Lens Showdown: Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 vs. RF 24-105mm f/4 - Which Is Right for You? | EOS R Lens Review

Ready to Set Up, Launch, and Perfect Your Video, Podcast, or Live Production? Get Professional Guidance on Equipment and Workflows: ChrisSpiegl.com/consulting
In this video, join me as we dive deep into the comparison of two incredible lenses from Canon - the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro and the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM. Both lenses have their unique strengths and special features, and I'm here to cover them all.
Shop the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 IS STM Macro: crsp.li/rf35f18
Shop the Canon RF 24-105mm f/4.0 L IS USM: crsp.li/rf24105f4l
I'll be exploring various aspects, starting from the autofocusing noise and speed to the ultimate test of background separation blur. You'll get to witness firsthand which lens excels in these areas and find out if either of these lenses is the perfect fit for your photography needs.
Get ready to discover the capabilities and differences between these two remarkable lenses. Whether you're a macrophotography enthusiast or looking for a versatile zoom lens, this video has it all. Join me on this lens comparison journey and make an informed decision on the best lens for you.
🎧 Chapters / Show Notes:
00:00 Intro
00:52 Spec Comparison
05:47 Blur Comparison (Depth of Field)
08:24 Zoom vs. Prime Lens
10:00 Focusing Speed & Noise Comparison
15:41 Vignetting Differences
16:51 Conclusion
19:05 My Lens Wishlist
21:05 Outro
22:14 Ending with Longer Autofocus Noise & Speed Tests
#CanonEOSR #CanonLensReview #ComparingLenses #CanonRF35mm #CanonRF24105mm
Website 💻 ChrisSpiegl.com
Instagram 📷 ChrisSpiegl.com/instagram
Twitter 💬 ChrisSpiegl.com/twitter
Podcast 🎧 ChrisSpiegl.com/podcast
Patrons 👑 ChrisSpiegl.com/support
Gear & Tools 🎥 ChrisSpiegl.com/gear

[@OhimynameisGoaway]

You did put a lot of work into this video, it really is helpful. Thank you!

[@jonnydelgato]

Very thorough review, and I love the fact that I didn't have to listen to any annoying music. Awesome stuff.

[@jessicakathryn9259]

Love how straightforward this was!! So focused and easy to follow

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you - always trying to be helpful.

[@ChadChristian]

Welcome to KZbin. Wish you and the channel much success.

[@davsey133]

Thank you this was so helpful, your so thoughtful, best review

[@bragfash]

Awesome review/comparison! You answered every question I had and then some, I do have the kit lens but I’ll definitely get the 35mm lens today! Thank you 🙏🏼

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you for sharing this in your comment. I greatly appreciate it 🌸.

[@Scheny-Dev]

Amazing video and very helpful! I like it because it is very practical oriented and you didn't read the spec sheet. It was exactly what I was looking for, like others have said. Congrats!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you, I appreciate that a lot 👍🌸.

[@tkirby2911]

This was exactly the video I’ve been looking for. Thank you so much for the thorough explanation and comparison. I would be curious though how many meters the 35mm prime lens must be from you in order to have the equivalent frame set you showed with the 24mm. (As that is about how wide I would like to go for my setup). Cheers

[@barsasa671]

Good job Chris. very useful and deep video. I dont understand why you have so little sucsribers. Keep going.

[@Ciiufu]

awesome and detailed review !

[@Loneandalone]

Loved it. Nice comparison and this was really needed for me. Thank you.

[@Loneandalone]

Chris Spiegl ❤️❤️❤️❤️

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Glad it was helpful!

[@DenisFortier]

Thanks for the tips. Great video!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Glad it was helpful! Thank you for your comment 🌸.

[@RT300Z1]

Great video, great explanation. Keep up the good work.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you. Absolutely I’ll try. 👌

[@relentlessburrito]

Question: I've got an eos R body on the way and need to purchase a lens. I'm moving from an m50, so full frame is new to me. Will f/4 on the Eos R be fast enough to take decent shots in indoor lighting? Not being able to do that is my biggest pet peeve about using the m50.

[@triciac.1343]

This was super helpful! Thank you!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thanks, I appreciate that. 🌸🥰

[@nealrichmond4588]

Thanks for this comparison review Chris, really helpful. It may be a little subjective, but I thought the 24-105mm F4 had a little better contrast and colour at points on your video, when I would’ve expected the prime 35mm to be better?... Have to say, probably the thing to do is buy both lenses if you can afford it, especially if you do stills photography. Most other canon RF lenses seem to be at a prohibitive price point!

[@DavidGriffithsmusic]

Great job! Thank you for your video.

[@noelleperrotta4944]

Thank you, that was helpful.

[@HelenaMeow]

Amazing video , thank you 😊

[@raulgolfs]

Love this breakdown of this lens 24-105 f/4 L. Im looking to get this Lens for my EOS R for my Golf Vlogs. Thanks for this one!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

I appreciate that. It’s a great lens 👍.

[@petertbd1674]

for wedding photography, which will be better glass , now im own sigma 50mm and 85mm. never own any zoom glass, which will better choices? and how about the sharpness.

[@vivekranjantube]

100 on 100 for your effort, very useful video, thanks a lot. you'll get RF 15-35mm & 10k+ Subs in a year. All the very best, keep it up.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thanks a lot! I'm on my way ❤.

[@thehearsglow]

Thank you for such an informative video. It is straight to the point I have been interested in. Hope you get at least some lenses of your wish list already :)

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thanks, I actually did. I now have the 15-35mm and the 70-200mm f/4 - so great progress on that front.

[@thehearsglow]

@@ChrisSpiegl Awesome! Did it actually worth it to pay for 70-200 F4? I mean, it seems to lose most of its outstanding professional portrait capabilities that F2.8 of holy trinity claims to offer.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

​@@thehearsglow The bokeh difference is there but I was mostly looking at the lens for the purpose of compression and doing so in landscape shots. In those cases the 2.8 vs 4.0 difference is not as bad. And the weight of the 4.0 is much easier to carry out in nature.

[@TruthReviews]

Great job. I own the 24-105, im considering selling it and getting the 24-70 f2.8 rf instead, as I use my C70 mainly to shoot events in not idea lighting situations. I just wish it wasn't £1,000 more.

[@ahmedomara11]

what is min shatter speed to go with image stabilization and get sharp image ??

[@MkenyaMarekaniTV]

Great just got my cannon r and these lessons are great 👍 new subscriber as well

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you, I appreciate that.

[@charlesmoor111]

Hey chris. Quick question please. At equivalent focal length What is the sharper lense. When pixel peeping 200% or more

[@charlesmoor111]

@@ChrisSpiegl cheers. I havent seen a bad review of the 35mm on the whole of searching.. i have a spare rx100 with 28 100 focal and for the same price of the 24 105 f4L lense its possible could sort two rf primes like 35 and 85 f2 when it comes. Maybe best. To do two primes

[@kanehi3275]

I just bought the EOS RP and a ring adapter so I can use my previous lenses in both EF and EF-S. I already have the EF 24-105L lens and it's much sharper on the RP than in the 5DII. I have the EF-S 15-85 lens and I'll probably my carry-all lens for now since it covers more zoom with the 1.6 factor than the 24-105L. Thanks for the review.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

For video that sounds like a great idea. For photo - depending on your subject - I would try to stick to full frame and with that use the 24-105 👍.

[@Guerrillamoviemaker]

Thank you. Well done.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you, these are the best comments to read. 🌸😍

[@menanabil1332]

hi im from egypt .. i have canon rp .. i would buy first lens rf ... im wedding photography.. 35 mm rf or 24-105 rf ...is good for wedding !??

[@colabus1]

If you can afford it (it is an expensive lens) the 24-70 f2.8 would be perfect. It has IS, the f2.8 will make a big difference when indoors and it is very sharp.

[@rajeshkumar-qk1bh]

Does this lens crop the image?

[@peterebel7899]

Nothing to compare: Those two lenses are my most used, most versatile lenses.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

I agree, they are phenomenal. But there are differences in use case, strengths, and weaknesses. Both have their spot though - that's for sure.

[@peterebel7899]

@@ChrisSpiegl That's why I have both :-)

[@Pablo-Ramirez]

Hello, thank you very much for your comparison, I have a question and if you can help me. I have an R6 with adapter, and my lenses are all EF, I have a 24-105 f4 L, and I am buying the RF 35mm or the RF 24-105. Is there much difference between the EF and the RF 24-105?

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Hi Pablo, I can’t really comment on that because I switched to the EOS R from Sony and thus don’t have much experience with the EF lens you are speaking about. Maybe there is a comparison somewhere on here about the 24-105 EF vs RF Version?

[@snowk3107]

many people says rf is much sharper than ef.

[@elfolder1703]

Organized, Informative, Amazing video!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you, I appreciate that 🌸.

[@ChainBrothers]

Gutes Video, ein paar Außenaufnahmen wären super gewesen, aber dennoch interessant :)

[@ShamisTalib]

Thank you. This helped me a lot with the shopping list a course suggested. I was wondering why I just couldn't use the 35mm selection on the 24-105 lens as opposed to buying the 35mm separate. Now I know. I also didn't know some key things like the 35mm couldn't zoom. I'm a complete newb to camera's so this helped me tremendously. Thank you again and thumbs up.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

You're very welcome!

[@alanjones8603]

Great video 👍 I’m a novice and this was really useful.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Glad you enjoyed it and thank you for leaving a comment 🌸.

[@CoolBreeze031_Photography]

Great video! I have both lenses, the range with the 24-105mm is wonderful, but the extra light with the 35mm f/1.8 outweighs the reach for me.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you for your input. I also like to play with both. Even years later.

[@Kickzster]

Thank you for this!! Where you filming 4k or 1080?

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Kickzster mostly 1080p since otherwise I would I traduce a 1.7x crop on the Canon EOS R.

[@harbanlutchman6563]

I bought canon eos R body and I want to buy One lens only ,which one should I buy, 50mm 35mm or 135mm or Another??? Thanks

[@harbanlutchman6563]

Chris Spiegl I will be shooting mostly street and Landscape. Thanks!

[@tktkwei]

Depending on what you want to shoot. If just do photo on pretty much anything, then go with 24-70 F2.8 or 24-105 F4. If you want to do mostly video in 4K or wide landscape then you want 15-35 F2.8. If you want only one prime, I would go with 35 F1.8. I own 35/1.8 24-105/4, 135/2. Looking to add 15-35 for video. And maybe one more 85/1.2 for portrait. 70-200/2.8 when I start shooting some sport. I skipped 24-70/2.8 myself because I have faster prime. The extra reach/compression 24-105 can give you is very handy. Sum it up, you will need more than one lens.

[@mavs8888]

Hey Chris… if you allow me to ask… you mentioned a remote (cable less as far as I can see, around 07:30 of the video)… I would love to know which remote that is… and also if it will work with the EOS CANON R5, the CANON EOS 5D mark IV and the Canon EOS 7D mark II… I would very much appreciate an answer… (I own the TC-80… with cable…) thank you!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Hi Max, the remote I use in this is a general camera remote for time-lapse shooting and the like. I found it on eBay a few years back and it served me well. The name on the device is AYEX AX-5. The interesting thing is that it works with cable and with wireless in the same box. In terms of which camera it works with, you just have to make sure the connector is compatible and that's something to check individually.

[@mavs8888]

@@ChrisSpiegl Goodday Chris! Thank you for your reply! I’ll start some investigations! Take care, thank again. Ciao!

[@vvlad78]

First of all thanks for your great job! I would like to precise which lens is more quiet in general use, when camera's internal microphone set in normal (low) sensitivity? In the final part of this review "clicks" of 24-105mm bother me much more than "buzzing" of 35mm motor.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

The only way you will be able to find this out is by trying them both out yourself. Otherwise, everybody will have a different tolerance. I use both microphones for video and photo. They work, but I also have my mics off-camera generally. When I am using the Rode VideoMic NTG on top of the camera, I usually prefer to use the 24-105 because it doesn't have the loud focus though. That's my thoughts.

[@vvlad78]

@@ChrisSpiegl Thanks a lot!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

@@vvlad78 You're welcome, I hope you find more useful videos on my channel 🌸.

[@lucaklein7904]

i bought the eos rp + 24-105 f4 stm kit. the stm lens is much cheaper than the 24-105 f4 usm lens. is there any difference except of the motor and price?

[@maisiaola]

Thanks for the inputs

[@firuzmukhitdinov7873]

Aperture is different. F4 USM has constant apeture F4, but STM kit not. It's f4-f7.1

[@floetic]

Can I double check with you that your 24-105mm F4 is basically silent when you're using it.. and that is presumably on AF SERVO mode? My lens makes a very audible rattling noise from the autofocus, clearly audible in my video... yet my store are telling me that's normal for the lens?! Grateful if you could clarify what your experience is with the autofocus noise on that lens. Thanks!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Please have a listen at 22:14 Ending with Longer Autofocus Noise & Speed Tests There I demonstrate how loud the motors are on these two lenses. They are mostly silent (you really have to pull up the gain on the mics to be able to hear them focus). This may be different if you are using these in Photography mode since then the focus motors usually spin much faster. But then you would not film at the same time with that camera.

[@floetic]

@@ChrisSpiegl Thanks that's really helpful. I missed those longer noise tests at the end. Mmm, my 24-105mm makes the same noise but much louder, audible standing a metre or so away from the camera. Wonder if I do have a defective model. Many thanks for your reply!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

@@floetic Sounds like it may be a defect model. Hope you can get it fixed on warranty or return it still. I really have to "pay close attention" to be able to hear it from a meter away. Good luck.

[@MK-yv7jn]

I bought both to use with my R8. I expect to use the 35 for street photography (since I live in a generally low-light location) and for video and will use the 24-105 for landscape and travel. Basically I had to decide if I just wanted to do a 35/85 combo or have a zoom. I do more landscapes, nature and travel than portraits so I went with the zoom. I'll see how it goes!

[@matt79hz]

How are these two lenses in any way comparable ?

[@Stracman]

I’m an RP owner still not able to decide on my first RF lens. Do I go for the 35 or hold out/save up another third more pennies for the 24-105 F4. I suppose it depends on whether the majority of my photos using EF lenses are around the 35mm?

[@cristobalramolete6993]

I have ef 20 105mm it is worth it to upgrade on rf 24 105mm or just buy rf 35mm?

[@lorenschwiderski]

The 50mm f1.8 is reasonably fast for single shot lock-in focusing. Several reports I read said the 35mm is slower and at times you can miss focus on a shot -- not good. I will stay with a 50 and a 24-105mm inexpensive kit which is OK -- not lightning fast to focus, but OK.

[@royalscanlon3217]

Is it possible that you had the IS on when you were recording the sound the internal microphone picks up? That clicking sound seemed reminiscent of one made by the IS on my old EF 24-105. P.S. A thoughtful comparison. Thank you.

[@box.10]

I dont recall my old EF 24-105 actually has IS

[@anasadel]

Roy Judge it has IS

[@box.10]

@@anasadel WHAT? Both RF 35 1.8 and RF 24-105 f4 have IS. Always have done. Pratt

[@anasadel]

Roy Judge I use to have EF 24-105 L series i ( the old one ) and now RP 24-105 L ( just trade in 2 days back ) and both has IS

[@regg82ooo]

Hi Chris! Great review/comparison. I'm debating to get the RF 35, or spend the money and get the RF 15-35. I love the RF 35mm because it's cheap, light weight, wide aperture. But my only concern is if its ok to use for occasional vlogging (selfie video) on a gimbal, or a gorilla pod. Is it doable, or should i spend the arm & leg for the 15-35?

[@regg82ooo]

@@ChrisSpiegl I see. Even with a gimbal (Feiyutech AK2000)? I would love to be able to buy a 15-35 RF lens or the 24-70, but I can't justify buying a $2K+ lense during this time of pandemic. thanks again for your input.

[@matheusvaladao9740]

hey Chris! I have this 24-105mm lens, and this is my only lens. I belive atm I need a lighter lens, and tinking about 35mm. Do you have another idea for me to consider?

[@ChrisSpiegl]

I would look into all the available RF lenses nowadays and decide based on the focal length you mostly shoot. If you like 35mm then the 35mm f/1.8 is a great choice. But nowadays, there are some 24mm and 16mm and others available which may fit your needs better.

[@taimoorkhanvlogs]

Can I use this lens on my Full frame camera Cannon 6D Mark II ..?

[@shawnyee033]

Not really

[@TMMS1984]

Thank you! I guess in my case I need a zoom for general stuff and for some special magic, this 35mm should also be in my backpack.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

I appreciate your comment. It's wonderful to know what you specifically need and then go out and get that. A comparison like this should make you think about that and help in your considerations. I'm surprised this video still has so much attention on it despite being years old… Maybe I should make a follow-up version.

[@TMMS1984]

Please do! Canon released also the 35mm 1.4 and that can also be compared with these two situations.

[@meyowind5743]

Do you recommend the 24-105mm or the sigma 35mm? For videos and for sharpness

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Hello, I don't know the Sigma 35mm so I don't know if I can make a judgement. And it is an almost impossible question to answer because it always will be "depends" what you are looking for. The 24-105 will give you much more flexibility but not the shallow depth of field. If I only had one lense, I would go for the 24-105 for versatility. If I want something smaller, with great image quality, I'd go for the 35mm. In my studio: I mostly use the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 for my in studio work.

[@meyowind5743]

Thank you

[@ChrisSpiegl]

@@meyowind5743 You're welcome.

[@blaspayri]

The RF 24-105 zoom lens focuses well, but it is not that quick and immediate I have found.

[@docbensch]

Thanks a lot for the review. Could you briefly comment on the differences in autofocus speed (including eye detection) between the two lenses in photo mode?

[@truckernige]

nice vid.. subbed.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you. That’s awesome. 🌸🌸

[@ryzenbiel4145]

24-105mm RF F4 Vs 35mm RF 1.8 85mm F2 RF what u pick should i get the 24-105 or that both prime lens??

[@ChrisSpiegl]

This highly depends on your use case. An important question to ask yourself: Do you prefer image quality or do you want flexibility?

[@ryzenbiel4145]

@@ChrisSpiegl yeah your right i prepare image quality and bokeh .. .

[@maisiaola]

Link broken anywhere, pls check

[@Larimuss]

I was thinking which one of these to get as I could only afford one.. however I already have the EF 50mm which cost like $150 so I figured might as well just get the 24-105 lens. I’m a noob though so I hope it’s good lol. The 35mm looks okay but just very expensive for a prime lens that doesn’t look as good as like the EF 35mm sigma art lens which is a top notch lens just no stabilization. I feel like this does not have anything really over the 50mm.

[@Anakena3]

very detailed and honest. I have the 24 105, was thinking of a prime like the 35mm, but more on the photo side (non video), looking to sharpness, what do you think?

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thanks for watching! I really like the 35 mm for all things - even years after making this video. But especially for photos, to carry around - because it is the smallest RF lens I have for any of my Canon cameras. I never felt any negativity about its sharpness and am very pleased with the lens.

[@Anakena3]

@@ChrisSpiegl thanks I’ve just ordered a secondhand that I got for €360.

[@brianthibault5929]

I have the same camera and lenses. Good to know we have the same experiences.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thanks for your comment. And what kind of experience do you have with it?

[@brianthibault5929]

@@ChrisSpiegl I use my camera for photography, no video, but the low light capability of the F1.8 is superior to the F4.0. I mostly use manual focus, for both lenses, as I do night photography and landscape. I have only attempted photographing with the auto a few times and have found it to be a bit of a bother, but I am new and still learning all the functions. I am on IG @artisticinspiration101 if you wanted to see some examples of the photos i take. I am also hoping to get the 15-35 lens as my next lens, but very expensive here in Canada! I am also considering lenses from other makers such as Samyang and Sigma.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

@@brianthibault5929 those Samyang and Sigma lenses can be real good. I remember I had a blast with the 14mm f/2.8 fully manual Samyang (EF Mount and with the 5D Mark 2 at the time for HDR Landscapes). Really good to see how that company keeps developing some killer lenses. I see your point and in my opinion the 35mm f1.8 is really remarkable for the price. I love mine and hope I get to use it again in my videos soon. 👌 And I also see your point about auto focus. Makes sense that that isn’t quite as workable for Astro photography. Definitely a whole different challenge. Good luck and i hope to provide you with some more good I sights over time on the channel. 🌸

[@mikeperkins4356]

Fantastic video!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you very much!

[@bamsemh1]

24-105mm for allround/travel photography. 35mm for street photography

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Great idea 👍.

[@bohdandanylyk351]

What is best lens for video Canon EOS?

[@bohdandanylyk351]

Hello @@ChrisSpiegl Just for home video. I saw new RF 24-105 f4

[@jasonchen3800]

F4 is still unusable in some places

[@HeroShotz]

Dude should i trade my sigma 50 1.4 and canon 70200 f4 for this lens ?

[@blaspayri]

I just bought the Canon EOS R6 II with the RF 24-105 F4 lens ... which is too front-heavy for the gimbal I have and cannot stabilise correctly. I was considering the RF 35 F1.8 lens which would be in theory very useful for my needs (gimbal recording moving subjects, and doing also close-ups and push-in .... so the macro capabilities would be great) but ... apparently this lens is bad with autofocus and that is essential for my needs as I cannot manual focus. I wonder if 3 years later the autofocus capabilities of the RF 35mm have been improved with the new cameras and possibly with new firmware. How frustrating the lens line-up of canon.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

The auto focus on the 35mm f1.8 is still kind of the same. It’s the motor that’s the issue. In your case: depending on the gimbal, you may be able to stabilize the lens with a front bracket. Usually those come with the gimbal to give the lens front support. Another alternative would be the 16mm or another prime in-between those numbers.

[@blaspayri]

@@ChrisSpiegl thank you for your response. I don't think that on my gimbals (the zhiyun crane 2 does not fit at all laterally or frontally, the ronin sc I manage to get it stable but it has to be so much pushed to the rear that some movements are blocked with the zoom lens) I will be able to stabilise a heavy and long lens. So either I get another gimbal with higher capacity, or I go for a shorter and lighter lens. The problem with canon (I am new to canon) is the restricted amount of lenses, and that the L USM series are extremely expensive and heavy, and even the prime lens 50mm is heavier than the zoom lens ... so the 35mm STM could have been the perfect focal length, stabilised, macro and light combination if it had autofocus. So maybe I will look into heavier gimbals and heavy lenses and spend a lot of money on the way.

[@bettyswallocks6411]

Nice informative, to the point video, although you have the wrong name to do reviews of mirrorless cameras.😈🤪 The RF 24-105 also works reasonably well with extension tubes, not too long though, or the point of focus enters the lens.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you for your comment and that joke… 🙈 And also thank you for the info about the extension tubes. I personally don't use those but sounds like fun 👍.

[@LetsAskAmericans]

awesome video。thanks

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thanks for watching!

[@TheCoExister]

What is the big difference between the 35mm and the 85mm deigned for this body?

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Hello Shanti, I have not tested the 85mm but the main difference would be that the focal length is different. But that's kind of obvious IMO. So you'll get a very different field of view. Much narrower, much more "zoomed in". The 85mm would be perfect for headshots / upper body portraits and if you want to get more compression in the shot. However, something to note is that you'll also need to be able to put some distance between yourself and the subject you are trying to photograph or film. Happy lens shopping.

[@pridesports]

Best lens in 24-105mm F4L USM

[@kaydawgy1999]

where are the sample pics??

[@ChrisSpiegl]

This was focused on video, there are no sample pics.

[@PunjabiGymBeats]

35 looks more cleaner and sharper and 24-105 f4 looks little dull in video.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

I also prefer the look of the 35mm, but the other things are benefits as well.

[@PunjabiGymBeats]

@@ChrisSpiegl thanks.

[@MrShijo]

F4 needs more light, thats why it looks dull and seems like a bit underexposed. But i think its sharper than 35mm even its underexposed..

[@level6visuals363]

You tested 1.8 vs f4 . Should’ve tested both at f4

[@ChrisSpiegl]

That's a good point. But at the same time there is value in showing the difference one can achieve by using the 35mm f/1.8 which simply is a look the f/4 can not give.

[@mrdamiansingh]

Most cinematic scenes are shot at 4- 5.6 so it’s all subjective

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Good to know. I use my 35 at 1.8 a lot for the added light and since I don't have as much of a distance to the backdrop. But i can see how 4+ is a good measure for outdoor shooting.

[@mrdamiansingh]

@@ChrisSpiegl oh for sure you are right in every aspect! And yes 🙌🏾 if you are the only subject and documentary wise! It’s great to use your faster aputure settings! I was just asking people think the blur background signifies “cinematic” when overall the video itself should be! I’m adding to your all great arguments

[@ChrisSpiegl]

@@mrdamiansingh I also have seen that meme one day where someone made fun of “KZbin cinematic” and actual retro cinema look. It was hilarious but sadly I can’t find it any more. 🤔 Basically it was a scene from a western movie where someone made one version which was super blurry in front and background and just a sharp line was in focus. And the original was almost all in focus but with a nice fade. It was great.

[@ly8370]

Cheapest RF lens is the 50mm f1.8.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Probably true. But at the time the video was shot the 50mm f/1.8 was not even announced. 🙈

[@Foto_School]

Apples and Oranges?

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Only if you already know everything and have all the lenses. I personally was in the position to wonder about these two so why not provide that video for those wondering as well?

[@pridesports]

Хаха only focus on face, 😂, ever best photographer and you tuber

[@ajitchauhan6838]

Not a single photo for comparison 😂

[@frecadore86]

after 10 minutes of listening to you i realised that you didn’t show absolutely no differences between those two lenses! So long video , for nothing!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Not sure which video you watched, I think there are some pretty clear differences.

[@frecadore86]

@@ChrisSpiegl yes they are differences , jus that in the firs 10 minutes of the video is nothing happening. Just bla ,Bla, ,bla!

[@marvinlovenfeldt]

RF 50mm f1.8 STM is the cheapest RF lens.

[@dayeah765caoni3]

Cheap for a reason. Boooooooring

[@marvinlovenfeldt]

@@dayeah765caoni3 It's the nifty fifty lens. Borring or not. It's a bestseller.

[@dahaizang]

What's the point of the comparison? They are not even close.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

There is always a point… maybe it's not helpful for you but many others. Myself included.

[@chukolna]

sharpness???????

[@melgross]

“If you’re doing photography”...isn’t that what’s it for, what else would we use it for? ‘The 35 can’t zoom the way the 24 to 105 can”. Well, yes, of course. I’m not sure how someone compares a 35 to a 24-105, and asks which is a better choice. These lenses are so different that choosing one over the other is going to be a strange number of parameters to look at. I get that you only have these two lenses for some reason, but a normal choice wouldn’t be between these do. Making an assumption that someone buying the camera has no lenses yet, why would these two be the ones someone should choose between? If a 35 is a choice, then the 24-70 f2.8 would be a much better comparison.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

I think many people have found this video very helpful. So many people are apparently asking the exact question. In terms of your suggestion of comparing the 35 to a 24-70 f/2.8? How is that a better comparison when the 2.8 is about 2.5x as expensive as the 24-105. Also the 24-105 is a kit lens for the EOS R and the 35f1.8 is one of the cheapest. So that’s part of the question. And lastly: how about one would use it vor video and not just photography? Which my video is mostly geared towards. Looking at the autofocus speed in video and similar. I argue that every perspective can be helpful. If mine wasn’t helpful for you, I am sorry and I hope you find the information you’re looking for in another review. If I can answer any other questions, feel free to let me know. 🌸

[@melgross]

Yes, the 2.8 is much more expensive. It was just an example I uses, because as a lens, it’s a much better comparison. But I keep thinking that since you only have these two lenses, you decided to do a video comparing them. I honestly can’t think of a case where most people would actually see all the lenses Canon has, and pick these two out to compare. Maybe the $400 24-105 instead, as, while it’s slower, the size, weight, and cost are much more similar. I have the 24-105, the older one for the EF. It’s a fine, though somewhat oddball lens. Best for walk around shooting such as street photos, though in a pinch it can be use for other things as well. But the 35 is much more limited, other than for the speed. It would generally be a case of which prime to get other than this 35, or which zoom to get other than this 24-105, rather than this 35 or this zoom.

[@ChrisSpiegl]

@@melgross well, you may be right that at that time these are the only two lenses I have. However, suggesting the 24-105 STM… it wasn’t even announced at the time I made this video. Also, the comparison stands… both lenses have their drawbacks and benefits. And everybody has their own opinion on lenses - which is why there are different lenses for all kinds of use-cases and scenarios. And I honestly don’t understand how the 24-70 is a “better comparison” to the 35mm? Those two are equally as different to the 35f1.8? And yet - if you’d make a video like that - there will most likely be people who are interested in it and watch it through. Cause … you know… people have different circumstances and needs.

[@MrDvaz]

how can you compare a 24-105 to a 35 lens.....apples and bananas.....fail!!!!!

[@ChrisSpiegl]

I think the comments here speak for themselves, some people find it helpful and interesting indeed. If it's not helpful for you, you're welcome to move along.

[@bigbluerios]

Waste of video here. No examples at all . Blah blah blah blah

[@ChrisSpiegl]

Thank you for your feedback.