Canon RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS: Build and IQ | 4K

[@jodokcello]

If you could have only two RF lens, wicht two would you take?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Probably the 70-200 and the 50mm F1.2

[@geoffreyenriquez]

I appreciate the portability of this RF lens for users who want a portable full-frame mirrorless setup. f1.8 / f2.0 primes might be a sweet spot for light weight mirrorless kits. Faster primes and fast zooms seem to negate the portable nature of mirrorless for those that are seeking it. Thank you for the review! Looking forward to part 2.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@3Schneewittchen]

Thank you for this detailed and honest video. I ordered the 35mm f2 IS for my DSLRs a few days ago. Even though I might change to the "R" system next year (wait for the pro), I probably will not switch to the 35mm f1.8, but work with adapters. By the way, I postpone this purchase for years before me but now I have an order for children's pictures of a forest kindergarten. The forest is really dark, even in the sunshine. Since I feel my beloved 40mm Pankake not sure enough ... The second camera is equipped with the 100mm 2.0, here would be my dream the 85mm 1.4 IS. Thanks for your great videos that I have been watching for years. Greetings from Thomas (Germany).

[@peterebel7899]

Thank you for the video! The RF 35 F1.8 Macro is a very smart fit to the compact mirrorless EOS R & RP. The whole setup is very compact and together with the tilting screen it opens your totally new perspectives you practically can't do with DSLRs. You can shoot in narrow corners, VERY low, ... I own it now for a quarter of a year and I got shots practically impossible with all my prior equipment. This is the lens which changed my mind for mirrorless (I do not love EVF after some month of use). Very versatile! Very unique, not just another lens. I still own the EF 35 F1.4L II and love it since some years now. It is totally different in usage. And the EF 100 F2.8 Macro IS, also great, also very different in usage. Both great lenses for more classic setups of shooting. But the RF 35 F1.8 Macro IS opens you a new world in nature photography, documentation, reports, ... , only limited by your creativity. Worth while the (limited) money, I never missed the last bit of optical excellence at all! A smart move from Canon: Starting mirrorless by not just replacing successful EF lenses but launching innovative products picking up the unfolding chances of the mirrorless platform. This path is different from Nikon's and very different from Sony's.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a solid take on the lens. I don't personally love the IQ, but I do really appreciate the versatility of the lens.

[@bodinian]

Something a lot of people don't consider about image quality is how much reducing the ISO on a 35mm or 50mm f/1.8 will preserve quality over the higher ISO needed with an expensive f/2.8 L lens. It reminds me of the saying how you shouldn't fight a pig in the mud because they'll beat you with experience. In conditions where image quality would suffer on more expensive zoom lenses the budget prime lenses may dominate. This doesn't apply to expensive primes nor tripod using long exposures.

[@mitigo]

This is the best video on reviewing the image quality of this lens. Would love to see one on the 50mm.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I do hope to fit it in before the year is out.

[@JonPaulKersey]

Hey Dustin 👋, thanks for the review but I have one question. How does the RF 35mm f/1.8 compare against the Sigma 35 mm f/1.4 ART for portraits?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I just don't find the rendering of the Canon lens very special, so I didn't love it. I would take the Sigma in that situation for portraits every day of the week.

[@JonPaulKersey]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks Dustin!

[@seansitter7350]

Thanks again for an amazing review, Dustin. My patreon contributions are the best return on money I’ve ever spent!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's pretty high praise. Thank you!

[@mikafoxx2717]

Been using my trusty 40mm 2.8 on the RP since my 6D screen died with 150k on the shutter. I'm not totally sold on these lenses? The 40 2.8 isnt flawless, but its better than the ef 50 1.8 stm, and from research probably about on par with the RF 50 1.8 at f4 and on. Picked up an EF sigma art 35 1.4 but didn't like it because it short focused too often near infinity and combined with f1.4 and a slightly curved focal plane it was unusable for blue hour landscape handheld, despite how sharp and contrasty when focused well. Considered picking up this, or a 35 f2 IS, or a tamron 45 or 35 1.8 VC.. just not sure if anything is reaaonably better for what I need at 2.8-4 apertures. Stabilization would help a lot. Any suggestions? The sigma 40 1.4 looks like a gem comparably to the 35, but still no stabilization and it's not exactly one you want to hike around with.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The Tamron 35mm F1.8 VC is really good, though you'll be dealing with an adapter compared to this lens, obviously. I also really loved the rendering of the Canon EF 35mm F2 IS.

[@mikafoxx2717]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the reply! Because of the weather sealing and better optics plus being mirrorless with better autofocus, I went for the Tamron, it was also a little bit cheaper second hand. Both very good options though! I also like the lack of vignette for wider aperture lowlight landscape stuff with buildings at blue hour or dawn. Was also very tempted by the 45mm, but it's easier to crop a little if I have to get to 40 ish.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@mikafoxx2717 I think that's a solid choice.

[@WilliamWallaceRoss]

Well, fully trust your reviews and look for your take before making purchases. Just purchased one with the lens hood, used on KEH in Excellent + Condition which should be good for my Canon R10.

[@HS-fk6hb]

Great video, thank you!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome!

[@chronocross85]

If you already have the 35mm L should I still get the RF 35? Besides the control ring I really dont see any other helpful use of having another 35

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I wouldn't. Your 35L is going to give more special images and it will work flawlessly via adapter.

[@peterebel7899]

I own both. Totally different usage. You can do a lot of shooting setups with the RF setup you can not do with the EF 35 L. I will go on using both side by side in their sweet spots.

[@vaskoobscura_]

You're right that 35mm is more like a 38 or 39mm. I was thinking it wasn't looking as wide as my 35 1.4L. Very nice review by the way. I'm going to skip on this 35 1.8.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the feedback.

[@tomvandenheuvel7603]

The MF speed depends on how fast you turn. so a 180 degree fast turn will change focus much more then 180 degree slow. Also in my EOS R, you can set the focus ring sensitivity to degree, so feels more like the mechanical focus of EF lenses. (can be found under custom settings tab 3)

[@ebreckpo6563]

There is the same custom menu setting in the RP. Still have to check it out with the RF35 with is stuck somewhere in the postal services...

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's true other than the fact under no circumstance does it feel mechanical. It feels far less connected and visceral.

[@chillwill1083]

It's the one thing that I despise about focus by wire lenses. But whelp as a sony shooter I gotta live with it on AF lenses but then again I'm hoping to grab some of the rokinon canon cineglass so focus by wire won't matter.

[@tomvandenheuvel7603]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I think that's just an opinion. I like the feeling. It's also the only way you can actually customise the functionality. A mechanical system can not. In other words, in my opinion, it's the way forward. You can already see some potential with coming RF 24-240mm where you can focus with the control ring.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@tomvandenheuvel7603 An opinion, perhaps, but as someone who as spent a lot of time with manual focus lenses, I can tell you that I've yet to handle a focus-by-wire lens that compares to the tactile feel.

[@joostkuijper6272]

I understand the 35mm f/1.4 L mkII is a good benchmark, however, i would love to see a comparison to the EF 35mm f/2.0 IS USM. The question for those who own the latter is: Is it worth it to upgrade? For vignetting obviously not, but there are more aspects.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I understand, but I don't own the 35mm F2 IS any longer (haven't since purchasing the 35L II). Benchmarking a lens in my own kit is not the same as having to pay duties to import a lens just to give a comparison.

[@pfmusic1636]

Great lens. Thanks for the recommendation

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@ye-soonmoon]

It is helpful to understand of lens. Mine is EOS RP with RF 24-105mm F4L IS. I am a totally beginner for using camera. I just want to take beautiful pictures as I can. Do I need to buy some more lenses for getting better quality pictures?.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That depends on what kind of photos you want to take. Some of the nice prime lenses (50mm or 85mm) will be much nicer for portrait work.

[@ye-soonmoon]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for your tips.

[@LeoinFrance]

Wow, that degree of vignetting for a prime totally surprised me. Don't we get primes for better optics? It's a positive point for the Macro fonction though.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

35mm primes often vignette pretty heavily, actually. But I was a little surprised by the degree of the vignette, too.

[@uncoy]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Sony ZA 35mm f2.8 Sonnar vignettes on full frame over two stops as well. Seems to be par for the course.

[@juangarcia1974]

Great review!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you

[@TLYRIDER]

I love this lens and I just posted my review last week on my channel. After using this I am now eagerly waiting for the wide angle lens RF 15-35

[@SuperPrufrock]

Where might I find your review please?

[@SuperPrufrock]

Have you done a review of the RF 15-35?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't. I'm trying to work to get an EOS R body so I can do more RF reviews. It's tough when you don't have a camera.

[@JemimahMai]

Will you be doing a review of the Canon RF 15-35 soon?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I actually have one for review right now. The EOS R5, 15-35, and 70-200 RF are all on my review desk right now.

[@JemimahMai]

Dustin Abbott amazing! I’ll keep an eye out for these reviews when you release them

[@Marcus2233]

I purchased this lens to take to Amsterdam & never really had much issue, actually loved it for the lightweight & compactness, personally think its worth the price tag for that alone, main thing that bugs me is the focus is relatively loud, but on the Eos r iv never had a problem with shadow recovery but i suppose the rp has a weak sensor so could see how that could be an issue, but for a native r lens its best in class for travel at the moment, love your reviews as they cover every aspect and you find the good and bad, any more R lenses on the horizon for testing ? would love for you to review the RF 28-70 f2

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'll probably do the 50 next, but at some point I'll do the 28-70. The problem I have is that I have to get loaners from the US (Canon Canada rarely gets the loaners in stock), so I have to pay duty to do these reviews. I get some of it back, but not until the following year. It actually costs me to do these reviews.

[@Marcus2233]

@@DustinAbbottTWI ah that's a-bit rubbish, shame because you are a fantastic reviewer so would be nice for canon to throw you a bone regardless where you are in the world, some of your reviews have led me to buy lenses as I'm sure many other people will on your recommendation so its in canons interest to get more gear out to reviewers, Tamron and sigma seem to do a lot of loaners to people around the globe

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Frankly I've really been shocked by the attitude of Canon Canada. Many companies bend over backwards to get me stuff when I need it, but Canon makes very little effort. Pretty disappointing, actually.

[@uncoy]

@@DustinAbbottTWI You are probably better off creating a relationship with a retailer in Canada and sharing some of the costs of depreciation (5% or 10% to help them sell off for a review copy). Personally, I'd prefer a review copy which tested well over an off the shelf new box.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@uncoy I've worked that angle before. One company has now shut down, and some others make promises but don't follow through very well.

[@youuuuuuuuuuutube]

Great review. I had the same impressions about the final rendering of the lens. It gets the job done, but there's nothing special.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Definitely sums up my feelings.

[@35259edgarboudaher]

I really love that lens for pictures and video. it's very sharp and light and works great on with my EOS RP on Feyutech G6 plus gymbal. I always vignette my pics anyways haha It would be nice to get lightroom corrections already, it's been out for more than 6 months.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I agree about the corrections. I'm very surprised they aren't available yet.

[@Noealz]

seems aight to me! the small things arent a deal killer

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Different things work for different people.

[@schwalleyf]

I think you did a good review but I have had the lenses since the EOS R came out. I have now used it on the EOS R and R5. The one thing I think you forgot is that unlike the EF lenses the RF lenses are undateable and fix may of the problems also I turn on corrections with the menu on the camera. It embeds it in the raw for Adobe to read. The latest update I did not see the Vignetting as bad as you showed with the EOS r5. The STM lenses were developed for video it is fast with still photos and is quieter during video. Over all since it is updatable I think it is more accurate than most 35 mm lenses.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There's some truth to that, though firmware updates changes things like focus algorithms or glitches, not optical performance. You won't get less vignette via firmware. My biggest knock on this lens is that I didn't find the rendering of the lens particularly nice...and that disappointed me.

[@yaosautoben]

rf 50mm 1.2 review sometime?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

How about tomorrow?

[@yaosautoben]

@@DustinAbbottTWI awesome

[@JimBailey]

Thank you Mr Abbott, Tamron's new 35-150 F2.8-4 would make a good video. (Just hinting). Thanks again Mr Abbott, you always impress me. :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's scheduled. Tamron USA is just waiting to get a Canon mount in for me.

[@charruaporelmundo]

35 mm 1.8, of the first lenses Canon decide to launch with it mirrorless and meanwhile...sony user's (like me)...we ll, using adapted voigtlanders....

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're right. I'm not quite sure why Sony hasn't addressed this area.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

We'll see about your last point. I suspect the 28-75 has taken more than a few GM sales, as will the 17-28mm when it arrives. I'm hoping that Tamron and Sigma go hard on Sony over the next few years.

[@navpreetsingh8156]

The Sigma 35mm isn't bad but its big, Samyang dropping a 45mm 1.8 would have been better suited to have made that 35 or even 40

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

45mm is actually a very useful focal length, but it isn't 35mm

[@DanyGiletto]

@SwitchRich yeah, the lack of a 35mm f1.8/f2 with autofocus is the only reason that is keeping me from buying a sony camera, and having me look a nikon z6... they have so many big and small 35's but no compromise, nothing in between

[@MrJAM-np7go]

I think it is only appealing option for EOS-RP users, considering other inexpensive options like adapting a third party primes.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The ability to easily adapt other lenses does help flesh out the options for the system.

[@lmallard3788]

Had I not bought ef 100-400 is2 prior to deciding to buy eos r, I would keep using 80d, but be buying another brand than canon, ff mirrorless camera. I appreciate your reviews. This lens will not be one of lenses to use.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I was very disappointed by this lens, actually.

[@rooper.9102]

Thanks for the nice review Dustin! I must say that I'm truly disappointed in Canon's achievements during the last past years. Seems like they just keep under performing release after release these days. Almost makes me wonder if they will be out of business soon.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

They are still the biggest player in the room, though there have been some underwhelming results as of late.

[@gwesterneng5859]

Its weird to compare this lens to the 1.4 version. Don't forget that you can buy 4 of the RF lenses for just one 1.4 version. Its like comparing the Mazda 2 vs the Mazda RX-8

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's true, to some extent, though that was the lens that I own and have used for comparison with many other 35mm lenses (probably at least ten). Those that regularly follow my channel have more context for the performance of the lens because of that.

[@gwesterneng5859]

​@@DustinAbbottTWI I hope that viewers will see that, because sometimes people are fast to make this assumption

[@fangxusun1723]

I have compared this RF35 with Nikon Z35 side by side. The Nikon Z35 is so much better in image quality, especially when compared wide open. I thought they would be similar in performance but I was totally wrong.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's not as great as I expected it to, actually.

[@sergtrav]

Now compare their prices.

[@markshirley01]

The Nikon Z is excellent but expensive.

[@donh4907]

Lens performance is different? Need we point you to the $400 difference in price. May I add, "DUH?"

[@markshirley01]

@@donh4907 sure you can add it Don 😁

[@chrislj2890]

Is it just me or does the video footage of yourself look over exposed in comparison to the stills? Anyway, a revealing initial review.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Different processing techniques. Thanks for the feedback.

[@Imhotep397]

I wonder if Canon is planning and APSC, APSH or even a M43 with an RF mount which would likely cut out quite a bit of the vignette on this. Even with nice sharpness that much vignette, distortion and poor light transmission is just too much even for a non-L labeled Canon lens and is highly problematic when asking people to transition from a lot of other cameras.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It would be interesting if Canon experimented with APS-H again. It's been a long time!

[@mochamocha1040]

If I started photography this year instead of last year, I would have chosen the RP and the 35 macro rather than the sigma 35. Just because there isn't a major difference between f1.4 and f1.8 and that macro capability.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The macro ability helps.

[@mikafoxx2717]

The sigma 35 has weird issues focusing near Infinity, like it doesn't have enough resolution to the focus motor. Otherwise it's very good optically. Maybe not the flattest focus field for astro.

[@kevindiossi]

I found this lens to be very disappointing to use and is really tailored to closer focusing distances. Shooting general street photography distances can result in so strange bokeh performance that honestly distracts even non photographers. The macro ability is certainly neat, but this lens isn't for me.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Bokeh rendering at certain distances can be a little busy.

[@MannyScoot]

Canon and nikon went from building top quality equipment to building plastic junk.

[@dayeah765caoni3]

Troll

Too much fade :)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Editing choices. Not everyone agrees.

[@JesusReinaC]

Thank yuo for the review! I will buy this lens for my R cameras. But, wait, aren't you Canadian? Why INCHES? You Canadians are smart and use the metric system. Talk millimetres, centimetres, grams firstly instead and leave the obsolete system to you-know-who! :-)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Two things - first of all, I'm an American by birth, and only Canadian for the last couple of years. Secondly, the United States is my biggest market by far. I typically try to use both metric and imperial in my reviews.

[@DocAdvert]

compare this both lenses makes absolutely no sense. Are you seriously expect the same from a cheap 500 $???

[@xy-kv4lu]

哇

[@pynchia4119]

so it's a poor lens, for a number of reasons

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's stronger language than I would use. I don't think it is a poor lens, I just don't think it is an exceptional one.

[@Cagey7531]

Many other reviews that don't do the boring brick wall section have high praise for this lens/ A lot of these so called flaws don't really matter out in the field and after post processing.

[@DerPhiL]

I really like the lens! The option to have a wide angle, macro, is and wide aperture is awesome!!