CA (purple fringing) shooting in high contrast areas like foliage against a bright sky. In Adobe’s ACR I have to add an additional +4 purple de-fringing on top of their lens profile. Other than that and the heavy vignetting, it is a good lens. Still, it’s a little disappointing given that it’s an L lens and cost a premium. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@ThroughJoesLens]

As a follow up, I dug out my EF 35/1.4L II to compare to the RF version. For photography, the older EF lens has similar resolution but significantly less distortion and CA. It is the superior image quality lens. It does have heavy vignetting like the RF version and add noise in the corners when corrected at the wider apertures. It’s still sold new for $2000 USD so it is a more expensive lens. The RF version is a better video lens and is smaller and lighter, especially factoring in the addition of an EF to RF converter. 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@tom_k_d]

@@ThroughJoesLens Thanks, this is valuable information. I was tempted to get the EF version since a while, but decided to wait for an RF 35 1.2... - maybe the wrong decision.

[@ThroughJoesLens]

@@tom_k_d With a good lens profile I’d probably go with the newer RF version just for the native mount, size, and video features. In the end the image quality will be roughly equal once corrected and you’ll save $500 if you’re in the US. They both have good sharpness. One thing I forgot to mention is that, at least for my copies, the EF version renders images with a noticeably warmer tone (compared with camera matching Faithful color profile in ACR). The RF version was more neutral.

[@JamesReader]

Great info! I did briefly own the EF 35mm 1.4 II and thought it was great and fairly light weight if it wasn’t for the need to adapt.

[@tom_k_d]

@@ThroughJoesLens Thanks - I sincerely hope Canon comes with a nice photo-centric RF 35mm 1.2 USM on top of this VCM lense soon, to complete my other two excellent RF 1.2 primes. Till then: I still own an EF35mm 2.0 IS USM, which isn't that bad, either...

[@ryanpallotta5]

how do you think it compares the the Sony G master version? Sony use their own version of VCM?

[@kifley19]

The distortion is crazy when looking at the raw pics without correction. My RF 24-70mm 2.8 has pretty much no distortion at 35mm. For $1500 this is really bad. Also, the vignette is the worst I've seen on a L prime. Shame on Canon. It's still a great lens with corrections but it shouldn't need this much.

[@JacobDarkOfficial]

Does the lens suffer the same distortion and vignetting with video? I definitely noticed it in the photos you showed but didn't see it in the video samples.

[@JamesReader]

Seems to be automatically corrected in video - however if you shoot RAW video I think it will be present.

[@mousbleu]

Thanks a lot

[@JamesReader]

Thank you!

[@Brettfhill]

Does her face look longer or more stretched on the 1.4 in comparison to the 1.8?