12-21-2019, 11:12 AM
(This post was last modified: 12-21-2019, 11:14 AM by Klaus.)
So we have a last pre-Christmas review for you - about the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 STM IS macro
Sorry, no sample images in there - the bushfires around Sydney are currently limiting the fun factor for photography.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
12-21-2019, 04:28 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-21-2019, 04:35 PM by Spinifex.)
Thank you for the review.
I have been enjoying that lens immensely. In fact, I like to refer to it as the "Swiss Army Knife" of the system: it's small and unobtrusive, it can accomplish several things pretty well, from low-light situations to street photography, environmental portraits and macro photography, though it does not excel in any single capacity (that's what big knives... er, lenses... are for). And the price is right, which is rare nowadays (looking at you Sony [Zeiss 35mm f2.8 for $749!] and Fuji [As much as I love their Fujicrons, APS-C 35/50mm f2 should not be $399-449]).
It's basically the reason I decided to go to the Canon RF system (as well as the 24-105mm f4). Now, Canon, I just need to see a couple more Amateur-level lenses, notably a light f4 or variable-aperture telezoom.
For what it is it seems kind of yucky from your test results. Maybe it is cheap.
I'm genuinely surprised by that response. What part of the lens sounds "yucky"? The review states:
- "the native distortion characteristic is actually pretty decent with a barrel distortion of just ~1%."
- "The resolution characteristic of the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 STM IS macro is impressive"
- "Lateral CA (color shadows at the image borders) stay just below an average pixel width of 1px at the image borders. This is usually neglible"
- "If you decide to buy a fast prime lens, you also do so for superior bokeh compared to the zoom lenses. And the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 STM IS macro doesn't disappoint us here"
- "The background blur (shown to the left) is especially silky"
The two main failings are vignetting and swirly/cat's eye bokeh (which is fixed by f2.8), which will be unavoidable in a Full-Frame Mirrorless lens of this size. Is it build quality then? It's a $449 FF lens, something has to give.
It seems pretty nice, actually.
Besides being more than decent optically, it has that cool control ring, and IS.
Focus shift and native vignetting, and that's pretty much it as far as the downsides go. Looks like a no-brainer, especially as it's the only native 35mm (or wider, anyway) prime in the system thus far.
Of course if I had been building an RF system I'd rather spring for the 15-35 (or an inevitable slower variant), forgoing this.
Vignetting - what did just happen? Yet to see a lens from Canon and Nikon with better parameters here. The revolution of wider lens mount - it sounds more and more like marketing blurb now.
There is a difference between F-stops and T-stops. F stops indicate aperture size, thus giving you an indication of the defocus you can expect. T stops give you an indication of transmission, this is why cine lenses use these instead.
I also find extreme vignetting to be an issue with some lenses, but it's usually easier to forgive on fast glass