Canon RF 14-35mm F4 v EF 16-35mm F4 Best Wide Angle L Zoom Lenses in 2023. After many assignments 

I got tired of adapting my EF 16-35, so I picked up the RF 14-35 back in October. The 14-35 is working out just fine for me. I've been slowly making the transition to all RF lenses, but I do believe the overall build quality of the EF L lenses is more robust.

Between you and Martin Castein I have developed an appreciation of "Not so leading-edge" gear. If my living depended on it then I may chase the leading-edge gear. I'm an amateur enthusiast (since school in the 1970s). You both made me realise that Canon got it sooooo right a few years ago. Currently very happy with my Canon 6D (like new from MPB for £400) a superb trinity of F/4 zooms (70-200, 24-105, 16-35), a few primes (50mm f/1.4, 85mm f/1.8, 40mm f/2.8) Martin Castein made me realise just how underrated the 6D is. It's truly bargain of the decade at £400!! I have a Canon M50 (with a speedbooster). Another overlooked camera. I was an early adopter of the Fuji X100V. I could sell it for way more than I paid but it's too beautiful to ever sell. It's the perfect evolution of the X100 series. a "Street" monster and a guaranteed classic. I also have a Canon S120 "pocket camera". It was almost £500 new, really class-leading, but I really think my Smartphone is better in most situations. I'll keep it because it's not worth anything Fundamentally though I've woken up (because of you and Martin) to the capabilities of older cameras. So many of the world's greatest images were taken on Canon 5d/5D2/5D3 that you, eventually, realise that it's about YOU, not the latest £4K camera Cheers. Keep up the good work..

The corrected image is the 14 mm. Many mirrorless lenses are designed so that the correction is essential. On DSLRs this is not possible as the viewfinder image cannot be corrected. On DSLR lenses the correction is extra.

Good comparison. I actually like the pictures out of the EF lens better. EF also has better build quality.

Well done. (ty) Just bought R6-M2. So far, so good. Also still use 1Dx M3 etc. I have EF 16-35L. Love it. Keeping all my EF L lenses.

Good real world review Roy. When I finally took the plunge into mirrorless last year (R5 from 5D4) I traded my 16-35 for the 14-35 and apart from being struck by how well my L glass had held its value (gradually traded them all ) the 14-35 has been a revelation in all the areas you mention and of course the R5+14-35 combo is a lot lighter than the 5D4+16-35 which being retired with stuffed knees and questionable shoulders is important for me and it’s surprising how much wider 14 is than 16 which is useful since my general personal style finds me more at the wide end than the long end of lens. Cheers from NZ.

You are not losing wide angle to the profile correction. The lens is actually projects an image wider than 14mm, something around 12mm. And after correction the final image is 14mm.

Great review, Roy, I really like your channel! I have the EF f4 and have no complaints! It's been a event photography workhorse for years and has never failed to deliver.

Great video comparison. I ended up bypassing both of these lenses and opting for the 17-40 f4 because of price which in like new condition was $279. It has paid for itself multiple times over already. 17mm is a little long in some cases but I have always been able to make it work.

Great video, really informative and helpful, way more sow then a bunch of charts and technical mumbo jumbo! Many thanks.

I've had nothing but success with the EF 16-35 mm f4. Very good lens. Love mine. Thank you for the info great video.

Great real world comparison , i have just purchased the RF 14 - 35 to replace my ageing EF 17-40 which i had to adapt to fit the Eos R . Looking forward to receiving it and seeing how i get on with it. Like you i leave on the lens correction in lightroom so never think about it as a issue , most lenses have distortion to some degree. Glad Canon produced an ultra wide for the RF mount that is rectilinear as being able to use this with my filter kit was a major consideration as a lot of 14mm lenses are so bulbous you can use standard filters with them.

Thank you! Like you, I loved my 16-35 f/4 and I thought I would own that lens for decades. I was really hesitant about making the switch, but yesterday I did it. I couldn't afford to keep the ef lens, but your video along with some others make me think this was a wise choice so I could gain a couple mm without having to carry around an extra prime.

I prefer the ef Glass espacially in These wide Angels. Try to use a Polfilter with 14mm you will get Problems. With the Drop in Adapter für ef No issue. Actually the Adapter ist an Advantage for wide Angels lenses

ich danke Dir für den tollen Vergleich, ich stehe gerade genau vor der gleichen Frage.

I own 16-35 f4. Great lens. No doubt I'd buy it again over that rf lens, price is a very important thing when you don't have much money to spend)

Great comparison! Thanks ❤

My wide-zoom is the Tokina 16-28mm f/2.8. When I was comparing wide zooms money was an issue and at less than half the price of the Canon 16-35mm f/4.0 the Tokina was my buy. Advantage of the Tokina would be identical - or better! - optical performance as the Canon at a much cheaper price. Also, I don't know if you've ever tried a Tokina lens, but there a big ass "chuck" at the front you push/pull to switch between auto focus and manual focus modes which is great during live event or street photography. You can switch easily between AF/MF while the camera is up at your eye rather than taking the camera away to look at the switch or feeling for it with your camera up. In a fast moving situation that can be the difference between catching or missing the shot. Disadvantages: It's a heavy bastard - just over 900g - and it has no filter threads. At all. Now I do usually use the lens inside (real estate, often) so it's not a huge issue, but I'm always aware that front element is unprotected. Not a huge issue since I also love my Rokinon 12mm f/2.8 and 14mm f/2.8, and neither of those can take a front filter either, and those lenses got taken to Antarctica, South America, New Zealand and Australia. Guess when using cheaper lenses that are a few hundred bucks vs a lens that's over a thousand you can be a little casual on that. I can break four Rokinon 12mm and/or 14mm lenses for one Canon 8-15mm. And my Rokinons have survived a decade of use. I can break two Tokina 16-28mms for one Canon 16-35mm. And these price differentials hold across new and used. Speaking of breaking lenses, ugh. I did drop my Samyang 24mm f/2.8 tilt shift and, yup, it broke. Looking through the glass and shining a flashlight through it, it looks like the glass is all good - I get a nice clean circle on my white card with no shadows, rainbows or diffraction which would indicate cracks in the glass and it's a clean circle, not an ellipse, so I don't think anything shifted. It's a manual lens with no electronics... Looks like it just came off the shift track, so the repair should be cheap (it's a used lens). But, from Ireland I have to ship to the UK then they ship to Korea, so it'll be gone for awhile. Really need to send it out this week. You should do a video on adapting EF lenses ti an RF mount and how well that works. The reality is Canon shooters will need to go mirrorless sooner or later and I'm stalling because of the sheer amount of EF lens I have and the smaller overall selection of RF lenses. But I do keep looking at that R5.

•Canon 16-35mm F4, my fav Lens..just wonderful & solid •2nd fav: Sigma Art 40mm - the Cats Pyjamas

This a re-watch for me and probably a second comment here. But as I was watching and other videos of yours I have watched I started wondering just how cold is it in your room? A heavier coat, a toque, all you need to complete the picture is gloves. Maybe all I've heard about how cold Brit's homes can be is true. Canadian here!

Thank you very much for this comparison, especially the side by side photos. That was very helpful for me. Also interesting would be a comparison at different apertures and both at 16mm.

Another great video! So true about dropping things... my tripod tripped on one assignment, and I watched if fall in slo-motion... The hood of the 16-35mm F4 got smashed, but nothing happened to the lens, and the 5Dmk4 did not even got a scratch, and I could continue like nothing has happened, even though it was quite a big impact. Quite impressive, as this happened twice. The other day thoug, I dropped my bag, not bady at all, and my 10-22mm AFS split in half that was mounted on the R7, to my big surprise, as I thought that nothing would happen... Yes, the 16mm is indeed the sweetspot, all wider starts to look weird :-) Actually the focus window is quite imortand in my workflow as I use it in manual 99% of the time and change the focus by looking in to the scale.

good work

Great video love the beach shots specially the pebbles I still have the ef 2.8 version 2 and love that adapted onto the R6 I’m with you on the manual aperture ring would love that back on the lenses I . Now for RF lens unlike the ef L lenses tough as tanks I got my 1st rf lens Friday the 100-500 (had to give up the ef 500f4 is usm as the weight and a bad back not a good combination) Well had heavy snow here Friday so wasn’t risking going out slipping and smashing it to bits with it feeling plasticky on Monday went down to the local canal with the 100-500 on the crop R7 and got by best ever kingfisher pics closest I’ve ever gotten to one so really great just a shame was late on so low light and f7.1 high iso not great on the r7 well heads off home and along the towpath a little motorcycle goes bombing past us … Thinks nothing of it the next day I updates both the R7 &R6 firmware and see 3 tiny pinhead specs of dirt on the front lens of the 100-500 no biggie gets a new lens cloth some solution goes to clean it off like I have done over the years with many a lenses and I still can’t believe it actually put 3 scratches nearly a cm long across the front glass …. I was almost in tears only shot it once I’m still gutted my old big f4 over 30 year old with total zero marks on the glass in fact this is by far the most damaged lens I’ve ever had which includes my old Minolta kit lens 18-55 which the wind blew the tripod over smashed the vivitar flashgun off the hot shoe the lens hit the ground 1st and just had a tiny scuff on the edge of the glass . Makes me wonder if the coatings on the rf glass is really soft or made of something else . Shocking luckily I’ve got my gear insured so hoping this is covered and will see what the insurers say 😢😢

Always a joy to see your videos, Roy! I have to wonder if your workspace needs insulation and heating through! As regards the RF corrections: I have been told that the lens, uncorrected, is shooting at around 11 or 12mm, and the correction uses that 2+mm for its correction, thus rendering the expected 14mm. This was the same technique used for the F24-240 lens, and my tests comparing 24mm on that lens against the RF 24-105 show it's corrected FoV is actually 24mm. Aperture ring and distance displays... I am a living fossil, having started my photography over 40 years ago, and TBH, I am ok with those elements being gone, I tend to shoot via the viewfinder almost exclusively, so having info in that display - either as a number or the WYSIWYG image display is OK for me. Best wishes for more videos from New Zealand!

Good video, as always. Your channel may be one of the smallest, but definitely is one of the best.

Canon experimented with an LCD screen on the barrel of the EF 70-300mm II USM that could toggle between showing focal length, focus distance or a camera shake meter. Whilst it didn't seem to offer much over a standard focus window at the time, it's surprising that they haven't integrated that tech into RF lenses featuring a customisable control ring. It would be very handy!

Something I realized after recently upgrading from a 50D to R6mkII is that my EF lenses with a VND EF-RF adapter were very convenient for shooting CLog 3 video. My “holy trinity” of EF-S 10-22mm, 24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8 IS with and wiithout 2x extender all work well on my new mirrorless body. I did buy an RF 100-500mm for wildlife stills but for now will hold off on buying any more RF glass.

Wonderful thorough analysis. Many thanks 😊

Great great review. I took a interesting route and just fall back to dslr recently (obviously for seeing the moon with that magnificent optical viewfinder 😅). Bought a mk4 and this ef 16-35 f4 (hopefully won’t regret not getting the 2.8), and a 50 1.2 to start with. Plan to get the 100 macro in the future for film scanning. What else do you recommend? For travelling, landscape and maybe animal (we got many of these here in Canada). Great content btw, subbed. 🎉

"Don't be lazy. Put the underwear back in the drawer and get the tripod out." Never thought I'd hear those sentences. 😜 Do you have the the f/2.8 ultra wide zoom as well? When do you favor one over the other? When I was shopping for one, I almost got an f/4, but ultimately decided to save up for a 2.8 and I'm quite glad. It's really helped in low light venues. PS...you are an old school dinosaur. ;)

Regarding durability: i dropped the 16-35 f4 camera and all straight onto a tile floor. It cracked and bent the UV filter which i had to pry off, but everything else was fine

A very good overview of the RF v EF lenses. The EF versions are undoubtedly better built, the RF undoubtedly a sharper. My RF 24-105 has become a bit wobbly at the front, my EF 16-35 is so old it's a bit rattly. What a combo'... I really miss the EF red dot, changing RF lenses in dark conditions is so frustrating!

Nice reflection of both lenses Roy. I don’t think at least short to medium term there is much need for RF glass when there is bargain EF glass to be had. I do think Canon was right with the budget option to make them smaller and lighter sacrificing the aperture. When the right tool is needed, the better (in most cases) RF L glass is available. I registered all my kit this week and the EOS 7D bodies, I do miss that heft. However I’m happy to go with the flow and the R7 is a good step forward. Is there anything the R5 doesn’t have that the 5d predecessors did?

I would love to hear how autofocus compares in video. Can you tell me if the old EF lens on a canon adapter and r body has good autofocus? Fantastic video!

Great video, you should get an equity card too👍

Deciding between these two lenses as I use an R6 II. The EF 16-35mm is half the price at £500 whereas the RF 14-35mm comes in at £950 second hand. Is the RF worth that much more as I already have an adapter and would be using it for Real Estate work.

It looks like the EF has a better or more solid colour definition in the backgrounds. Speaking for the church or the sea sunset, IMHO.

great video, thanx! How behaves the ef-Lens adapted on the R5 with eye-AF ?

I gotta ask. Do you have a link to the photo you took when underneath the water “fountain” while on your back with the kids in the background? I’d love to see it. It’s early on in this video.

Yo. you dont mention if the 14 has the af/mf and is/none switches? Also as an RF newb I think im on to something.. I use the control dial not to do the iris but to scroll through focus types which I have restriced to.. 'face recognition', and 'focus on the box'. Iris im doing with my right hand forefinger.

I landed fully onto my 100-500mm RF and just took it like a champ. And I am not light!

There is a huge mechanical vignette problem in this lens. It is impossible to correct it without cropping. EF 16-35 F4 is way better than this. Sharp corners, no vignetting problem, sweet spot is F5.6.

Just spotted the shoes! Are you into climbing as well?

Merhaba Video için teşekkürler.bu lens'in ef versiyonuna yeni sahip oldum. ancak bir şey dikkatimi çekti. Odak halkası netlik aramak için dönerlen 3 kademeli bir Tıkırtı sesi yapıyor sizde de böyle mi?

Roy I'm having a little problem with Raw. The raw file will be on the SD card or on the compact card. When I go to put them on a flash drive nothing is there. Am I doing something wrong? The camera is my 5Dmarkll and my 7D. Any information is appreciated.

Hahaa! You made coffee come down my nose with the underwear thing.

EF doesn't need correction and built like a tank and also excellent for video and gimbal. Till death do us part 😂. RF needs too much corrections if you're a manual guy and it's bult good but not a tank like EF.

"don't be lazy, put the underwear back in the drawer and get your tripod out, and do it properly." - Roy Riley My number 1 takeaway from this video..jk 😅 But seriously, the review helped me come to my decision. Thanks

sir this lens will work in canon eos r1

The EF is a proven, battle-hardened workhorse whereas the RF is built with lesser quality. 16mm with 4.0 aperture is perfect for me as a start because for a wide angle lens, Bokeys are not why you would use one so the other 2.8 versions don;t really make any sense. It is like having a 60hz Gaming panel on a machine with a fast GPU. It makes no sense, whatsoever. I have the 16-35 and 4.0/5.6/8.0 are my favorite F stops to use on outdoors during the day when shooting architecture, landscapes and so on.

How is your spine holding after these years of abuse?