CANON RF SHOWDOWN: 28-70mm f/2.0 vs 50mm f/1.2. Which one Dominates the MidRange?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 5 июл 2024
- Which of these midrange RF Monsters, the Canon 28/70mm F/2.0 or the Canon 50mm F/1.2 wins in a head to head?
Maximize your footage with my Custom Cinema CLog3 LUTS: www.deafdirector.com/product-...
CANON R5c: bhpho.to/3sU5mjR
CANON R5: amzn.to/3fRhRI2
SMALLRIG CAGE FOR R5: amzn.to/3cYUBG0
SMALLRIG NATO TOP HANDLE: amzn.to/2Q4SLug
PANASONIC GH5: amzn.to/3dArbx2
ATOMOS NINJA V: amzn.to/3dIfYL5
ATOMOS NINJA V (B&H): www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...
CANON 16-35mm/2.8: amzn.to/3wtMV6u
FALCON EYES RX-24TDX: amzn.to/3fNQtL5
APUTURE 120D: amzn.to/2PIboV9
Heads up! This is a completely independent and honest review. My posts may contain affiliate links. If you buy something through one of these links you won't pay a penny more, but I'll get a small commission, which helps to keep this station going. Thanks!
DISCLAIMERS
This video was not paid for by outside persons or manufacturers.
No gear was supplied to me for this video. I purchased this gear to test for myself.
===========
CUSTOM FILMMAKER APPAREL: www.deafdirector.com/shop
==========
If you're interested in contacting Bryan for work please email me at
thedeafdirector@gmail.com
CHAPTERS
0:00 Setting the Battleground
0:26 Why Compare These Lenses
1:02 Test Parameters
1:17 Environmental Test #1
3:15 Environmental Test #2
5:19 Studio Setup
5:50 STUDIO TEST #1
6:50 CHART TEST
8:15 Individual Strengths
9:35 Minimum Focus Distance
10:48 Size & Build
12:24 AutoFocus
13:25 Final Verdict
++++++++++++++++++++
Bryan Redding is an award-winning Cuban American Cinematographer and Director based in Athens, Georgia. He loves being on set and sharing his knowledge. In addition to his love of cinematography, Bryan has complete high range hearing loss which, according to his audiologist, leaves him functionally deaf in certain environments, hence making him the Deaf Director. This has not stopped Bryan from continuing his passion on set and behind the camera, and he uses his experience with his physical condition to propel his unique vision.
The content of this video and my opinions were not reviewed or paid for by any outside persons.
DEAF DIRECTOR gets some funding via your transactions with purchase links with the following affiliate programs:
Amazon Affiliate
B&H Affiliate
SUPPORT THE CHANNEL AND BUY THRU OUR LINKS!
#canon #canonphotography #deafdirector 
Кино
I like how you went into detail about how the 50 at f2 has smoother bokeh. I saw the same thing with the 85 1.2 at f2 compared to the 85 f2. Artistically, the 50 is definitely the winner.
its as close that Leica 3d pop magic that Canon has.
The reason one would buy the 28-70mm is that you basically have 4 primes in one lens, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 70mm, at about 95% Quality of the primes.
Such a great technical video and very detailed. I've been eyeing these 2 lens and now I'm even considering the 24 to 105 f2.8. Thanks for the great video
The reason of different focal distance at 50mm is Focus Breathing at close objects. If you focus at infinity, it will be exactly the same 50mm view. Thank me later.
A possible reason that the 50mm field of view is tighter is because it’s got a magnification factor of x.19
Whereas the 28 to 70 as a slightly lesser maximum magnification factor of X .18.
It’s not linear throughout the range of the 28 to 70 though so it could be only .15x at 50mm and .18 at 70mm or inversely at 28mm.
I ran into some confusing 200mm focal length comparisons between primes and zooms due to this very thing.
Yeah the magnification factor seems to be the big factor. What's odd is that the 28-70mm seems a tad brighter in-spite of them both being at f2.
Really great info, but too bad you didn’t match the frames instead of the mm’s.
It doesn't make sense to compare sharpness on leaves because they move a lot. In 1 sec, the leave that was in the back can go foward.
‘‘First thanks Deaf for your review it was great to see and how the 2 lenses compared with one another.... I've had the RF 24-70 for a year now. I tried out the 28-70 for fun from Canon. I liked it so much I'm selling the 24-70 The 28-70 is a sharper lens even corner to corner. I do like having the option to shoot at 2.0 when wanting to. Personally I didn't buy this lens to replace my primes. It was the perfect lens when I need to run and gun quickly.. I still use all my primes and I grab them first unless the 28-70 is a better choice like family photos, groupings during the ceremony or same goes for the RF15-35 or the RF 70-200 They have their purpose as well. But I still love the primes EF35 1.4 RF 50 1.2 RF 85 1.2 RF 100 and just bought the RF 135 1.8 I like this lens just as much as the 85 We all have different needs and we're lucky to have so many choices. But if you wanted just one lens to try and do it all the 28-70 is an excellent lens and will cover most of your needs.
You have GAS, man.
The RF50 1.2 is a god tier lens. I’ve never used anything that renders like this lens does. It has a ton of character!
The character from this lens is really fantastic. Have a great day!
Tools are made for tasks. The 28-70 is better for events in my opinion. All zooms are trade offs compared to fixed focal lengths. If I’m in a studio or on location the 50 is better. For events and run and gun which is what I usually shoot the 28-70 is my favorite. I get that unique prime look while zoom flexibility. Plus I have three lenses that do 50mm.
I have both lenses. How is the 50 better in the studio of must of those shots are f5.6 or stopped down from there? Product photography? I certainly see the value of the zoom, but for weddings, events, I prefer the f1.2 for the option to isolate single individuals, mating them with a beautfiful background which will blur into creamy awesomeness. And most often, the 50mm can be used as a "standard zoom"...via your feet. To be fair, I think both lenses render beautifully with a slight edge going to the 50.
Cool video DeafD ! I can only tell you something about the Chart test : you are not straight. We can see the panel is turned left side so the right part is off focus so this is not a sharp problem at F2.0. Big up !
So im now retired and taking up photography. And I'm 100% new to this. I just bought the r6 mark ii with the cheap RF24-105mm F4-7.1 but will be buying a couple quality L series lens over the next year. I have to learn it all... iso, aperture, shutter speed. Anyways... while watching this I just got confused on auto focus. Why is there a big difference with auto focus on 2 top end canon L series lenses? Thanks for your help
Is the noticeable softness in bokeh possible because it’s slightly more compressed? Like if you shot at 55mm on the 28-70 would it be the same?
Did you try a third lens to see which offered the true perspective at 50mm? Supposing the 50mm f/1.2 was truly a “50mm” focal length, what setting what you need to make on the 28-70 to match it, and what true focal length would you say the 28-70 really is? As an example, I’ve seen sone reviewers measure the RF 85 f/1.2 to be closer to 89.5mm (or 90mm) than 85mm. Thanks for the review video!
Pretty much echoes my thoughts on those two lenses as well. What's funny is I was just having the conversation the other day with my buddy Josh about the 50s clunky autofocus. It's really bad, especially in video...lol. I also have an EF 50 1.2 and honestly, I think that older lens is better in a few areas. It's smaller, lighter, quieter, and the AF seems to be stickier.
I hear you on that. After these tests I actually sent my 50 into Canon to see if they could do anythng to improve the AF. Thanks for the comment and have a great day!
I’ve noticed this about the 28-70, which I have. Comparing the bokeh of the 28-70 vs my 85, the bokeh is messier. It’s still pleasing on tue 28-70, just a bit less refined.
I thought the same when I bought my RF 28-70 f2...but over a few weeks, I missed the RF f1.2 primes...I concluded that the zoom really is not a "bag of primes"...
Great video. I’d love to see how the 28-70 stacks up against some of Canon’s cheaper STM primes (eg 35mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8) when they’re all wide open, and then at f5.6 etc. Those STMs are surprisingly sharp when stopped down.
Sharpness is a thing. It’s more important uniformity, contrast, flare, purple frangin… it’s exactly where those prime fail.
You’re right. But by how much of a noticeable difference? It would be great if someone could do a video on this so we can see for ourselves.
@@MattyZed I shoot artworks for art galleries and I have seen a big difference of uniformity and contrast between rf 24 70 and rf 35. I sold the 35. My next buy will be the 24 105 f/2.8.
You’re missing my point. I keep saying a comparison video would be interesting. Not individual opinions.
@@MattyZed sorry, I answered too fast. If you understand French, this RUclipsrs can help you. He’s doing a lot of review and compare a lot of lens:
Damien Bernal
Great video comparison. I have owned the 28-70 and thought it was great and so versatile as a wedding photographer. However I decided to try out the 50 F1.2 as I already had the 85 f1.2 and see the quality difference. The 50 as you say is sharper and with the versatility of f1.2 this for me was enough to justify keeping it and selling the 28-70. I have not experience any problems with the autofocus in a wedding environment though whatsoever. On an R5 with this lens you can also punch in without any worries of the image falling apart rather than worrying about an extra 20mm of reach which as you have shown in reality is probably closer to 12-15mm difference between the these two lenses. Looking forward to seeing next year the 35mm f1.2 as this promises to be a fabulous lens and then I will keep my 15-35mm for just when I need a wider shot.
the filter is 95mm..otherwise great video thumbs up
The 50mm F1.2 has the best 3d pop ive ever seen from Canon thats why at f2 it looks "smoother" behind... and Ive been shooting Canon since the 5dMii- If I did weddings I get the 28-70mm but i tend be a port fine art guy and the 50 has only let me down in build quality(Which is just as true for 28-70mm) given the materials canon uses now. I have seen a "cracked body" 50mm when I used to borrow it So My personal copy lives in a very very cushy case!.
I too have both lenses. For portraits, the RF 50L f1.2 focuses very accurately, and fast enough...just don't shoot basketball...additionally, f1.2 provides fantastic bokeh possibilities, and I often shoot indoor parties, events of candid people at f1.2 without flashing to over the top beautiful effect...mesmerizing...f2 will not do that as much.
The sharpness overall of 50 1.2 is still better than the zoom one. Prime is still Prime anyway.
I don’t know but 28-70 looks better for me
Its a great time to get those EF 1.2 primes. RF glass will be overpriced for at least another decade.
I had the last versions of both EF f1.2 primes...with all due respect, they are junk compared to the RF counterparts. The RF prices are falling...
Why are you comparing the bokeh of obviously two different focal lengths?
Both lenses are at 50mm, and is verified by Lightroom. I made sure the 28-70 was always set to 50mm, so this test is comparing the same focal length from both lenses
@@DeafDirectorI have now done my best to research the topic up and down, and the only cause for such an increase in width + depth of field I could find is that the effective focal length changed.
The kicker is though, there is a good chance that the 50mm indication from Canon is correct, for the reason that the focal length is determined at infinity. The best I can say is that it seems to me like the effective focal length changed at closer focus. It's not so common, yet I'm not surprised if it happens with a lens that is pushing the limits that much.
Since it's a zoom I think the sensible choice is to adjust for it and compare both lenses using the same field of view. After all, this is what a normal user would do.
PS: Other factors might contribute too. E.g. it could be possible that the 50mm 1.2 has a slightly more open aperture at f2. However, I believe this does not explain the big difference in the depth of field.
@maggnet4829 I think a "normal" user would turn the zoom ring to the value indicated on the ring for their comparison. The 28-70 most likely is not a 28-70, but maybe a 26-65 or something. I've seen a few discussions about this in various forums. I've compared this lens at 70mm to the RF 70-200 at 70mm, at a subject approx. 10 feet away, and it was noticeably wider than the 70-200.
@@DanielFazzariI think a normal user wouldn't compare the two lenses, but rather zoom in to get a shallower depth of field.
Did you compare the two lenses at infinity? That's where the lenses are measured.
@@maggnet4829
The larger the diameter of the inner lens, the better the bokeh. Example: Sigma 105mm f1.4.
Sinceramente, quem se importa com essas pequenas diferenças? A maioria das pessoas está vendo as fotos pelo celular e com filtro. 😂 Eu compraria a 28-70mm 2.0
Isso é verdade. Embora, na minha experiência, quando você acaba usando lentes tão caras, isso tende a ser para clientes comerciais, que definitivamente não avaliam isso em iphones, e se preocupam muito com as pequenas diferenças. Obrigado pelo comentário e tenha um ótimo dia!