But don't you think for us folks who are getting an EOS R5, with no crop 8K, shouldn't we be getting the RF 35mm F1.2? It's coming out later this year. Since the F1.2 is about to become the new go-to 35mm for professionals, I'm going to have to try to snap one up. I hope the R5 isn't more than 3500.00

@@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr for sure but it's in a different category if it becomes a reality, and 3-4 times more. If you can afford it no doubt the way to go since this existing RF lens is not an 'L". I've researched this to death, half the weight, 1/3 the cost, I'm gonna get it as my grab and go... but ultimately the RF 'L" variant will be on the wish list...

@@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr Why would he or anyone else care what you "folks" should get. Why should you care what other think you should get. You are not me and I am not you. Everyone has different needs and different budgets. Get whatever you want to get and be happy with it. Cell phones are taking over so it doesn't matter anyway ;)

@@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr "it's coming out later this year". Still isn't out though 😂

I don’t know what video you are watching but wide open that RF lens is not even close to the other 2 lenses.

You bet!

Yeah that could bring up the sharpness in the corners and less vignetting for both the 1.4 lenses. Thanks glad it helped!

Yes!!! It would be good to see how the lens perform at 1.8 in terms of luminance loss as a measure of the efficiency of the lens and things like chromatic errors, sharpness, etc... that said I really appreciate you taking the time to do the review!! thanks.

Well this wasn't the mark II.

@@Justmakesomenoiz the video description doesn’t make II, but in the video, it shows II in Lightroom

@@Justmakesomenoiz It was. Mark I is considerably smaller and overall considerably worse in performance.

What did you choose?

I intend to use this lens for street photography and an aperture greater than F5.6 and that should match the sharpness to the more expensive Ef 1.4 and do the rest in post do you agree ?.

Three yasrs later I did the same 👍

I'm now in a situation where I can't choose a lens for photography. Do you think it’s worth buying a used Sigma ART 35 1.4 or buying a new RF 1.8? Their price is the same in my region

Very true so the are both at least double the length of the 1.8

It’s not a macro lens “first and foremost”… it’s not even a “true” 1:1 macro…

aww thanks man

So which one do you decide to go with?

@@PeacePham1991 RF it was the smallest since I use it for traveling purposes. And I really like the macro capabilities. IS was also a plus.

It would be number 1

Correct that does help ! camera lens correction software can correct all the other deficiencies.

Weather sealed though, but on the cost of the is. I'm going for the rf myself, because I'm learning handheld night shooting. Not going the best with 50mm stm. So I hope the is will do the trick.

We are based in the states

@@lensprotogo I know, but the videos are watched worldwide, and the other 95% of the world population are metric.

Would definitely be a contender, I personally haven't used that lens though I would like to check it out.

Only for Sony.

It will have very similar result as L lense

That could be years away.

Been a year, hopefully next year!

Maybe they should to serve a wider audience, but they don’t NEED to.

Metric boo.

Who cares

Yes, but if they do, that RF 35 (1.2?) will be about $2000 minimum.

Look at both the EF & RF 50mm 1.8 and 1.2 size difference, if they do make a RF 35mm 1.2 I believe it will be massive and the minimum price will sit near the 85mm 1.2 since the EF 35 1.4 II is already way more expensive than the EF 50mm 1.2 in my opinion. The RF 35mm 1.8 is great for size but doesn’t compare to the EF 35 1.4 II in image quality. If size is your bigger issue I’d go with the RF. BUT if overall images quality is more important the EF 35 1.4 adapted is massive and protrudes far out but it’s the sacrifice you’ll have to make and even when the RF 35mm equivalent releases I believe it’ll will be a chunky boy/ girl!

@@adnmultimedia now i have the rf 85mm 1.2. Looking for this sigma

please send link

There’s a 1.2 version but I wouldn’t necessarily call it an update.

@@brandonj8018 lol, no so great hey? RF version would be good with a new motor.

It’s an entirely different class.

damn that really resonated............. L glass will last 2 to 3 photography careers and the the life of the mount.

CoolhandLukeSkywalkr u r rich!😂

@@xuezhongyu5853 No, I'm just going to use a tax refund combined with a Coronavirus stimulus check. You are beautiful. 😍❤️👸🤠😁😉

@@CoolhandLukeSkywalkr admire u!lucky!

@@xuezhongyu5853 haha, I admire your boyfriend.

@@xuezhongyu5853 Do you like White dudes from America?

Owning 35RF and 35L EF MII: The RF is very versatile with its small size and macro capabilities. This gives you shots you will never get with the others. Sometimes the optical performance of the L counts (which is I really love), but I use the RF more often.

@@peterebel7899 I have seen other videos that praise the RF 35mm and considered buying one for the sake of travel (going light) and having a prime. I have the 24 to 105 kit lens currently so I'm not sure if I will make my money's worth for the 35mm

@@Azhang22 I have both lenses. Very different usage. The tiny 35 in cooperation with the swiveling screen and its macro capabilities enables secret shooting and very new perspectives. 24 to 105 usage is like experienced since decades.

@@peterebel7899 Yea that's a good point. So you think RF 35 is 100% worth it?

@@Azhang22 plain YES. Experience new styles of shooting, enjoy it. Street, people, nature, .... Shoot low, close and fast like never before. As long as you just shoot with your eye at the EVF it is just a usual lens.

@MP when comparing, you use the same setup. Otherwise it isn't comparing. It's exactly the same as comparing f1 to f4. Of course you aren't able to compare, till both are f4 and up. But again, not everyone see the actual truth. Still doesn't make it right.