[toni-a]

Was looking for RF 35mmf1.8 when I came across Canon  EF 35mmf1.4 MKI in good condition for less than 300 EUR.
Knowing that I want it as carry everywhere lens, and I willl be mostly shooting my  kids in parks and malls, which one would you recommenf ?

Unless it's winter nobody here goes to parks in daytime when temperatures get around 50 degrees celcius. Life is rather nocturnal,

[Rover]

Depends on the condition of that 35/1.4, of course (and judging by the way it showed itself in Klaus's test, it should be okay by 2.8), and bear in mind that it will be so much larger than the 1.8 adapted.

I would've chosen the 35/1.4, I guess, but it may be just my wariness of the Canon RF system in general...

The 1.8 looks a lot sharper, of course, until both are stopped down a lot and the difference goes away.

[wim]

The RF 35 F/1.8, no 2 doubts.

The EF 35L Mk I is not all that great, if you ask me, it is one of 3 L-lenses I owned and tested I never really liked, and I wasn't convinced by its sharpness and rendering either. Not so great in darker environments either, IME, which is what you'd want to use an F/1.4 lens for from, say F/1.4 to F/2.8.

I must say here that I never really liked the 35 mm FL either, I could not really work with it, I did not see it, and I have tried and owned many over the years, from 1973 onwards. That changed completely, however, with the RF F/1.8 version, which I got because of a good deal a few years ago, and I wanted to give it a try because of its close focusing abilities.. I never looked back. It is a delight to shoot, it is light, it focuses very close, and its IQ stands up to the EF 35L II, only a teensy fraction less sharp than the 35L II when stopped down.

It currently is my 'standard' lens on the EOS R, the lens I have always mounted unless i need a different perspective. Highly recommended, in my book anyway.

HTH, kind regards, WIm