user102873
| sent on 03 Agosto 2020
Pros: Love at first use, blurry which is a symphony, front view from lensporn, detail and microcontrast to f1.2 all over the frame, optically without almost smudging.
Cons: Weight, clutter, 82 mm front filter (but there are those who do worse), lack of stabilizer, blurry sometimes nervous in the foreground. Price?
Opinion: It gets to me, from Amazon, the spack, it's much bigger than I imagined and I had prepared myself, psychologically, not to like it. The weight, however, is well distributed in the center and in the back as on the RF 50 f1.2 so I find it well balanced on the R. Then I remove the front cap, look at that front lens and see the slats closed and it is love, immediately, immediate. I feel it without delay, AF not very fast but it has stuff to move in there, in that glass bucket. Sharpening everywhere at f1.2, palate microcontrast, practically zero curvature of field and perfectly centered as optics. Blurred? Well, I used f0.95 (50 mm) and no, this is from another planet (almost zero chromatic aberrations and also very limited/almost absent spherochromatism). Even compared to the various 85 f1.4 it blur a lot (even at f1.4 it blurs more) and with little vignetting and a lot of detail and microcontrast (had I already said it by chance?). The only two flaws, as far as I am concerned, are a certain nervousness in blurred in the presence of small elements (such as leaves for example) especially in the "foregroud" (in the first floor), probably due to the characteristics of strong optical correction and the general detail of the lens and the lack of the stabilizer but in the meantime I took the R6 so the second problem arises less :). As a focal it is slightly longer than the EF 85 f1.2 and bears quite well the use of extension tubes (I do not recommend using it with pipes longer than 12 mm). I don't just put 10 for the two described above. So in the end, yes, the Canon RF costs money but i think it's worth it all. I predict a good price hold over time. |