RF Pancake vs RF Macro | 28mm & 35mm 

Id go for the 35 :)

I own both: the 28 is just stellar! (as long as you don't go Macro)

I’m working on both to pair with my RF 50mm

None of them. I just bought a used Canon 17-40/4L EF. I use it on my R5 with an EF/RF adapter, and I must admit that it is surprisingly sharp (for a zoom lens, of course) and covers all the focal lengths I use. I believe it's underrated.

I was looking at that lens in the past but never ended up trying it, glad it’s working though!

For those who like both lengths, it might be pretty normal to own both for a long period. They really have filled out the budget primes recently!

I've slowly drifted to the 28mm's for that reason, 35mm continuously feels a little tight when hiking for landscape. And 28 still does a lot of time, but while I like 24mm for that, I don't like 24mm as a multipurpose length or for a-roll. Great point about the phones! I was just shooting some mountains in CO, only brought the 100-400mm on a hike, and I was using the ~24mm on the phone as a companion to that lens pretty heavy.

Why is it an issue that 24-28 is where “phones live”. I wasn’t clear from the text that followed to me 😅

@@sethnielsen3325 It's not an "issue" in a real sense, but most likely you'll have some overlap with the focal length of your main, wide phone lens. So it's something to consider if you're looking to go with the 28mm as part of the smallest form factor option. Your phone is close in look, the quality is catching up, and will be even smaller/lighter.

Lotta double owners out here!

Great point, I'd love to mess with one, but haven't accepted going down the astro rabbit hole yet.

I've had them together for several months at this point and the 35mm for years, but I haven't tried to do much scientific testing with sharpness. I think most people tend to agree with you though and it might be even more clear on the higher megapixel bodies. They're both pretty decent in the middle wide open and around f8 which is primarily how I use them. I tend to notice some more green fringing with the 35mm, but nothing uncorrectable.

I've bouldered indoors long ago but wasn't good and didn't love it 😅 So I just shoot the climbers now haha. I'd figure you'd want something as small/light as possible?

Having the R8 with the little lenses has been a great experience so far!

It's a neat one!

Also thinking I'm probably fine with the lens, and I should buy a sleeve instead, extra battery and memory card lol

First, very jealous, have fun! Alaska is slowly working its way up my list. When in doubt, wait it out! Those are two great lengths to have for that trip when using the R50 if going with primes. Minimal lens switching, wide and tight. If you already need some accessories, maybe it's a good time to simply add those and take mental notes while on the trip about what you like and don't like from a focal length perspective. If you find you want something in the middle with IS, consider the 35mm afterwards. Personally that's the type of trip I love to bring the 24-105 L on for the versatility. Obviously that lens is a big investment compared to what you have, so you'll know best if it's within the budget and how often you'll use it.

I also have the r50 and going to Alaska next year. Doing some research for lens because I’m a very beginner

@@DanYosuaI just sold my 24-105 because I found over the years that lens was at 105 and I was wishing I could get closer, or at 24 and it wasn’t wide enough. My new approach is 70-200 f4 and some of the non L primes to complete the wide end. I’ve doubled the reach and have 16mm instead of 24. Also have the 35mm f1.8 and trying to decided if this 28 can be justified. I like doing panos and the 28 appears to be better in the corners than the 35. So hard to decide.

@@stephennowlan2637 I would say that if you're shooting with the 35mm and like it for what it is, stick with it. I just find I like 28mm better walking around, and it's a good compromise for me before I finally commit to a wide zoom. Obviously you'll likely run into a similar issue where it isn't as wide as 24mm.

I haven't used it myself yet, but it seems that the 24mm is one of the weaker performing among the small primes. Unless you really want the fast aperture as wide as 24mm, then the 28mm is a great fit for the RP/R8 bodies!

@@DanYosua thank you very much for your answer; friendly. Philgood

Thanks!

Have you tried the 24mm?

@@DanYosua unfortunately not. According the reviews it is not as sharp as 35mm or 28mm. And 24mm is too wide for me. I’ve noticed that most of the time I’m shooting with one of my countless 50mm vintage primes. Lol

@@andriimartynov83 😂I've seen similar as I've looked through them. Not a length I'm super excited about either, but still hoping to try it out and compare to the 28mm if I can.

@@DanYosua yeah it’s gonna be an interesting comparison.

Focus is pretty good, but no IS if you like shooting short video clips. I don’t hold it against the lens but def something to note when using with bodies like the RP and R8

@@DanYosua I have R6 MII. Do you think these lenses are good? I do not meet the problem of focus in filming?

Oh yeah, in that case, I would choose based on your budget and focal length preference. Having IBIS will be nice if you go 28mm just so you have it.

@@DanYosua I didn't get my full answer but thanks a lot anyway

Do you have a favorite?

hoping to try it out someday!

@@DanYosua recently picked it up myself and mate it's a big boii haha but the images are so crisppp

@@rhemtro I'm sure 😂 I want the performance without the size or cost. What do you typically shoot?

@@DanYosua mostly weddings and couples, so the f2 is defo useful for me

I feel like it's not terrible for what it is. I haven't used the 16 or 24 yet, but those both seem like Canon relied on the corrections more heavily.

Its not that bad though…

🥴