Canon RF lens user roundup and quick reviews 8 December 2022

 

Luna Park Sydney Canon EOS R5 with RF 100-500mm L

I have bought, owned and used 15 Canon RF and RF-S lenses over the last three years. Some have been used very frequently, others less often. But I have had sufficient experience to be able to offer the reader some useful observations about each.

They have been mounted most often on an EOS R5 however at times I have also owned and used the EOS R, RP, R7 and R10. I have now sold most of the camera bodies, keeping only the R5 which I regard as the best all round camera body I have ever owned.

I would also argue that the R5 is also the best value body in the RF system catalogue, but that possibly slightly controversial view is for another post.

Canon’s move from the DSLR EF mount system to the mirrorless RF mount system enabled them to incorporate many new features into their lens catalogue.

In particular the Canon on-sensor dual pixel AF (DPAF) system has allowed them to achieve fast accurate AF with lenses having a smaller aperture than the typical f5.6 limit found on EF DSLR lenses.

This gives us lenses like the RF 100-400mm f5.6-8,  RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 L, RF 600mm f11 and RF 800mm f11 each of which would have been impossible to implement in the EF system.

Canon has also made much more use of in-camera and/or raw converter post capture correction of distortion, peripheral shading and color fringing than was usually done in the past. This has generated some negative comment from optics purists but most users take the pragmatic view that it is the results which matter not  the technology used to achieve them.

Each of the lenses listed in this post has an Adobe Raw profile which corrects most issues with distortion and color fringing.

Lenses for the new RF mount have four more contacts  (total 12) than most EF mount lenses, enabling better two-way communication between body and lens for faster, more accurate autofocus and better image stabilisation technologies.

As a result of all these changes and the reduction in flange-back distance from 44 to 20mm there are very few RF lenses which carry over a previous EF optical formulation.  Only some of the super tele primes like the RF 400mm f2.8L and RF 600mm f4 L carry over an EF optical configuration.  As the EF versions of these lenses were released in 2018 I suspect they might in fact have been designed for the RF mount anyway.

Canon lens pricing policy

In Canon world when you pay more you get more. In the case of lenses that means more of everything: aperture, focal length, size, mass, build quality, weather sealing, on-lens controls, optical quality, AF speed, stabiliser efficiency, lens hood, soft pouch or carry bag and packaging.

Canon’s top tier lens line is denoted “L” series. These lenses are Canon’s best. They have all the good stuff including a lens hood, best optical and build quality and are distinguished by a red ring around the front of the lens barrel and a hefty price tag. These lenses are usually made in Japan while the not-L models are made in Taiwan.

Conversely when you pay less you get less of everything.

So if what you really want is, say,  a very compact 28mm  f2.8 weather sealed walk-around lens of L standard quality then you will be disappointed. The L model will be an f1.4 and it won’t be light or compact.

My informal lens rating guide

I use a 6 level informal rating system based on my own experience with a lens often over a long period and usually many thousands of photos. This is no substitute for a comprehensive evaluation but can be useful as a quick guide to the overall performance of a lens.

1. Unsatisfactory

2. Acceptable at a low price point

3. Good

4. Very good

5. Excellent

6. Outstanding

I would not describe any of the RF lenses which I have used as “unsatisfactory” but I did encounter some less-than ideal copies of some lenses which I would rate as “Acceptable at a low price point”.   Better copies of these lenses might rate as “Good” or even “Very Good”. In particular I found some not-so wonderful copies of the RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 STM kit lens and the RF 24-240mm f4-6.3 IS USM superzoom.

Let’s start with the primes in order of focal length, smallest first:

RF 16mm f2.8 STM    Here is a  good practical implementation of the benefits flowing from the new RF mount as outlined above. In 1991 Canon released the EF 14mm f2.8L ultrawide prime. This was quite radical in its day. It was very large, very heavy and very expensive. It had a dome type front element which was incompatible with any normal screw-in type filter. In 2007 a Mark 2 version brought much improved sharpness in the periphery of the frame. But it was larger, heavier and more expensive. Even now these things cost upwards of AUD3000 if you can find one.

The RF 16mm takes an entirely different approach to the task of delivering a workable ultrawide full frame prime. At 165 grams and AUD599 the RF 16mm is only 20% of the price and 25% of the mass of the EF 14mm. It accepts a normal screw-in type 43mm filter with no vignetting.

The RF 16mm shares the same housing as the RF 50mm f1.8, making these two lenses the smallest, lightest and least expensive in the RF full frame catalogue.

There is just one control ring on the barrel which can be purposed for manual focus if desired. There is no AF/MF switch and no stabiliser.

Image quality is mixed. The RF16mm f2.8 exhibits the greatest difference between center and peripheral sharpness of any lens I can recall using.

Sharpness and clarity are excellent in a large central area of the frame right from f2.8 and terrible in the periphery of the image circle at f2.8 with smearing, softness and obvious color fringing especially with foliage against a light background. The edges clean up a bit at f4 and substantially at f5.6. There is no real improvement on further closing the aperture apart from gaining depth of field. The far corners never get tack sharp at any aperture.

Autofocus is quick and reliable on any RF mount body. Flare is well suppressed.

So who is likely to find this lens useful and for what ?

The professional or enthusiast amateur doing interior architecture on a regular basis might be better served by one of the UWA zooms of which there are now three in the RF catalogue. These are the 15-30 f4.5-6.3 (see below), 14-35  f4 and 15-35  f2.8.  The zooms are larger, heavier and more expensive but deliver greater versatility and more even image quality across the frame.

However for the person who occasionally needs an ultra wide angle lens the RF16mm f2.8 is really hard to beat. It is also capable of delivering excellent results as long as you understand its characteristics and work with them.

My overall rating: Very good.

RF 24mm f1.8 Macro IS STM   Several recent RF lenses share a housing. In this case the 24mm uses the same basic housing as the 35mm next on the list. I guess this allows Canon to save a bit on tooling costs.  In this case however they are not exactly the same. The 35mm does not have lugs for a bayonet type lens hood, the 24mm does, thank goodness. This is the reversible petal type EW-65B.

The RF 24mm f1.8 is optically competent. It has an image stabiliser controlled by one switch on the barrel while the other switch sets AF/MF. It focusses quickly and reliably. It can also do close-ups which are indeed very close for a semi macro effect. In practice this feels a bit strange as one ends up almost touching the subject at maximum magnification.

Sharpness is excellent in the central artea of the frame right from f1.8 with softness and darkening in the periphery.  Even at f5.6 the edges and corners of the image are not tack sharp.  At the wider apertures  there is color fringing in the periphery especially with foliage against a hot sky. This cleans up substantially by f4.  Bokeh is mostly smooth although I did see a bit of ni-sen double lining with casuarina trees in the background of some landscapes.

Flare is very well suppressed with the sun at or near the frame edge even without the lens hood and with a protect filter in place.  Astro photographers have expressed disappointment that coma is evident at the wider apertures, limiting this lens’ desirability for star photography.

On my tests this lens is slightly outperformed by the 24-105mm f4L at matched apertures at 24mm.

The principal reason for selecting the 12mm f1.8 would be its compact dimensions and low mass when compared to the 24-105mm at 24mm.

My overall rating: Very good.  This is actually a bit disappointing. The 24mm costs more than the 35mm f1.8 (see below) but is not up to the same optical standard as the 35mm.

RF 35mm F1.8 Macro IS STM    This was one of the first four lenses released with the new full frame RF mount system in 2018.  It is also arguably the most versatile all purpose enthusiast prime in the RF mount catalogue. I have used the 35mm f1.8 extensively and have always been pleased with the way it performs and the results which it delivers. Image quality is excellent across the frame right from f1.8, the stabiliser works well and autofocus is very reliable. I find this is about the shortest focal length which is consistently useful for close-ups. The lens is quite resistant to flare and has low levels of color fringing.

Autofocus is fast enough for the use cases in which this lens might find itself. However the 24mm f1.8 is a bit quicker with less to-and-fro in the close-up range. Both lenses use an 11 element front focussing design but the 35mm moves the front 9 elements to focus which means pushing a fair bit of glass back and forth.

The only complaint I have is that Canon did not allow for a bayonet type lens hood in the design. The screw-in EW-52 circular hood is worse than useless in my view as it provides inadequate protection for the front element but could easily be bumped.

JJC comes  to the rescue in the form of their JJC LH-RF35F18 reversible petal type hood which bayonets  onto a press fit mounting ring. I have this hood which works as advertised.

My overall rating: Excellent.

RF 50mm f1.8 STM     Canon has been making “nifty fifty” compact 50mm lenses for longer than most people have been alive, starting with the S series Serenar 50mm f3.5 in 1946 followed by the f2 version in 1947. Each of the FL, FD, New FD and EF series has offered numerous iterations of this lens type. Most, including this new RF mount version  have utilised one or other variant of the classic 6 element double gauss optical construction first seen in the early part of the 19^th Century.

The nifty fifty has traditionally  been the smallest,  lightest and least expensive lens in each successive lens series and that tradition continues with the RF version. The optical construction now includes an  aspheric element in the rear group. Focus is by moving the whole optical module back and forth.

Image quality is typical of this class of lens. The center is good but corners are soft and dark at f1.8. The circle of sharpness increases as the aperture is closed and by f4 everything looks sharp and snappy.

Lens test afficionados are sometimes inclined to dismiss this lens, pointing out that the RF 50mm f1.2 delivers sharper and cleaner results wide open and a generally smoother bokeh. Well, you would hope the f1.2 is better as it costs 11x as much and has 6x the mass.

But for many use cases I think most of us would be hard pressed to pick the difference between the two lenses when both are used in the range f5.6-11 which is typical for many situations.

My overall rating: Excellent,  with the bonus of being best value for money in the RF catalogue.

RF 85mm f2 Macro IS STM    Canon also has a long history of making very nice 85mm lenses, most of them delivering excellent optical capability. The 85mm f2 continues this tradition. It is compact and moderately priced yet still has a nice bright aperture and delivers excellent sharpness and clarity across the frame right from f2. The bonus with this lens it its ability to deliver very good “half macro” close-ups with AF and stabiliser working well. This is a very versatile and capable lens. The only potential downside is that AF is not as quick as some other lenses in this roundup.

My overall rating: Excellent.

RF 100mm f2.8 L Macro IS USM    The RF 100mm f2.8 L Macro improves on all previous Canon 100mm macro lenses in almost every way. It is optically outstanding, delivering super sharpness across the frame right from f2.8 at infinity or close-up and everything between. The stabiliser is excellent even when hand holding close-ups and the autofocus is fast and accurate. The AF is so good that I can hand hold close-ups of flowers waving in the breeze using continuous drive and servo AF with a high percentage of sharp results. This ability has transformed the way I photograph wildflowers in the field. I no longer use a tripod, flash or light modifiers, just the RF 100mm L Macro on an EOS R5.

The lens can autofocus down to an image magnification of 1.4x . This works even hand held making it an extremely versatile and capable macro lens for any use case.

There are a few downsides though. This is the longest 100mm lens I have ever seen, being only a few millimeters shorter than the RF 100-400mm. It feels a bit plasticky, no doubt due to selection of materials designed to keep the mass as low as possible for such a large lens. The tripod mount ring and adapter have to be purchased separately making a high priced lens even more costly. The lens incorporates a “spherical aberration control” feature which no doubt increases the cost but for which I have never found any use.

The last issue is probably more a function of the R5 camera body on which I have been using this lens. There are occasions when the lens refuses to focus on the flower I want, persistently locking onto the background instead. I have developed various strategies to manage this but it would be nice to have a control on the lens or body telling the AF mechanism to look for the closest object and lock onto that.

I just mention that some lens testers have stated that the RF 100mm L macro is subject to focus shift as the aperture is closed down. One said this occurred in the close-up range, another found it in the distant subject range. I spent considerable time conducting tests using purpose designed focus targets  but I never saw any evidence of focus shift. I have no idea why some testers say they did find focus shift.

My overall rating: Outstanding, although  the issues detailed above are not trivial.

RF 600mm f11 IS STM     This very interesting lens and its companion the 800mm f11 were introduced in 2020 to an initially rather sceptical reception. Diffractive optics ?  f11 ? no aperture diaphragm ? telescoping barrel ? what is this thing ?  can it possibly work ?

As it turns out yes indeed it can work and it does and is surprisingly effective.

Here we see Canon again using new technologies to deliver a type of lens not seen before.

Optically the RF 600mm f11 is excellent, delivering very sharp crisp results across the frame. Color fringing and peripheral shading are minimal  with JPGs or Raw files corrected in a good image editor such as Adobe Camera Raw. Autofocus is fast and accurate and the stabiliser is very effective.

The traditional Canon RF 400mm f5.6 super tele lens costs 16 times as much as the f11, is twice as long and three times as heavy. Yes it is better optically but not dramatically so.

The downsides of the F11 are not so much about image quality which is really very good but about other issues. The closest focus distance is 4.5 meters. You might think this is not so bad and for distant subjects it is perfectly satisfactory. But I found when photographing birds with this lens I was surprised at how often they came inside the 4.5m limit at which point the lens was effectively useless. The next problem is that on several full frame RF mount bodies the maximum available focus area covers only about half the frame. This is not such an issue with crop sensor bodies or with the new R6.2. There is a tripod socket but only for landscape orientation. To shoot in portrait orientation we must flip the whole camera/lens unit over 90 degrees. This is no problem hand held but is a real nuisance on the tripod. Lastly the lens is of telescoping design for compact dimensions when not in use. So the outer barrel must be pulled out then locked to ready the lens for action. Not a big deal but it does add another step to the process of getting the lens ready for photography. Some users have complained about the lack of an aperture diaphragm, but I never found this to be an issue.

The real genius of this lens and its companion the RF 800mm f11 is that they provide  amateur and enthusiast photographers  access to high quality super telephoto optics at a remarkably budget friendly price.

My overall rating: Very good.

Now we come to the zooms:

RF 15-30mm f4.5-6.3 IS STM   It seems there is a healthy market for ultra-wide zooms because Canon offers three of them in the RF mount. These are the 15-35mm f2.8 L, 14-35mm f4 L and the subject of this review the 15-30mm f4.5-6.3 IS STM.  This is a recent addition to the catalogue which is very welcome for photographers who want an ultrawide zoom without the much greater size, mass and cost of the L zooms.  The 15-30mm STM shares a housing with the 24-105mm STM described below with a Focus/Control switch and a Stabiliser switch on the barrel. My tests show the RF 15-30mm STM gives a very good account of itself with very good sharpness and contrast across most of the frame at all focal lengths.

The lens is resistant to flare even when facing into the sun, an important consideration in a lens like this. I stress tested it by photographing foliage against a hot sky with commendably pleasing results.  I used Raw capture and the Adobe profile.  There is some softness in the corners wide open and some color fringing which is reasonably easy to remove in Adobe Camera Raw. With the profile in use there  is no significant distortion in the output files.  The lens is quite usable indoors at or near the wide end of the zoom which gives an aperture of f4.5 at 15mm reducing to f5.6 at 22mm.

This lens is a good example of the benefits of Canon’s three tier product development strategy.  At the top we have the big, heavy, expensive f2.8 L for pros using an ultrawide for their livelihood. Then comes the not quite so big, heavy or expensive 14-35mm f4L for pros or enthusiasts.  And in the third tier we have the compact, moderately priced 15-30mm not-L STM with an even smaller aperture. This opens up the world of high quality ultrawide photography to those of us who just cannot make a personal or business case for investing in a larger, more expensive alternative.

My overall rating: Excellent.  

RF 24-105mm f4-7.1 IS STM   This lens is often sold in a body/lens kit adding very little to the body only price. I have to preface my remarks about this lens by saying I am quite fussy about image quality, for which I make no apology. It may well be that other users could be quite happy with a lens which I choose not to keep.

I have bought, tested and used four copies of this lens. Nobody lends me lenses to test. I found considerable sample variation with the RF 24-105mm STM. One copy was soft on the right side, one was soft on the left side, one was soft at the wide end of the zoom range. The copy which I am currently using delvers very good sharpness across the focal length range over most of the frame.

Autofocus is fast and reliable, the stabiliser is very effective and the lens is quite resistant to flare even when deliberately stress tested.   The great benefits of this lens are its compact size, versatile focal length range and modest price.    At 105mm this makes a handy and effective semi-macro lens with a maximum magnification of 0.5x and good sharpness.

I wish Canon would make an L standard version of this one. Even at twice the price,  it would be my most often used lens.

 My overall rating has the least good copies at “Acceptable at a low price point” and the best copy at “very good”.

RF 24-105mm f4 L IS USM    This is another of the first four full frame lenses introduced with the new RF mount in 2018. There have been a few grumbles about build quality of early samples on user forums but overall reception of this lens has been very positive. I bought mine early and still have it. The aperture and focal length range are very versatile and image quality is generally excellent at all focal lengths and apertures across the frame. Autofocus is fast and accurate. The stabiliser is very effective. Some reviewers have suggested that the 24-105mm STM kit lens is just as good as this one but that is not my experience. There is not a lot to say about this lens. It does everything expected of it very well with no real faults or problems. It is reasonably compact for the zoom range and aperture although substantially larger, heavier and more expensive than the 24-105mm STM kit lens.

My rating: Excellent.

RF 24-240mm f4-6.3 IS STM    This is the second RF lens my experience of which has been blighted by considerable sample variation. I suspect the problem with this lens as with the RF 24-105 STM is that to get the lens onto the market at the price point presumably dictated by marketing considerations corners have to be cut in quality control during component manufacture and assembly. My first copy of this lens was woefully soft from 150mm to 240mm, right across the frame. The second was soft on one side. The third has been a keeper. This delivers excellent imaging across the frame from 35-150mm. The periphery is soft with considerable color fringing at the wide end and the long end of the zoom range. Autofocus using Canon’s USM technology is fast and accurate. The stabiliser is very effective. Build quality appears to be very good with very smooth operation of the double extension inner barrel. The first and second versions of the Adobe profile for this lens were not satisfactory but the third version does a good job of controlling distortion (which is extreme without corrections) most of the color fringing and some of the peripheral shading.

My rating: I rate the not-so good copies as acceptable for a relatively non fussy user and the best copy I have used as very good.

RF 100-400mm f5.6-8 IS USM    This lens strikes a balance between price and capability. It is a really good lens and is excellent value for money. My copy is very well centered and very sharp in the center of the frame at all focal lengths right from the widest aperture (which is admittedly not very wide). The periphery of the image is not  as sharp as that given by the 100-500mm L.  The lens is light and compact without compromising build quality.  Autofocus using Canon USM is fast and reliable. The stabiliser is very effective.

This is an appealing walk around lens on either a full frame or crop sensor RF mount body. One potential disadvantage would be the small lens aperture in low light when high ISO settings could be required. Another might be the not-so-sharp image periphery which could be an issue with some subjects.

My rating: Very good.

RF 1.4x Extender  Canon offers 1.4x and 2x extenders for selected lenses on the RF mount.  Both offer  L standard  build, optics and weather resistance. I have the 1.4x which I have used on the 100-500mm L zoom.  This is definitely a viable pairing which does give slightly more image detail than simply cropping into the image delivered by the lens without the extender. It does however steal one EV step of light and does make autofocus and tracking a bit slower and less reliable than is available with the bare lens.

My rating: Excellent but working with the extender requires more operator experience than the bare lens.

RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1 L IS USM  Leaving the best of the full frame lenses to last, we come to the RF 100-500mm L, one of the best tele zooms ever made by Canon or any other lens maker. In my early days of using this lens I was amazed by the sharpness and clarity the 100-500L could reveal on the R5 even with distant and fast moving subjects. Almost everything about this lens deserves superlatives in description including build quality, image quality, autofocus speed and accuracy, close focussing ability and stabiliser performance. It comes with the full set of big (off) white lens stuff including lots of controls on the lens barrel, lens hood, tripod foot (which makes a handy carry handle) and its own carry pouch.

Some will think this lens expensive. Indeed compared to the RF 100-400 described above it is. But compared to the RF 400mm f4 or 600mm f5.6 it looks like a real bargain.

The only downside I have found with this lens is that in order to mount an extender the lens has to be zoomed out to 300mm. This is because at shorter focal lengths the rear elements of the main lens physically prevent the extender from being fitted in there. The advantage of this design is a compact size for carrying when you don’t want the extender.

My rating: Outstanding although  mounting an extender  makes the whole package significantly longer and less versatile as the zoom range is limited.

 

And now we have two RF-S zooms:

 

RF 18-45mm f4.5-6.3 IS STM   This is a newly designed lens for the RF-S range of bodies and lenses which will no doubt expand and mature over time.  The original APSC mirrorless EF-M kit lens was the 18-55mm of 2012. This was replaced by the more compact but optically poor 15-45mm in 2015.

The new RF-S kit lens has a limited zoom range and a small aperture. The glass elements in it are really very small. It utilises a collapsing design for a compact profile when not in use. I have found that despite the designed-in limitations or perhaps because of them this lens delivers very good image quality at all focal lengths and apertures. It focusses quickly and reliably on the EOS R10 and the stabiliser is effective. It is a light compact sharp walk-around lens which is a good match for the EOS R10 body.

 Reviewers and forum contributors have tended to ignore this little lens in favour of the RF-S 18-150mm but for the camera user who wants a light, compact, unobtrusive, budget priced kit lens delivering very good optical quality the RF 18-45mm fits the bill nicely.

My overall rating: Very good.

RF-S 18-150mm f3.5-6.3 IS STM   Canon released the EF-M 18-150mm zoom for the EF-M mount in 2016. Now we see the same lens re-housed for the RF mount in 2022. The RF mount has a flange back distance of 20mm, the EF-M mount 18mm. So it is a fairly simple job for Canon to re-package existing EF-M lenses for the RF mount. The rear part of the lens just needs to project back behind the mount 2mm more than it does on the EF-M mount. All the EF-M lenses had a barrel diameter of 61mm. Both the  RF-S 18-150mm and the RF-S 18-45mm have a slightly greater  exterior barrel diameter of 62mm which is smaller than the RF mount so these lenses look a bit odd on first sight.

There are rumors we will see the EF-M 23mm f2 in RF mount soon and I would not be surprised to see the very good EF-M 11-22mm ultrawide in RF mount in due course.

My experience with the EF-M version of this lens was of considerable sample variation with the best copy being very good and the worst unacceptable. My one copy of the RF-S version is very good, with no significant decentering or other problems. It is sharp across the frame at all focal lengths. Autofocus is fast and reliable on the EOS R7. The stabiliser is effective.

The RF-S 18-150mm has a zoom range of 8.3x making it very versatile for many use cases. I would like to see an RF-S 15-150mm zoom at some stage but in the meantime the 18-150mm works well as an all purpose, walk around light compact kit zoom. On the R7 it actually delivers better sharpness in the image periphery at 150mm than the RF full frame 24-240mm does on the R5.

My overall rating: Excellent.

And that concludes this little RF mount lens roundup