Show some love to the guys at www.hireacamera.com/ Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art - geni.us/50art B&H- bhpho.to/2PSJfX7 Canon EF 50mm f1.2 - geni.us/ef5012 B&H - bhpho.to/2PTh9uH Canon RF 50mm f1.2l - geni.us/rf50 B&H- bhpho.to/2PW2TRT
YES! He is comparing MY (LOL!) Sigma thru the 5D4's AA filter which significantly lowers sharpness at these huge file sizes. The Canon Cripple Hammer is in full effect on the EF-Mount lenses here. :-) I think that the Sigma is MUCH closer in sharpness than what we are seeing in this test. Definitely.
Perhaps a more accurate comparison would have been to simply test all three on the Canon EOS-R with the EF-RF adapter? This would allow the same sensor with a newer processing engine and firmware(Vers. 1.2 with servo eye auto focus) to render the results more fairly. I have the EOS-R and a number of the Sigma Art 1.4 lenses. There are Canon supported profiles for all "Art" series lenses natively installed in the EOS-R. Though I'm pretty sure the RF 50 will still win anyway.
@@Sondercreative Have you tried the Canon EF Adapters? There are no issues at all. It doesn't do the other lenses justice to compare when you're focusing with an inferior focusing system.
Sonder Creative, I have to disagree. I have used EF lenses on the R with the adapter and there is no hiccups whatsoever. You have to compare apples to apples, same lenses on both cameras. I have both cameras.
@@beverleylusteeves5989 Do you happen to have both the EF 24-70 please? I'd love to see if there are any colour differences. Controlled lighting, set white balance and colour checker in shot too, please. I'd really appreciate if you could do that.
Really interesting video but you're just plain wrong about the color. You cannot compare lens color reproduction on different camera bodies. It's blindingly obvious that the EOS R has less magenta than the 5D VI. Just because they're both Canon cameras doesn't mean the colors will be processed the same and many reviewers have already pointed out that Canon changed their colors with the EOS R - for better or worse. Anyway, I prefer the Sigma bokeh but that RF is crazy sharp.
They have the same sensor and a colour checker passport and a colour checker Digital SG was used. Also this is native performance. Thats how these lenses perform on a camera they are specifically designed for.
The 5Div is NOT the same colour as the R. I have both cameras and have used the same lenses on both. The 5Div has a more magenta color and the R is more neutral colour. I have done a multitude of testing for this as I thought it would be the same as the sensors are similar. But the processor is different. There is a definite colour difference in these 2 cameras. Your 5Div colour is not the lenses, it's the camera.
@@beverleylusteeves5989 I'd love to see your results please. Same lens on both cameras in controlled situation with a colour checker and a set white balance. Huge thanks in advance.
I have used all 3 and the RF is the best hands down. Although if you own both a DSLR and a EOS R I would probably get the EF 50L because you can use it on both mirrorless and DSLR
All very nice lenses. Personally I like the look of the old canon EF in both IQ and ergonomics. It somehow seems to suppress highlights better than the other two and the colors were the best IMHO. I’m not a “sharpness” guy, so the ability to shoot wide open and dreamy actually is a plus for portraiture for me, then stop down to f2-2.8 and I bet they all start becoming more and more similar. By 5.6 I bet you can’t tell them apart. The Sonnar designs have that ability as well, wide open you get a magical art lens, stopped down and it’s very sharp with just the right contrast.
I have heard the EOSR (RP) give new life to old lenses like the EF 50mm 1.2 because of the focusing which is done at a sensor level. I would have loved to see how the EF 50mm 1.2 then compared to the RF 50mm 1.2 if you shot both on the EOSR. Thanks for the awesome video!
It's the truth. I owned the EF 50 1.2 and the DPAF adapted on the R was fantastic, much better than my 5DM3. It truly was like "getting a new lease on life". I got the RF ver when it came out a few months after the R body and sold my EF 50. I can tell you anecdotally that the RF 50 is not significantly better focusing on the R. Maybe a bit more smooth and refined, given the EF 50 is more than a decade old, but nothing glaring. Paired with the R both lenses can also focus down to EV -6.
Brian Chu thanks a lot for letting me know. I do not plan on getting the RF lenses at all due to cost. So far my sigma lenses work flawlessly especially for what I do, which is lifestyle and portraits. The EOS R is truly underrated
@@brianchu8147 This is really promising. The newly announced R6 looks great, and it should be great with my existing Canon EF lenses. It also means there will be a period before used EF lens prices will go up due to R5 and R6 owners buying them.
raksh9 the R6 is what we all hoped the R was going to be...but I for one glad they focused on lenses first to build out the ecosystem. How far we’ve come in just two years! The new cameras should give all EF lens users out there a new lease on life!
Dude! Killer review!!! I just got my Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens TODAY! I can't wait to go out and run it through some test shots, but once again, it's been shown to be well worth what I paid for it ($570, in fact!). I love your fast, concise style of reviewing and how you load up the details. Gerald Undone has nothing on you. ;) I only hate on this review because you made me want to get the RF Canon lens so my OES R has an RF buddy in my stable. It may be the only one of the RF lenses I can afford, and my 14-24 Sigma Art is awesome, so no worries there, and my EF 70-200 Canon lens (Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM) is so insanely good in my world that it'll suffice for years to come, but man, I really want to have some RF glass to push the limits of my ESO R. Nice job; sub'in' and ringing the bell for future vids from you! You certainly deserve more subscribers, my friend.
The Sigma Art 50 is the lens that ruined me. I was perfectly happy with my camera bag back in 2014, but after I bought it, I realized everything I owned wasn't good enough. (I've replaced every lens since then except the 135L) Great video and kind of proved my fears of the RF lens' bokeh performance. I think the Sigma really beat everyone out.
Kevin DiOssi see for me the sigma is actually one of lens rendering I prefer least. For reproduction work ( I do this type of shooting often ) the sigma is great because of the detail /resolution. Though I find it to be less crisp and pop looking that lenses like the EF 50 1.2 when viewing the image as a whole such as in a large print of full screen on monitor. At 2:1 viewing the sigma does show more visible resolution especially in the corners at wide apertures.
@@nigelwest3430 yes but they produce virtually identical results. If anything the 5D4 is a better camera. There’s no discernible difference in performance. Additionally if we’re gonna go that level of minutiae then lenses always perform best on native mounts. The difference in the grand scheme of things is completely and utterly negligible. If I did as you suggest then there would be complaints about that from the opposite side.
@@Sondercreative A totally different processor is hardly "minutiae" also EF lenses perform as if native on RF bodies...no point discussing further, we will obviously never agree.
I have the sigma art and it just lacks micro contrast. It's somewhat embarassing ho many modern lenses to satisfy monkeys photographers bet everything on "sharpness" ignoring color rendition and micro contrast, such a shame. Sure my sigma is super sharp and the images pops out in terms of "wow" effect. But it's a clinical rendition without any nuance in color and mid grey tones (if you're converting in b/w). Going to go back to Canon.
About RF vs EF: please do remember that adding a bit of sharpness in post (where you need it) is possible and not that difficult. On the contrary, the dreamy look of the wide open EF lens is not something you can replicate easily. EF lens can add "magic", will RF do the same?
I think both the Canon RF and EF lenses were outstanding in terms of performance for different reasons. The kind of depth of field the EF and RF produce were pretty much identical. Having said that I think the clarity of the RF was unmatched. It's not just sharpness because you can do that for any lens. It's how detailed the images were and detail isn't something a slider can replicate. The EF however is just a stunning lens too and again it's for a very different reason. I like them both but I get the feeling you seem to enjoy results from the EF :). Can't go wrong with that lens.
@@Sondercreative Understand. I'm asking myself and I'm willing to understand myself when I'll have a mirrorless, if all this clarity is going to kill the dreamy look EF creates. RF seems (SEEMS) to look very contemporary, loosing that vintage taste. This EF is not an easy one, when it comes to get consistent results, at least for me. But I cannot understand those who say it focuses slow: it's very fast, not as Canon's 70 200 is v2, but faster than a 35mm f2 or a Tamron 24 70 g1.
So if you had to choose between the Canon EF 1.2 or the Sigma 1.4 to shoot with for artistic fashion photos - which lens would you choose ?? Its kind of hard to decide whether to go with the Sigma 1.4 or the Canon EF 1.2....The RF lens for me is NOT affordable
A few things to think about with regards to the 50mm EF 1.2 lens, yes it is a little soft wide open, but this is in part due to the focus on the canon slr cameras. Also this lens is all most like 2 lenses in 1 wide open it gives a creamy glow to the image, but stop it down to f1.6 & its similar in sharpness to the sigma 50mm 1.4 lens art lens.
I just find it interesting how you say that you could not test the all of the lenses on the same body. Fortuna's Merrill assistant they make an adapter that all of those losses would have fit on. Can you please clarify your comment.
Thanks. The video does a great job at showing the bokeh at wide open - but what happens as you step down? Does everything still remain roundish in the 50 RF?
As far as I can remember it was pretty good but I didn’t test that thoroughly. I’m sorry I missed that point. I’ll keep that in mind for future comparisons.
I wouldn’t trust the colours you see in a compressed video on RUclips especially if the screen you’re looking at isn’t calibrated. The sigma does have a nice amount of contrast but it’s not more than the RF. the colours on the sigma weren’t the best compared to both the EF and the RF. the RF probably looks green relative to the overly magenta tones in the Sigma but the RF is definitely more neutral.
Thank-you, Usman! Wonderful review! I love your style and your details. I am considering strongly the Canon RF 50 1.2, and this video helped me SEE the differences! Deeply appreciate your time and your presentation :)!!
I did off-screen and the focusing was ok at best. Sigma is a third party lens and the EF f1.2 is really old so they both didn't perform really well on the EOS R with the adapter. Also, image quality comparisons would have been a waste of time because the sensor is exactly the same. I didn't want to make the video longer than it had to and wanted to stick to the main points. Hope that's ok :).
Sonder Creative I have heard that Canon had created new lens profiles for EF lens when used on the R. I assume that correction would happen with the Canon software. Also the focusing speed and accuracy was increased.
@@Sondercreative I don't know what you were doing, but that's simply not true. Every single lens that I tried on my eos R with an adapter works the same, or even better than on my 5DmkIV. Other users and reviewers have noticed the same thing. And it makes sense because it's not a third party adapter, but a genuine Canon adapter. Also, how am I supposed to compare lenses when the very first photo you put in comparison has motion blur because it was taken at 1/50s? I'm soory but you really did a poor job in this video.
Nicely said Usman! At this level, all 3 lenses are compared in just the details and it all falls down to personal preference and budget. Renting as you said is always a good option if you are aiming on a higher production value but it’s not your everyday line of work to justify buying the most expensive ones. Personally, being an amateur photographer, I’m using mostly f/2.8 zoom lenses (Tamron & Sigma) which are good trade offs in quality and flexibility vs price but primes are usually at least a hair better if not a lot better in some situations by comparison.
I have sigma and find it hard to use on portraits esp close up, so much distortion. U can see right away in the comparison. Both canon lens rf and ef produced similar facial shape but the sigma is majorly distorted in the middle.
Thanks for this review and sharing the findings. Just getting little bit sad, when sharpness becomes a synonym to image quality in modern reviews. But well, this is probably the most obvious and measurable part...thats why. One thing about the newer lenses, that might be important to test is a continuous auto focusing on video mode. Personaly love ef version of 50mm 1.2 for stills but unfortunately in video it is not very usable with af.
Thanks for your video. really like the song in the intro when you get into talking about the performance of the lens.WOuld you mind sharing the song name and by who? Also what lens and camera do you guys use to make the video? Very cool chic style! Thanks!
Thank you so much that’s really nice of you to say. The music is from Epidemic Sounds. I’ll see if I can find a link. The camera we use is the Sony A7R III and the main lenses we use are the Zeiss 55mm f1.8 and the 28mm f2
The EF lens does look better in terms of colour. You have to appreciate that you're looking at this in a highly compressed video on RUclips so differences in colour may be difficult to see. also the kind of screen you're using to watch this makes a difference too. The RF is a brilliant lens though.
@@Sondercreative Yes, I understand what you're saying, from the video the RF did look much better that's why when you spoke about the EF...it looked quite similar to the sigma...in the video. Thank you for the review!
Today manufactures do a lot of processing and communication between lenses and body. They can achieve an optical quality by designing a lens around a camera never seen before. I question that the 50mm RF lens is the „best“ 50mm lens out there. It may get very good results combined with the R body but that has a lot to do with algorithms polishing up optical problems. On a different camera this lens would not perform as good. You can‘t imagine how much optical optimization internal software is going on in the lens and body communication even if you shoot in RAW format- it‘s far far away from untouched RAW data. So the combi of R body and RF lens is performing very good - seperate them and you get another story. That’s the case with every other manufacture as well.
You’re right that’s very true. Having said that the majority of that is for distortion, diffraction and vignettes. Shooting wide open to see optical performance can’t be corrected that much or at all. Detail captured is still based on fundamentals which can’t really be faked with algorithms in cameras like the EOS R because they just don’t have the processing power to make up detail. Also all lenses perform better natively it’s something that’s true for every camera. Due to the flange distance it’s going to be incredibly difficult if not at all possible to use this lens on any other camera. Ultimately it’s about the results and this lens produces results that are beyond almost any other 50mm lens right now.
It’s mostly due to the physics of light. Even Otus lenses will have that kind of bokeh on the edges. In regards to Red cameras, it can’t be based on the camera it will be entirely based on the lens. Do you recall which lens it was filming with?
@@Hshjshshjsj72727 Essentially, yes. It varies from lens to lens but the majority of lenses will have oval shaped bokeh on the edges. It's mostly due to the angle at which light enters the lens. The sides of an image is where light has traveled from a steep angle. It's like when you look at a circular hole from the side, it will appear oval in shape to you.
@@Sondercreative well.. I assume you are showing JPEGs, right? then the same "sensor" doesn't have any impact on the image quality. Also, these all have CMOS sensors, I think what you tried to mention was the image processor. But, EOS R has DIGIC 8 , while Mark IV has DIGIC 6+. Since JPEG is a compressed file, this different image processor creates a big difference. According to you, then all 5D cameras should have the same tone/color, but they are all different.
@@ericlee4991 all raw files. Also any differences based on the processors would generally only apply to noise performance algorithms not detail and sharpness; especially due to both sensors having an AA filter. Performance between both cameras, as shown in many comparisons, is virtually identical in terms of image quality. Therefore, to say the sigma would have been much better is completely untrue.
@@Sondercreative Thank you for your insight but I still have to disagree with you. Again, your review of those lenses is based on color, tone, and sharpness. According to your argument, all 5D cameras should have the same results because they all have the same sensor. I have used all 5Ds and 6Ds, EOS R, RP, now I have a R6. These are all different. It's not just because of lenses. I personally think if you want to compare different lenses, then it gotta be done on the same system(image processors). Image quality could be a subjective matter. I don't know you are a photographer or just a reviewer. I have been shooting more than 500 weddings and I know which one is "better" for me. I definitely tell you that Sigma Art lenses are the best so I had to sell all my L lenses. When I say this, I tried them all on the same body so I know exactly how they look.
@@ericlee4991 the 5DS, 6D and EOS R all have different sensors, therefore they will have differences in performance. The EOS R and the 5D Mark IV have the same exact sensor, therefore performance is virtually identical. Had I have done it the other way round, people would have complained about how adapting isn’t native and I should have compared them with the camera systems they were designed for. Having said that, please feel free to provide any of your findings.
game2572 no because that’s not fair if your testing by adapting. You have to compare on native mounts otherwise other factors will interfere. Also autofocus was identical to the EOS R when shooting in live view.
It is your test you can do it anyway you want. But the adapter is pure canon so ef mount works seamlessly with the RF mount but I haven’t shot with it so you may know something I don’t
game2572 honestly it doesn’t work seamlessly especially not with third party lenses like the sigma 50mm art. That’s why it’s not a fair comparison to adapt and compare.
It’s not about the adapter lol, it’s different focusing systems. A fair comparison would allow all lenses to be compared via all focus systems. You can’t adapt the RF 50 to the 5D4 so it’s an incomplete test/comparison. I do go on to discuss DPAF.
Show some love to the guys at www.hireacamera.com/
Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art - geni.us/50art B&H- bhpho.to/2PSJfX7
Canon EF 50mm f1.2 - geni.us/ef5012 B&H - bhpho.to/2PTh9uH
Canon RF 50mm f1.2l - geni.us/rf50 B&H- bhpho.to/2PW2TRT
Would have been nice to see these all compared on the EOS-R. Otherwise great video
YES! He is comparing MY (LOL!) Sigma thru the 5D4's AA filter which significantly lowers sharpness at these huge file sizes. The Canon Cripple Hammer is in full effect on the EF-Mount lenses here. :-) I think that the Sigma is MUCH closer in sharpness than what we are seeing in this test. Definitely.
Perhaps a more accurate comparison would have been to simply test all three on the Canon EOS-R with the EF-RF adapter? This would allow the same sensor with a newer processing engine and firmware(Vers. 1.2 with servo eye auto focus) to render the results more fairly. I have the EOS-R and a number of the Sigma Art 1.4 lenses. There are Canon supported profiles for all "Art" series lenses natively installed in the EOS-R. Though I'm pretty sure the RF 50 will still win anyway.
Comparing on native mounts is more accurate. Adapting isn’t.
@@Sondercreative Have you tried the Canon EF Adapters? There are no issues at all. It doesn't do the other lenses justice to compare when you're focusing with an inferior focusing system.
Ryan Nanca dual pixel AF is identical on both cameras.
Sonder Creative, I have to disagree. I have used EF lenses on the R with the adapter and there is no hiccups whatsoever. You have to compare apples to apples, same lenses on both cameras. I have both cameras.
@@beverleylusteeves5989 Do you happen to have both the EF 24-70 please?
I'd love to see if there are any colour differences. Controlled lighting, set white balance and colour checker in shot too, please.
I'd really appreciate if you could do that.
Really interesting video but you're just plain wrong about the color. You cannot compare lens color reproduction on different camera bodies. It's blindingly obvious that the EOS R has less magenta than the 5D VI. Just because they're both Canon cameras doesn't mean the colors will be processed the same and many reviewers have already pointed out that Canon changed their colors with the EOS R - for better or worse. Anyway, I prefer the Sigma bokeh but that RF is crazy sharp.
They have the same sensor and a colour checker passport and a colour checker Digital SG was used.
Also this is native performance. Thats how these lenses perform on a camera they are specifically designed for.
The 5Div is NOT the same colour as the R. I have both cameras and have used the same lenses on both. The 5Div has a more magenta color and the R is more neutral colour. I have done a multitude of testing for this as I thought it would be the same as the sensors are similar. But the processor is different. There is a definite colour difference in these 2 cameras. Your 5Div colour is not the lenses, it's the camera.
@@beverleylusteeves5989 I'd love to see your results please.
Same lens on both cameras in controlled situation with a colour checker and a set white balance. Huge thanks in advance.
@@Sondercreative Sorry, you still don't understand what you're talking about.
Dennis Kapatos I just asked to see results in a polite manner but I don’t understand? You know everything right?
I have used all 3 and the RF is the best hands down. Although if you own both a DSLR and a EOS R I would probably get the EF 50L because you can use it on both mirrorless and DSLR
Honestly, I like the colour of the Sigma the best by far.
All very nice lenses. Personally I like the look of the old canon EF in both IQ and ergonomics. It somehow seems to suppress highlights better than the other two and the colors were the best IMHO. I’m not a “sharpness” guy, so the ability to shoot wide open and dreamy actually is a plus for portraiture for me, then stop down to f2-2.8 and I bet they all start becoming more and more similar. By 5.6 I bet you can’t tell them apart. The Sonnar designs have that ability as well, wide open you get a magical art lens, stopped down and it’s very sharp with just the right contrast.
Thank you for the helpful comparison video! Good luck and keep creating!
I have heard the EOSR (RP) give new life to old lenses like the EF 50mm 1.2 because of the focusing which is done at a sensor level. I would have loved to see how the EF 50mm 1.2 then compared to the RF 50mm 1.2 if you shot both on the EOSR.
Thanks for the awesome video!
It's the truth. I owned the EF 50 1.2 and the DPAF adapted on the R was fantastic, much better than my 5DM3. It truly was like "getting a new lease on life". I got the RF ver when it came out a few months after the R body and sold my EF 50. I can tell you anecdotally that the RF 50 is not significantly better focusing on the R. Maybe a bit more smooth and refined, given the EF 50 is more than a decade old, but nothing glaring. Paired with the R both lenses can also focus down to EV -6.
Brian Chu thanks a lot for letting me know.
I do not plan on getting the RF lenses at all due to cost. So far my sigma lenses work flawlessly especially for what I do, which is lifestyle and portraits.
The EOS R is truly underrated
@@brianchu8147 This is really promising. The newly announced R6 looks great, and it should be great with my existing Canon EF lenses. It also means there will be a period before used EF lens prices will go up due to R5 and R6 owners buying them.
raksh9 the R6 is what we all hoped the R was going to be...but I for one glad they focused on lenses first to build out the ecosystem. How far we’ve come in just two years! The new cameras should give all EF lens users out there a new lease on life!
Dude! Killer review!!! I just got my Sigma 50mm f1.4 Art lens TODAY! I can't wait to go out and run it through some test shots, but once again, it's been shown to be well worth what I paid for it ($570, in fact!). I love your fast, concise style of reviewing and how you load up the details. Gerald Undone has nothing on you. ;) I only hate on this review because you made me want to get the RF Canon lens so my OES R has an RF buddy in my stable. It may be the only one of the RF lenses I can afford, and my 14-24 Sigma Art is awesome, so no worries there, and my EF 70-200 Canon lens (Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM) is so insanely good in my world that it'll suffice for years to come, but man, I really want to have some RF glass to push the limits of my ESO R.
Nice job; sub'in' and ringing the bell for future vids from you! You certainly deserve more subscribers, my friend.
If you're doing Portraits spend on light and enjoy the sigma!
The Sigma Art 50 is the lens that ruined me. I was perfectly happy with my camera bag back in 2014, but after I bought it, I realized everything I owned wasn't good enough. (I've replaced every lens since then except the 135L)
Great video and kind of proved my fears of the RF lens' bokeh performance. I think the Sigma really beat everyone out.
Kevin DiOssi see for me the sigma is actually one of lens rendering I prefer least. For reproduction work ( I do this type of shooting often ) the sigma is great because of the detail /resolution. Though I find it to be less crisp and pop looking that lenses like the EF 50 1.2 when viewing the image as a whole such as in a large print of full screen on monitor. At 2:1 viewing the sigma does show more visible resolution especially in the corners at wide apertures.
I have the 5D mark IV, if you have the possibility to choose one EF Lens for the same price, used. Would be Sigma or Canon ?
Might have been a better idea to adapt the 2 EF lenses on the R then we would have had a more meaningful comparison
It’s the same sensor.
@@Sondercreative But not the same processor
@@nigelwest3430 yes but they produce virtually identical results. If anything the 5D4 is a better camera. There’s no discernible difference in performance.
Additionally if we’re gonna go that level of minutiae then lenses always perform best on native mounts. The difference in the grand scheme of things is completely and utterly negligible.
If I did as you suggest then there would be complaints about that from the opposite side.
@@Sondercreative A totally different processor is hardly "minutiae" also EF lenses perform as if native on RF bodies...no point discussing further, we will obviously never agree.
@@nigelwest3430 no we’re not going to agree.
A very well made and intelligent review of these three lenses - Thanks!
I rented EOS r and rf 50mm and man that lens is a monster when it comes to sharpness even at 1.2.
sigma 1.4 work with canon eos r and adapter?works all ? autofocus etc?
I have the sigma art and it just lacks micro contrast. It's somewhat embarassing ho many modern lenses to satisfy monkeys photographers bet everything on "sharpness" ignoring color rendition and micro contrast, such a shame. Sure my sigma is super sharp and the images pops out in terms of "wow" effect. But it's a clinical rendition without any nuance in color and mid grey tones (if you're converting in b/w). Going to go back to Canon.
About RF vs EF: please do remember that adding a bit of sharpness in post (where you need it) is possible and not that difficult. On the contrary, the dreamy look of the wide open EF lens is not something you can replicate easily. EF lens can add "magic", will RF do the same?
I think both the Canon RF and EF lenses were outstanding in terms of performance for different reasons. The kind of depth of field the EF and RF produce were pretty much identical. Having said that I think the clarity of the RF was unmatched. It's not just sharpness because you can do that for any lens. It's how detailed the images were and detail isn't something a slider can replicate.
The EF however is just a stunning lens too and again it's for a very different reason. I like them both but I get the feeling you seem to enjoy results from the EF :). Can't go wrong with that lens.
@@Sondercreative Understand. I'm asking myself and I'm willing to understand myself when I'll have a mirrorless, if all this clarity is going to kill the dreamy look EF creates. RF seems (SEEMS) to look very contemporary, loosing that vintage taste. This EF is not an easy one, when it comes to get consistent results, at least for me. But I cannot understand those who say it focuses slow: it's very fast, not as Canon's 70 200 is v2, but faster than a 35mm f2 or a Tamron 24 70 g1.
On my tv Sigma looked best in all images
It's a great lens right. Thank you for watching :).
So if you had to choose between the Canon EF 1.2 or the Sigma 1.4 to shoot with for artistic fashion photos - which lens would you choose ?? Its kind of hard to decide whether to go with the Sigma 1.4 or the Canon EF 1.2....The RF lens for me is NOT affordable
For artistic fashion, Canon. Commercial fashion, Sigma.
@@Sondercreative Thanks ...Whats represents commercial fashion ? Do they overlap?
A few things to think about with regards to the 50mm EF 1.2 lens, yes it is a little soft wide open, but this is in part due to the focus on the canon slr cameras. Also this lens is all most like 2 lenses in 1 wide open it gives a creamy glow to the image, but stop it down to f1.6 & its similar in sharpness to the sigma 50mm 1.4 lens art lens.
I love 50 EF but it's not sharp until f/3 or smaller apertures
I just find it interesting how you say that you could not test the all of the lenses on the same body. Fortuna's Merrill assistant they make an adapter that all of those losses would have fit on. Can you please clarify your comment.
timestamp to exact words I used please?
Thanks. The video does a great job at showing the bokeh at wide open - but what happens as you step down? Does everything still remain roundish in the 50 RF?
As far as I can remember it was pretty good but I didn’t test that thoroughly. I’m sorry I missed that point. I’ll keep that in mind for future comparisons.
Am I the only one who thinks sigma is the best among the three?
I think the Sigma is a brilliant lens and in some respects it is the best. It’s a very subjective matter I guess.
Rf 50/1.2 looks greenish. The Sigma and the EF have similar tones. The Sigma is more contrasty.
I wouldn’t trust the colours you see in a compressed video on RUclips especially if the screen you’re looking at isn’t calibrated.
The sigma does have a nice amount of contrast but it’s not more than the RF. the colours on the sigma weren’t the best compared to both the EF and the RF. the RF probably looks green relative to the overly magenta tones in the Sigma but the RF is definitely more neutral.
Thank-you, Usman! Wonderful review! I love your style and your details. I am considering strongly the Canon RF 50 1.2, and this video helped me SEE the differences! Deeply appreciate your time and your presentation :)!!
Far too kind, thank you very much :)
Why didn't you test the EF and Sigma on the R?
I did off-screen and the focusing was ok at best. Sigma is a third party lens and the EF f1.2 is really old so they both didn't perform really well on the EOS R with the adapter.
Also, image quality comparisons would have been a waste of time because the sensor is exactly the same. I didn't want to make the video longer than it had to and wanted to stick to the main points.
Hope that's ok :).
Sonder Creative I have heard that Canon had created new lens profiles for EF lens when used on the R. I assume that correction would happen with the Canon software. Also the focusing speed and accuracy was increased.
@@bngr_bngr correct they work great many times even better than. Dslrs :)
@@Sondercreative I don't know what you were doing, but that's simply not true. Every single lens that I tried on my eos R with an adapter works the same, or even better than on my 5DmkIV. Other users and reviewers have noticed the same thing. And it makes sense because it's not a third party adapter, but a genuine Canon adapter.
Also, how am I supposed to compare lenses when the very first photo you put in comparison has motion blur because it was taken at 1/50s? I'm soory but you really did a poor job in this video.
Nicely said Usman! At this level, all 3 lenses are compared in just the details and it all falls down to personal preference and budget. Renting as you said is always a good option if you are aiming on a higher production value but it’s not your everyday line of work to justify buying the most expensive ones. Personally, being an amateur photographer, I’m using mostly f/2.8 zoom lenses (Tamron & Sigma) which are good trade offs in quality and flexibility vs price but primes are usually at least a hair better if not a lot better in some situations by comparison.
The BEST one is Leica SL 50mm F1.4 lens. It is just insane Usman :)
I need to try that lens then. Thanks for watching man much appreciated.
Sonder Creative thanks man! Keep doing that beautiful videos!
Haven't seen many RF 50 reviews, so when I saw your video on my feed. I had to jump. Great review.
you should use the same body to test these lens...
I got the canon 50mmEF 1.2L Which I paid £490.00 for it second hand and Is BOXED
Wow that’s a great deal, very lucky.
I have sigma and find it hard to use on portraits esp close up, so much distortion. U can see right away in the comparison. Both canon lens rf and ef produced similar facial shape but the sigma is majorly distorted in the middle.
Thanks for this review and sharing the findings. Just getting little bit sad, when sharpness becomes a synonym to image quality in modern reviews. But well, this is probably the most obvious and measurable part...thats why.
One thing about the newer lenses, that might be important to test is a continuous auto focusing on video mode. Personaly love ef version of 50mm 1.2 for stills but unfortunately in video it is not very usable with af.
which one is better for video?
Thanks for your video. really like the song in the intro when you get into talking about the performance of the lens.WOuld you mind sharing the song name and by who? Also what lens and camera do you guys use to make the video? Very cool chic style! Thanks!
Thank you so much that’s really nice of you to say. The music is from Epidemic Sounds. I’ll see if I can find a link.
The camera we use is the Sony A7R III and the main lenses we use are the Zeiss 55mm f1.8 and the 28mm f2
The EF f/1.2 is way overpriced now, considering how soft it is. I know people like the look but that should be a choice, not a restriction.
Your videos are a lot better than your articles for Peta-PIxel
Thank you for taking the time to watch our video, it's very appreciated :).
Yeah the canon ef next to the sigma with the guys portrait, they look pretty much equally orange in this video, the rf lens is clearly more natural...
The EF lens does look better in terms of colour. You have to appreciate that you're looking at this in a highly compressed video on RUclips so differences in colour may be difficult to see. also the kind of screen you're using to watch this makes a difference too. The RF is a brilliant lens though.
@@Sondercreative Yes, I understand what you're saying, from the video the RF did look much better that's why when you spoke about the EF...it looked quite similar to the sigma...in the video. Thank you for the review!
Agree on the Sigma especially when paired with a MILC.
Today manufactures do a lot of processing and communication between lenses and body. They can achieve an optical quality by designing a lens around a camera never seen before. I question that the 50mm RF lens is the „best“ 50mm lens out there. It may get very good results combined with the R body but that has a lot to do with algorithms polishing up optical problems. On a different camera this lens would not perform as good. You can‘t imagine how much optical optimization internal software is going on in the lens and body communication even if you shoot in RAW format- it‘s far far away from untouched RAW data. So the combi of R body and RF lens is performing very good - seperate them and you get another story. That’s the case with every other manufacture as well.
You’re right that’s very true. Having said that the majority of that is for distortion, diffraction and vignettes. Shooting wide open to see optical performance can’t be corrected that much or at all. Detail captured is still based on fundamentals which can’t really be faked with algorithms in cameras like the EOS R because they just don’t have the processing power to make up detail. Also all lenses perform better natively it’s something that’s true for every camera. Due to the flange distance it’s going to be incredibly difficult if not at all possible to use this lens on any other camera.
Ultimately it’s about the results and this lens produces results that are beyond almost any other 50mm lens right now.
Those other bokeh look like lemons 😂 Is there any canon lens to make almost perfect circles ? Ive only noticed it on RED cameras tbh
It’s mostly due to the physics of light. Even Otus lenses will have that kind of bokeh on the edges.
In regards to Red cameras, it can’t be based on the camera it will be entirely based on the lens. Do you recall which lens it was filming with?
@@Sondercreative Thanks. So the more towards the edge, the more oval the bokeh will be ?
@@Hshjshshjsj72727 Essentially, yes. It varies from lens to lens but the majority of lenses will have oval shaped bokeh on the edges. It's mostly due to the angle at which light enters the lens. The sides of an image is where light has traveled from a steep angle.
It's like when you look at a circular hole from the side, it will appear oval in shape to you.
Sigma 50mm Art is at least to me so much better than Canon 1.2 L. It would have been much better if you could compare lenses on the same system.
It’s the same sensor, the performance is identical, therefore no it wouldn’t.
@@Sondercreative well.. I assume you are showing JPEGs, right? then the same "sensor" doesn't have any impact on the image quality. Also, these all have CMOS sensors, I think what you tried to mention was the image processor. But, EOS R has DIGIC 8 , while Mark IV has DIGIC 6+. Since JPEG is a compressed file, this different image processor creates a big difference. According to you, then all 5D cameras should have the same tone/color, but they are all different.
@@ericlee4991 all raw files. Also any differences based on the processors would generally only apply to noise performance algorithms not detail and sharpness; especially due to both sensors having an AA filter.
Performance between both cameras, as shown in many comparisons, is virtually identical in terms of image quality. Therefore, to say the sigma would have been much better is completely untrue.
@@Sondercreative Thank you for your insight but I still have to disagree with you. Again, your review of those lenses is based on color, tone, and sharpness. According to your argument, all 5D cameras should have the same results because they all have the same sensor. I have used all 5Ds and 6Ds, EOS R, RP, now I have a R6. These are all different. It's not just because of lenses. I personally think if you want to compare different lenses, then it gotta be done on the same system(image processors). Image quality could be a subjective matter. I don't know you are a photographer or just a reviewer. I have been shooting more than 500 weddings and I know which one is "better" for me. I definitely tell you that Sigma Art lenses are the best so I had to sell all my L lenses. When I say this, I tried them all on the same body so I know exactly how they look.
@@ericlee4991 the 5DS, 6D and EOS R all have different sensors, therefore they will have differences in performance.
The EOS R and the 5D Mark IV have the same exact sensor, therefore performance is virtually identical.
Had I have done it the other way round, people would have complained about how adapting isn’t native and I should have compared them with the camera systems they were designed for.
Having said that, please feel free to provide any of your findings.
You couldn't get the adapter so you could just use the r
I do have an adapter I chose not to.
But you were testing autofocus so for a apples to apples test shouldn’t you use the adapter
game2572 no because that’s not fair if your testing by adapting. You have to compare on native mounts otherwise other factors will interfere. Also autofocus was identical to the EOS R when shooting in live view.
It is your test you can do it anyway you want. But the adapter is pure canon so ef mount works seamlessly with the RF mount but I haven’t shot with it so you may know something I don’t
game2572 honestly it doesn’t work seamlessly especially not with third party lenses like the sigma 50mm art. That’s why it’s not a fair comparison to adapt and compare.
I wish there was a video comparison
Lol, what are you currently commenting on then?
@@Sondercreative lol i meant a comparison of how their video capabilities so we can see how the autofocus performs.
Hey man, really enjoyed this one. Thanks for the info as i am looking for a 50mm 1.2
Thanks man much appreciated :)
Nice review
plz compare canon rf 50mm and zeiss otus 55mm
I'll see if I can get hold of the otus, thank you.
Sonder Creative thnx
Para mi sigma es lo máximo pero no cambió mi Yongnuo 50mm. F1.4
couldn't compare the lenses even though there is a mount adapter for the eos r. lmfao, come on man.
It’s not about the adapter lol, it’s different focusing systems.
A fair comparison would allow all lenses to be compared via all focus systems. You can’t adapt the RF 50 to the 5D4 so it’s an incomplete test/comparison.
I do go on to discuss DPAF.
You have cute models