32mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2MWP30m or on b&h: bhpho.to/2MWP5VP 22mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2Vv3QDg or on b&h: bhpho.to/2CO1irm Which prime won? 0:32 Lens Design 1:53 Video Montage 2:37 FOV Comparison 4:30 IQ Comparison 14:43 Lens Flare Comparison 15:22 Chromatic Abberation 17:54 Slow Mo Low Light 20:15 22 Low Light Vlogging 22:07 32 Low Light Vlogging 23:48 Outro
It's very simple. You need/want 22mm, get the 22mm lens. You want/need 32mm, get the 32mm lens. You want/need the best optical performance, get the 32mm lens. The 22mm is a very good lens, the 32mm is an excellent lens.
Thanks a lot. Good sample for doing decisions. I was using the 22 and now 32. I agree with your result. Also my 22 have strong CA, even at f5.6 and higher in bright light but was even better in corner sharpness then yours. At the end I sold the 22 and bought the 32. It’s the best lens you can get. Even for the the price in the whole Canon lineup! My experience is only with taking pictures. I don’t shoot video.
please tell me the price of canon m50 with Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M and i have herd that if we buy Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M the price will be less the actual price is it true ?????? which one is better for portrait photography canon 32 mm 1.4 or canon 50mm 1.8???
The picture quality of the 32mm is much better but I keep the 22mm on my main camera most of the time as the field of view is more practical and it's so tiny. I'm looking forward to the sigma 16mm 1.4 efm, rumored to be available this month. Wide, sharp and fast.
Yeah, the price is right on the 30mm I'm thinking it was the only new lens of the three that had any competition. I'm glad to see any new lenses available for the efm mount. Maybe they will make a fast zoom too.
@@DriveByReviews There is a youtube VOID on reviewing this lens, and it could revitalize ef-m low light vlogging- you've crushed all of these man, if you can get to it before the usual suspects, you'll probably top the algorithm! Even just a "first look" vid, and whether you recommend it (saving the more in-depth specs like this one as you catch up on your queue). Frankly, just shocked by how little is out there on this one. The 30 seems a coin flip with the canon 32 you just compared, and the 56 a welcome telephoto, but us budget conscious folks can just adapt a nifty 50... but this 16mm... This can be a game changer, and there are only a handful of folks even discussing it. Anyway, thanks for this fantastic vid as promised!! Keep it up, man!
@@jonathanwise84 So true. You just reminded me that Sigma offered to loan me this lens. But I think I'll order it tomorrow based on this comment alone. You're right for sure and I'm curious to see it myself.
Nice coverage. The 22 had been my go to for a lot of stuff I shot. It lived on my m50. Then I got a 32 but not used as much, I wanted that for my "nifty fifty", but then I realized that the more lenses and the more camera's I got, the better photographer, I am, right, so I got more lenses and another camera, the 50 m II. Every "how to vid" I watch encourages me to buy, buy, buy and and when I buy I just know I'm becoming a better photographer, I just know it.
Dude you gotta try out the new Sigma 16mm F1.4 for ef-m. That seems like a low light vlogging beast. Video idea: Compare that to the Sigma 24mm F1.4 EF boosted to F1.0. Can it vlog by moonlight alone. Can iso12800 at F1.0 pick up starlight?
@@emocraps07 Both are great. It really depends on how big your room is. If you are filming in tight corners get the 16mm and if you have a bit more room than get the 30mm. You could use your kit lens to get a feeling for the best focal length.
At minute 4:27 when looking at your pictures, you could’ve shot at ISO 400 and have good pictures, there’s no need to have lower shutter speeds I would shot at 32 mm 1/50 - F/ 2.8 - ISO 400
I think at 12:58 the focus point on 22mm was OFF as you can see on plank underneath the can. It appears to be closer to the camera than it should be, maybe that's why everything in the shot is blurry mess on 22mm
I hope you're joking? Better shot and light control quality? What's that in English? The 32mm lens is much sharper, has a shallower depth of field and less distortion. The 32mm is clearly a superior lens.
please tell me the price of canon m50 with Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M and i have herd that if we buy Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M the price will be less the actual price is it true ?????? which one is better for portrait photography canon 32 mm 1.4 or canon 50mm 1.8???
As these are called fast lenses useful in low light, could you please tell me how many frames faster would a F1.4 be when compared to a F2. Thanks in Advance!
Frames is not a measure in that. It is one f-stop faster. That means it lets in twice as much light so you can use either half the shutter speed or half the ISO.
I think you sold me on the 35 but I have one question. I’d be using it for short film clips and was wondering how the facial tracking is in the 35? Good choice?’
by 35 do you mean the 22 which has FOV like a full frame 35? the Canon 32 and 22 in this video both face track well, but the 32mm is slower at AF. I have a whole video on its AF speed comparing to the fastest and most accurate for video AF
Btw, what’s your take on 11-22? It s a lot softer than both of these lenses right? I wanna buy it for vlogging but with no IS and lack of sharpness I may end up sticking to the kit for that.
loved it when I was reviewing it. Did you watch that video? It does have IS! I demonstrated it incrementally as you can add on the m50 + the lens IS. Only thing I didn't like was how poorly it works in low light at F4. Wish they made it a prime lens as I only use it at 11mm.
I bought a Neewer 35mm F1.7 lens for my M50. My main question is, is it truly 35mm ? Or cause of the crop sensor, is it a 50 something mm lens? And to make up for that, would it be good to just get the 22mm canon lens?
@@AHeroicOrange Old comment you probably already figured it out, but lens descriptions do no account for crop, they give the true mm length of the lens. So any lens you must multiply by 1.6 for canon APSc to get FF equivalent. Sometimes equivalent is listed, but it clearly will state that. Cell phones like to say F2 - 80mm or whatever which is a lie, but camera gear will either say the actual length or the length followed by the equivalent.
Get the Canon, it is far more compact. Also the 22 mm focal length is more general purpose. The Sigma is a more special purpose lens. You should know if you need it.
Generally 22mm. However since I have them all this is how it breaks down. 11-22 used when I want the whole room in the shot OR well lit slow motion shots. 32mm when I want subject separation (large bokeh). 22mm for all around run-n-gun vlogging. I've been having fun with the Viltrox Speedbooster lately and FYI: the intro shot & lens comparison shots to this video is the EF 40mm boosted amzn.to/35MBtWd
Drive By Reviews thanks for your reply! Do you have any image stabilisation issues when just using the 22mm or would you use a gimbal for vlogging with the 22? So far your reviews have been the best in comparing the EF M lenses!! The 11-22 has a wide field of view and image stabilisation but the aperture is not low enough for low light and on the other hand the 22 is good for low light but I’m worried about shakiness when vlogging. I’m not really moving that much - the most is walking or panning but just not sure if there would be a lot of shake. Thoughts?
@@ClaraZeela hah I said that almost exactly about the 11-22 on a different reply here😆 Overall if you are intentional about holding the camera close to the body and keep it steady the shots look good. There will always be that "amateur" look without any IS but people tend to like that on vlogs and YT. Gimbals smooth it out nicely (the ak4000 gimbal video I recently posted shows this) but if you don't need pro level stability its not worth the added effort/bulk. That said there is plenty of footage I toss because it was too abrupt/shakey/displeasing when shooting with non stabilized lens options.
Drive By Reviews Thanks !! Trying to see if I can save myself from lugging around so many lenses - guess I’ll have to try using the 22 and make sure I don’t drink too much coffee to see if that works later ! Tx so much for the advice and keep the great videos coming !!
@KingSam Prove it! I bet the Canon 32mm is sharper than the Sigma 30mm. If you're as cluey as you seem to think you are, you would have noticed something being done wrong in this video. He kept moving the images around BEFORE they had a chance to finish rendering in Lightroom, so they never appeared sharp. Each time you move an image, it has to re-render the new framing. It takes a few seconds on the computer used in this video. At one point I was getting so frustrated because I wanted to see the sharpness difference and the images suddenly became clear (completed rendering) and he immediately moved the images again! Aaahhhh. So I didn't even get a chance to compare. Watch some other reviews of this lens, it's amazingly sharp and I very much doubt the Sigma will match it. At least one reviewer said the Canon is sharper, but that doesn't mean it is, obviously. As for the Sigma "destroying it", you might want to grow up with your childish statements. If the Sigma is better, it'll be marginal, at best, but unlikely.
Just one tip. When showing us a lens comparison, please let the images finish rendering before moving them. Each time you move them you have to wait again. I noticed your computer takes a few seconds to render and you kept moving the images prematurely, so they were always soft. The one and only time I saw them 'snap into focus' (render fully) you immediately moved them again. It was very frustrating. Other than that, great video. Edit: in my frustration I didn't realise I hadn't seen all of the video. My comments apply to when you were the model on the bridge.
Your not really a photographer are you? Frame the 22mm like you framed the 32mm & the difference is less pronounced!. Allot of fashion/editorial photographers prefer the 35mm equivalent lenses for their intimate perspective.
![Eminem - Temporary (feat. Skylar Grey) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/ZaK9Wi5ho0o/mqdefault.jpg)
![BabyChiefDoit - Too Slow (feat. STAR BANDZ) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zayaxws7RPg/mqdefault.jpg)
32mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2MWP30m
or on b&h: bhpho.to/2MWP5VP
22mm on Amazon: amzn.to/2Vv3QDg
or on b&h: bhpho.to/2CO1irm
Which prime won?
0:32 Lens Design
1:53 Video Montage
2:37 FOV Comparison
4:30 IQ Comparison
14:43 Lens Flare Comparison
15:22 Chromatic Abberation
17:54 Slow Mo Low Light
20:15 22 Low Light Vlogging
22:07 32 Low Light Vlogging
23:48 Outro
It's very simple. You need/want 22mm, get the 22mm lens. You want/need 32mm, get the 32mm lens. You want/need the best optical performance, get the 32mm lens. The 22mm is a very good lens, the 32mm is an excellent lens.
Thanks a lot. Good sample for doing decisions. I was using the 22 and now 32. I agree with your result. Also my 22 have strong CA, even at f5.6 and higher in bright light but was even better in corner sharpness then yours.
At the end I sold the 22 and bought the 32. It’s the best lens you can get. Even for the the price in the whole Canon lineup!
My experience is only with taking pictures. I don’t shoot video.
please tell me the price of canon m50 with Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M and i have herd that if we buy Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M the price will be less the actual price is it true ?????? which one is better for portrait photography canon 32 mm 1.4 or canon 50mm 1.8???
The picture quality of the 32mm is much better but I keep the 22mm on my main camera most of the time as the field of view is more practical and it's so tiny. I'm looking forward to the sigma 16mm 1.4 efm, rumored to be available this month. Wide, sharp and fast.
Ugh. I should pre-order that right now. I just bought the m6 mark ii though! I need a month vacation to catch up on my channel to-do list!
Also the Sigma 30mm 1.4 for less 🙌🏽🙏🏽
Yeah, the price is right on the 30mm I'm thinking it was the only new lens of the three that had any competition. I'm glad to see any new lenses available for the efm mount. Maybe they will make a fast zoom too.
@@DriveByReviews There is a youtube VOID on reviewing this lens, and it could revitalize ef-m low light vlogging- you've crushed all of these man, if you can get to it before the usual suspects, you'll probably top the algorithm! Even just a "first look" vid, and whether you recommend it (saving the more in-depth specs like this one as you catch up on your queue). Frankly, just shocked by how little is out there on this one. The 30 seems a coin flip with the canon 32 you just compared, and the 56 a welcome telephoto, but us budget conscious folks can just adapt a nifty 50... but this 16mm... This can be a game changer, and there are only a handful of folks even discussing it.
Anyway, thanks for this fantastic vid as promised!! Keep it up, man!
@@jonathanwise84 So true. You just reminded me that Sigma offered to loan me this lens. But I think I'll order it tomorrow based on this comment alone. You're right for sure and I'm curious to see it myself.
Nice coverage. The 22 had been my go to for a lot of stuff I shot. It lived on my m50. Then I got a 32 but not used as much, I wanted that for my "nifty fifty", but then I realized that the more lenses and the more camera's I got, the better photographer, I am, right, so I got more lenses and another camera, the 50 m II. Every "how to vid" I watch encourages me to buy, buy, buy and and when I buy I just know I'm becoming a better photographer, I just know it.
2:24 like that photographer’s dance!
I'm ordering the 32mm efm and the 55 - 200mm efm for my M50 MKII. I only got it with the kit lens about 6 weeks ago.
i have the 22mm and actually my favorite lens on my canon m50. and made my own review as well.
Dude you gotta try out the new Sigma 16mm F1.4 for ef-m. That seems like a low light vlogging beast.
Video idea: Compare that to the Sigma 24mm F1.4 EF boosted to F1.0. Can it vlog by moonlight alone. Can iso12800 at F1.0 pick up starlight?
would you recommend the 16mm or the 30mm for RUclips videos?
@@emocraps07 Both are great. It really depends on how big your room is. If you are filming in tight corners get the 16mm and if you have a bit more room than get the 30mm. You could use your kit lens to get a feeling for the best focal length.
Thanks man, I was looking forward to this.
I wonder how the 15-45mm kit lens would have faired in this comparison. I think it would have done quite well.
....you wish....
I was just listening carefully until 4:32 when the phenomenal model comes in (!)
🤣🤣🤣
You mean 18:50
At minute 4:27 when looking at your pictures, you could’ve shot at ISO 400 and have good pictures, there’s no need to have lower shutter speeds I would shot at 32 mm 1/50 - F/ 2.8 - ISO 400
I personally liked the 22mm photos best!
I think at 12:58 the focus point on 22mm was OFF as you can see on plank underneath the can. It appears to be closer to the camera than it should be, maybe that's why everything in the shot is blurry mess on 22mm
Good comparison and detail 👍 PS Sigma just released lenses for Canon EFM.
I hope there was an EFM 10 or 15 mm with f 1.8
Check out the newish Sigma 16/1.4
I was surprised by how grainy the 35 mm looked
I would have to go with the EFM 22mm2.0 for better shot and light control quality
Now on a real note who thinks better Bast or Osiris?
I hope you're joking? Better shot and light control quality? What's that in English? The 32mm lens is much sharper, has a shallower depth of field and less distortion. The 32mm is clearly a superior lens.
if I want to take a pic of landscape which is the better?
22mm can’t go wrong with a wider shot.
How can you complain about missing subject-background separation, when you dont even shoot at maximum aperture? 🤔
Yeah, they really don't have the same application. You either need one or the other.
What i want to see is the ef-s 24mm vs ef-m 22mm. One is double the cost of the other. I'm wondering if the native one is that much better.
I'll put it on the list. Apparently there's a new EFM 16mm Sigma I should pick up as well
please tell me the price of canon m50 with Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M and i have herd that if we buy Canon 32mm f/1.4 EF-M the price will be less the actual price is it true ?????? which one is better for portrait photography canon 32 mm 1.4 or canon 50mm 1.8???
Hi, what did you film the intro with?
It was the 40mm amzn.to/2OoEnK5 boosted on the Viltrox Speedbooster amzn.to/2Omb37c which I haven't made a review video for yet, but is awesome.
what microphone did you use on the last part of the video? the night time part
Externally recorded with these ruclips.net/video/62ca5D_2gFU/видео.html
As these are called fast lenses useful in low light, could you please tell me how many frames faster would a F1.4 be when compared to a F2. Thanks in Advance!
Frames is not a measure in that. It is one f-stop faster. That means it lets in twice as much light so you can use either half the shutter speed or half the ISO.
Is this commercial for 32mm
I think you sold me on the 35 but I have one question. I’d be using it for short film clips and was wondering how the facial tracking is in the 35? Good choice?’
by 35 do you mean the 22 which has FOV like a full frame 35? the Canon 32 and 22 in this video both face track well, but the 32mm is slower at AF. I have a whole video on its AF speed comparing to the fastest and most accurate for video AF
@@DriveByReviews sorry, i meant the 32!! I'll check the other video, thanks!
Where Is WSOP?
Btw, what’s your take on 11-22? It s a lot softer than both of these lenses right? I wanna buy it for vlogging but with no IS and lack of sharpness I may end up sticking to the kit for that.
loved it when I was reviewing it. Did you watch that video? It does have IS! I demonstrated it incrementally as you can add on the m50 + the lens IS. Only thing I didn't like was how poorly it works in low light at F4. Wish they made it a prime lens as I only use it at 11mm.
Drive By Reviews totally agreed!
I bought a Neewer 35mm F1.7 lens for my M50. My main question is, is it truly 35mm ? Or cause of the crop sensor, is it a 50 something mm lens? And to make up for that, would it be good to just get the 22mm canon lens?
That also means I’m applying the 1.6x crop so 1.6 x 22 = 35. Or is the 22mm true to size since it’s a EF-M lens
@@AHeroicOrange Old comment you probably already figured it out, but lens descriptions do no account for crop, they give the true mm length of the lens. So any lens you must multiply by 1.6 for canon APSc to get FF equivalent. Sometimes equivalent is listed, but it clearly will state that. Cell phones like to say F2 - 80mm or whatever which is a lie, but camera gear will either say the actual length or the length followed by the equivalent.
Pls make a video 32mm vs Sigma 30mm for efm.. 🙏
planning to. Just got the 16mm sigma and working on that now. EDIT* done! ruclips.net/video/dsvpIbEEado/видео.html
@@DriveByReviews okay nice
I am unable to decide between the Sigma 16mm F1.4 DC DN & the Canon 22mm F2. Can you please help...
Get the Canon, it is far more compact. Also the 22 mm focal length is more general purpose. The Sigma is a more special purpose lens. You should know if you need it.
For vlogging do you generally use the 11-22 or the 22 more ?
Generally 22mm. However since I have them all this is how it breaks down. 11-22 used when I want the whole room in the shot OR well lit slow motion shots. 32mm when I want subject separation (large bokeh). 22mm for all around run-n-gun vlogging. I've been having fun with the Viltrox Speedbooster lately and FYI: the intro shot & lens comparison shots to this video is the EF 40mm boosted amzn.to/35MBtWd
Drive By Reviews thanks for your reply! Do you have any image stabilisation issues when just using the 22mm or would you use a gimbal for vlogging with the 22? So far your reviews have been the best in comparing the EF M lenses!! The 11-22 has a wide field of view and image stabilisation but the aperture is not low enough for low light and on the other hand the 22 is good for low light but I’m worried about shakiness when vlogging. I’m not really moving that much - the most is walking or panning but just not sure if there would be a lot of shake. Thoughts?
@@ClaraZeela hah I said that almost exactly about the 11-22 on a different reply here😆 Overall if you are intentional about holding the camera close to the body and keep it steady the shots look good. There will always be that "amateur" look without any IS but people tend to like that on vlogs and YT. Gimbals smooth it out nicely (the ak4000 gimbal video I recently posted shows this) but if you don't need pro level stability its not worth the added effort/bulk. That said there is plenty of footage I toss because it was too abrupt/shakey/displeasing when shooting with non stabilized lens options.
Drive By Reviews Thanks !! Trying to see if I can save myself from lugging around so many lenses - guess I’ll have to try using the 22 and make sure I don’t drink too much coffee to see if that works later ! Tx so much for the advice and keep the great videos coming !!
Except the sigma 30mm f1.4 will destroy this lens for only $350.
speedboosted or just straight adapter?
@@DriveByReviews its a native efm trio. 16mm, 30mm and 56mm 1.4 dc dn. Only on sigma website at the moment. No third party retailers yet.
@KingSam Prove it! I bet the Canon 32mm is sharper than the Sigma 30mm. If you're as cluey as you seem to think you are, you would have noticed something being done wrong in this video. He kept moving the images around BEFORE they had a chance to finish rendering in Lightroom, so they never appeared sharp. Each time you move an image, it has to re-render the new framing. It takes a few seconds on the computer used in this video. At one point I was getting so frustrated because I wanted to see the sharpness difference and the images suddenly became clear (completed rendering) and he immediately moved the images again! Aaahhhh. So I didn't even get a chance to compare.
Watch some other reviews of this lens, it's amazingly sharp and I very much doubt the Sigma will match it. At least one reviewer said the Canon is sharper, but that doesn't mean it is, obviously.
As for the Sigma "destroying it", you might want to grow up with your childish statements. If the Sigma is better, it'll be marginal, at best, but unlikely.
Just one tip. When showing us a lens comparison, please let the images finish rendering before moving them. Each time you move them you have to wait again. I noticed your computer takes a few seconds to render and you kept moving the images prematurely, so they were always soft. The one and only time I saw them 'snap into focus' (render fully) you immediately moved them again. It was very frustrating.
Other than that, great video.
Edit: in my frustration I didn't realise I hadn't seen all of the video. My comments apply to when you were the model on the bridge.
What about the autofocus for video though 🤔
Your not really a photographer are you? Frame the 22mm like you framed the 32mm & the difference is less pronounced!. Allot of fashion/editorial photographers prefer the 35mm equivalent lenses for their intimate perspective.
Waiting for the Sigma lenses...
No more poker video?
You look like Jacksepticeye
Total bullshit. That can’t be the angle difference between 22 vs 32.