This post may contain affiliate links(s). An affiliate link means I may earn advertising/referral fees if you make a purchase through my link,
without any additional cost to you. It helps to keep this site afloat. Thank you in advance for your support. If you like what we do here, maybe buy me a
coffee.
Canon RF 16mm F2.8 MTF Comparisons
As we always do, we scour the internet looking for the MTF of the new lenses and compare them against as close to equivalent lenses as we can find.
In this case, well, there is no comparison to an existing lens. So we went back into history and compared against the EF 17-40mm F4L and also the EF 14mm F2.8
Unfair? Oh yes.
The RF 16mm F2.8 MTF looks like;
Now this really isn't bad, if we were to compare against the RF 15-35mm F2.8, we find that yes, the RF 15-35mm F2.8 is better wide open than the RF 16mm F2.8, but the difference really isn't as much as you would think. Especially when you consider the size and price of the two. The RF 15-35mm has more contrast wide open and more resolution as it goes into the corners, but the 16mm holds its own. The 16mm does tail off faster, as the 15mm holds resolution more off center. Astigmatism should be around the same for both lenses.
Another lens that readers may know and even use still on the RF mount is the EF 17-40mm F4L USM. The 16mm does quite well against this older zoom, and at F2.8 on the 16mm is far better overall than the 17-40mm can even hope for. If you use the 17-40 on the RF mount as a stop gap and find yourself always shooting at 17mm - don't walk - RUN to get the RF 16mm now. Don't even bother reading the rest of the article - just click here.
I'm not sure there are any other relevant comparisons on full-frame and a UWA lens such as this. We'll add more as we find them.
blog comments powered by