# Review: Canon RF 5.2mm f/2.8L Dual Fisheye 3D VR



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 10, 2022)

> Bryan at The-Digital-Picture has completed his review of the Canon RF 5.2mm f/2.8 L Dual Fisheye 3D VR lens. This is Canon’s first foray into VR content development. This lens was scheduled to begin shipping in December, but I haven’t received any reports of preorders shipping out to buyers. Canon will also release software on a subscription model to create VR content.
> Currently, only the Canon EOS R5 with firmware v1.5.0 fully supports the RF 5.2mm f/2.8L.
> This is going to be a difficult lens for reviewers, but I’m sure we’ll start to see some pretty cool content in the coming months.
> *Read the full review of the Canon RF 5.2mm f/2.8L Dual Fisheye*



Continue reading...


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 10, 2022)

There are much more relevant reviews on YouTube where the Canon VR solution is compared to other current and popular VR solutions.

To save people time watching videos by people they don’t like, the Canon lens is very well rated when compared to other manufacturers from cheaper to over $20,000. But if you are a VR content creator you already know that.


----------



## vladk (Jan 10, 2022)

Here is one of best reviews I've seen yet:


----------



## Del Paso (Jan 10, 2022)

I'm proud and happy: finally, I have understood this lens.
Proof I'm not totally inept at understanding new technologies...
Thank you, Brian!


----------



## Hector1970 (Jan 10, 2022)

Thankfully its not a lens for me.
I've not much experience with Occulus etc . 
I found it disorientating and headache inducing.
I think I prefer the real world to a virtual world.
I'm sure there will be much cheaper generic lens like this in the future.
There are plenty of industries good and bad that will make use of these type of lens.
In the future I think alot of people will live in virtual worlds rather than face the real world. 
The Matrix seemed a mind blowing concept when it first came out in 1999.
Computer games are already immersive, I'm sure they will feel real in the near future.


----------



## COBRASoft (Jan 10, 2022)

Should be fun to create a VR timelapse...


----------



## Bdbtoys (Jan 10, 2022)

I was really excited for this lens... right up until they mentioned the subscription required to convert the videos to VR180. I'm still waiting on non-sub solutions before I go for it.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 11, 2022)

Bdbtoys said:


> I was really excited for this lens... right up until they mentioned the subscription required to convert the videos to VR180. I'm still waiting on non-sub solutions before I go for it.


Good luck with that. I believe subscription models are the future, especially for sophisticated software services like this. I also suspect that a purchased software license would cost more than the lens and be outdated within a few months for this fast changing technology.


----------



## Bdbtoys (Jan 11, 2022)

unfocused said:


> Good luck with that. I believe subscription models are the future, especially for sophisticated software services like this. I also suspect that a purchased software license would cost more than the lens and be outdated within a few months for this fast changing technology.



Just because subs are 'the way of the future' doesn't mean us, as consumers, need to be ok with it. Just look at Toyota's Remote Start fiasco that just happened on a 'new' released 'feature'. They got so much flak for it they had to do damage control. If you're not aware of what happened... the basically introduced one of their new vehicles with an odd 'feature'. Basically, the jist of the issue is when the owner pressed remote start on key fob, it sends a direct signal to the car, which then the car hits the net to see if you have an active service, then it will issue the command back to the car, which will then start the car. There was no way for the fob to start the car w/o a sub. It's a cash grab that none of us has to be ok with... why if I have the fob in hand does it need to check that I have an active service when it's talking to the car directly. We have to collectively take a stand on this type of crap and vote no with our wallet and/or feedback.

Sorry, but I expect to be able to use the camera+lens (that comes in over $6000 for the pair) to at least perform its basic functions out-of-the box. The sub is a blatant cash grab.

It would be the same as not being able to open or edit a RAW CR3 without a Canon sub to 'decode' it. There is a line that I will firmly stand behind based on principle alone. It's also the same reason I refuse to support any adobe products. There are other alternatives I use that can do just as good as a job, but on those if I want to skip a year and keep the version I have, I can.

Also, as I mentioned in the second half of my comment. One of the reviewers already talked about there being a non-sub way of converting videos. Just waiting on more info. If this gives an output quality that looks/performs at least as good as Canon's solution, then I may be interested... else it's a hard pass on principle alone.


----------



## SnowMiku (Jan 11, 2022)

Bdbtoys said:


> I was really excited for this lens... right up until they mentioned the subscription required to convert the videos to VR180. I'm still waiting on non-sub solutions before I go for it.


I agree, Canon should at least make a basic free version that lets you convert the files in a playable format and basic editing tools for consumers. Then the more advanced editing tools and updates can be on subscription for professionals.

For a hobbyist who only wants to use this lens every few months or so the subscription will be a pain to cancel and renew when you want to use it. But for professionals who will be using this regularly the subscription wouldn't be a problem.

If future versions of DPP were subscription only then I would just stick to the old version, but future cameras and lenses wouldn't have a choice and would need to use the newer version that may force a subscription, hopefully they don't go in this direction with DPP.


----------



## Chaitanya (Jan 11, 2022)

vladk said:


> Here is one of best reviews I've seen yet:


already posted it here:





Canon RF 5.2mm f2.8L review


Just saw this review of VR lens for RF mount.




www.canonrumors.com


----------



## Bdbtoys (Jan 11, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> already posted it here:


I saw that video. I'm waiting to see the follow-up where he says he's going to detail the settings used on a non-sub program.


----------



## dirtyvu (Jan 11, 2022)

I've always wanted a VR recording platform. Back in the day, I was so so close to buying the GoPro Max 360, Insta360, or Garmin VIRB devices. But luckily my early adopter personality walked off the ledge and didn't buy any of them. The videos were just too crude (the resolution like 5.7K sounded impressive until you realize that you had to split the resolution up and the final result would look blocky.

Sigh, the window passed for the hobbyist in me.

I can imagine the porn industry would love it (though VR porn is weird, the girls look like they're 50 ft tall giants). If I was an action sports person (surfer, skydiver, skater, etc.), this would be amazing. If this tech came out when I was 20... sigh...


----------



## fasterquieter (Jan 11, 2022)

$6,000 is such a high entry price for this tech. I had a Vuze XR, but the image quality wasn't great. I feel like somebody ought to be able to put out a great device with two 1" sensors and decent optics for around $500 - $1000.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 11, 2022)

fasterquieter said:


> $6,000 is such a high entry price for this tech. I had a Vuze XR, but the image quality wasn't great. I feel like somebody ought to be able to put out a great device with two 1" sensors and decent optics for around $500 - $1000.


But many people have R5’s so the $2,000 entry price for unmatched resolution even from $20,000 competitors makes it a steal. heck even if you don’t already have an R5 it is a steal if that is the space you are working in.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Jan 11, 2022)

privatebydesign said:


> But many people have R5’s so the $2,000 entry price for unmatched resolution even from $20,000 competitors makes it a steal. heck even if you don’t already have an R5 it is a steal if that is the space you are working in.



The real problem is that for VR video, the R5 is purely incapable of producing high quality VR180 video. 8K 30fps is useless for VR video, and 4K is available in other cheaper solutions. Hopefully they fix this issue by giving the R5c 6K at 60fps (120 fps preferable).


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 11, 2022)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> The real problem is that for VR video, t*he R5 is purely incapable of producing high quality VR180 video*. 8K 30fps is useless for VR video, and 4K is available in other cheaper solutions. Hopefully they fix this issue by giving the R5c 6K at 60fps (120 fps preferable).


Not going by the samples I have seen nor the reviews comparing different VR capture devices.


----------



## Bdbtoys (Jan 11, 2022)

So... I checked on the sub pricing/limitations. Thought I would share for those interested.

EOS VR Utility 31 days $4.99
EOS VR Utility 365 days $49.99
EOS VR Plugin 31 days $4.99
EOS VR Plugin 365 days $49.99
New subs get first 90 days free
No sub is limited to 2-minute exports

I actually thought it was going to be more than this... and with no trial or limited use.

Still, I would have rather seen them charge an extra 100$ on the lens to fund their program than to see a sub. I'm still waiting to see what other options will come up, but at least 2 min would be enough to do a walk around of an object.

Plan info can be found here... https://sas.image.canon/store/plan , the 2 min exports info is mentioned in the utility.


----------



## unfocused (Jan 11, 2022)

Bdbtoys said:


> So... I checked on the sub pricing/limitations. Thought I would share for those interested.
> 
> EOS VR Utility 31 days $4.99
> EOS VR Utility 365 days $49.99
> ...


I agree that's reasonable, but I have to also point out that Canon is charging almost half the cost of the entire Photoshop program and about a quarter of the cost of Premiere Pro, the industry leading video editing software program, for one single plug-in. Worth pointing that out for those on this forum who constantly whine about the cost of Adobe.


----------



## MarkS99 (Jan 12, 2022)

Bdbtoys said:


> I was really excited for this lens... right up until they mentioned the subscription required to convert the videos to VR180. I'm still waiting on non-sub solutions before I go for it.


The EOS VR Utility is 100% free to use for photos and video clips under 2 mins in length. I just got this lens and am currently testing it out.


----------



## MarkS99 (Jan 12, 2022)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> The real problem is that for VR video, the R5 is purely incapable of producing high quality VR180 video. 8K 30fps is useless for VR video, and 4K is available in other cheaper solutions. Hopefully they fix this issue by giving the R5c 6K at 60fps (120 fps preferable).


The R5 is capable of producing some of of the best high quality 3D VR180 video out of any camera at the body+lens price point. Sure, 30fps may be limiting, but that doesn't matter to me. I can output to 8k 60fps (a true 60fps) using R5 video. There's a special in post production trick to convert 30 to 60fps. Is it an extra annoying step? Yes. Would I rather it be done natively in camera? Yes. But again, considering the price point and quality it produces, nothing comes remotely close to this awesome setup. And FYI, I just got this lens and it is awesome.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Jan 12, 2022)

MarkS99 said:


> The R5 is capable of producing some of of the best high quality 3D VR180 video out of any camera at the body+lens price point. Sure, 30fps may be limiting, but that doesn't matter to me. I can output to 8k 60fps (a true 60fps) using R5 video. There's a special in post production trick to convert 30 to 60fps. Is it an extra annoying step? Yes. Would I rather it be done natively in camera? Yes. But again, considering the price point and quality it produces, nothing comes remotely close to this awesome setup. And FYI, I just got this lens and it is awesome.



Have you ever actually worked with 30fps VR video? You can't recover 60 fps in post. Even with the "tricks" you can apply, it's nowhere as good as 60fps.


----------



## fasterquieter (Jan 12, 2022)

privatebydesign said:


> But many people have R5’s so the $2,000 entry price for unmatched resolution even from $20,000 competitors makes it a steal. heck even if you don’t already have an R5 it is a steal if that is the space you are working in.


I haven't looked at the reviews of this lens properly, but I'd be surprised if you get better results than the Z CAM K1. That's only $3K. It has 2 micro four thirds sensors, a higher resolution at 30fps and an option for a slightly lower resolution 60fps. 30fps in VR is all juddery.


----------



## mindu (Jan 12, 2022)

I'm probably an edge case for this lens, as I was more psyched for ease of 3d still photography and 180 degree still web images. I also already have an R5. 

I can simulate 3d stills by moving a camera on a track of course. But handheld snapshot 3d pics with the R5's focusing system and other features sounded pretty great to me. Plus I like having the occasional extreme fisheye pic, even if it's effectively crop sensor and 2d.

It is weird to me that it's already almost a month late with no updates from Canon. But so it goes. Plenty of other pictures to take in the meantime. : )


----------



## Bdbtoys (Jan 12, 2022)

MarkS99 said:


> The EOS VR Utility is 100% free to use for photos and video clips under 2 mins in length. I just got this lens and am currently testing it out.


Yes, I mentioned that a few posts above yours... but that doesn't negate the sub at 2:01+. Also, since you might have missed my post... note you can get the first 90 days free too (w/o limit).


----------



## TAF (Jan 12, 2022)

I'm waiting for the dual 45mm version to generate traditional stereo images.

And the slide printer to output them...that's where Canon would really make money. The consumables.


----------



## dirtyvu (Jan 12, 2022)

fasterquieter said:


> I haven't looked at the reviews of this lens properly, but I'd be surprised if you get better results than the Z CAM K1. That's only $3K. It has 2 micro four thirds sensors, a higher resolution at 30fps and an option for a slightly lower resolution 60fps. 30fps in VR is all juddery.


Msot of the cheaper options don't offer enough resolution. If you must have higher frame rate, you could take down the r5 resolution to those competitors and still have a better image.

30 fps can be good. It's just that the source material from those cheap cameras weren't good.


----------



## mindu (Jan 12, 2022)

TAF said:


> I'm waiting for the dual 45mm version to generate traditional stereo images.
> 
> And the slide printer to output them...that's where Canon would really make money. The consumables.


Are there any rumors about a possible dual 45mm lens? That would sure be on my wish list...


----------



## MarkS99 (Jan 15, 2022)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> Have you ever actually worked with 30fps VR video? You can't recover 60 fps in post. Even with the "tricks" you can apply, it's nowhere as good as 60fps.


Yes, I have worked with 30fps 3D VR180 video. I've also worked with 25fps as well, which is even more terrible in a VR headset. lol And then I convert it up to 50 or 60fps and it looks way better. I've been shooting with an Insta360 EVO camera for almost 2 years now and do have some experience. It shoots 5.7k 30fps (or 25fps HDR). I won't claim to be a pro but I have improved with time and even have some videos I put up on my YouTube channel you can watch. And yes, they all play at 50 or 60fps https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLYzJfVECzigKT7XuihzYCO5CBTNM1o777

I imagine in time Canon will update the firmware for the R3, which would allow 6k60fps 3D VR180 video, which would be a better balanced fit.


----------



## MarkS99 (Jan 15, 2022)

fasterquieter said:


> I haven't looked at the reviews of this lens properly, but I'd be surprised if you get better results than the Z CAM K1. That's only $3K. It has 2 micro four thirds sensors, a higher resolution at 30fps and an option for a slightly lower resolution 60fps. 30fps in VR is all juddery.


The R5 with the 5.2mm lens pretty much beats out any competition at the $6,000 price point. The Z Cam K2 is much improved and better than the K1 but still is a touch behind the R5. Hugh Hou compares the R5, Z Cam K2, FM Duo, and Insta360 EVO all side by side. While the $20,000 FM Duo does slightly better in a couple areas, the R5 with the 5.2mm lens has better optics. You can watch the comparison on Hugh's channel. https://youtube.com/c/HughHouFilm


----------



## TAF (Jan 15, 2022)

mindu said:


> Are there any rumors about a possible dual 45mm lens? That would sure be on my wish list...


No; but we can dream, can't we?


----------



## MarkS99 (Jan 17, 2022)

Bdbtoys said:


> Yes, I mentioned that a few posts above yours... but that doesn't negate the sub at 2:01+. Also, since you might have missed my post... note you can get the first 90 days free too (w/o limit).


Yeah, sorry, I saw your comment right after I posted mine.

Well, for those who, on principle, don't want to pay a subscription fee to export out clips longer than 2 minutes there is actually an alternative way to do so freely with the EOS VR Utility software. Select out 1 min 59 secs with the selection brackets and then choose export to export out a clip. Once that finishes, change the bracket selection forward to the next segment of 1 min 59 secs and export that clip out. Do so as many times as necessary until you've exported out the entire length of the video. Now bring all the clips into whatever video editing software you use and put them altogether. I did this and only had to erase one redundant frame in between two clips and then the video played back smoothly. So there you go. Unlimited video export lengths using the EOS VR Utility software for free (if you don't mind those extra steps).


----------



## mindu (Jan 27, 2022)

Still waiting for the release that was supposed to be in December, with no further update from Canon that I can find. 

It's not like they owe me, just complaining about it. : )


----------



## MarkS99 (Jan 27, 2022)

mindu said:


> Still waiting for the release that was supposed to be in December, with no further update from Canon that I can find.
> 
> It's not like they owe me, just complaining about it. : )


The Canon Store is probably your best bet. They actually did have it in stock briefly like 2 1/2 weeks ago. Adorama and B&H have yet to get them in non-preorder stock. If you haven't already, pre-order it from the Canon Store and they'll ship it to you when it's available.


----------



## mindu (Jan 27, 2022)

I'll probably do that if it takes much longer. I did set up credit at B&H to possibly save money on tax. See how it goes.


----------



## mindu (Feb 16, 2022)

Finally got it!  
Now I just have to figure out how to do what I want with it : ) 
Takes 2 fisheye pictures on the same full frame. Good in relatively low light, as expected. Its manual focus, which makes sense I guess as it's focusing for both lens at the same time. Also of course it's got a huge depth of field, and I'll be taking pretty composed shots with it and not shapshots so that's fine.

Just to note if others dig up this lens for stills, what I'm in the process of figuring out now is how to have a quick workflow to make stereoscopic panoramas out of it. I found a Sourceforge cross-platform app called Hugin, which looks promising. Right now it looks like: 
1. bring the original cr3 file with two fisheye images on it, and run a script to split and crop it into two separate images
2. output those images in a format Hugin can work with
3. define the "focus points"
4. ....
5. Profit? 



See how it all works out...

Oh, and the camera arrives with a suitable custom lens cap and bag. So those things don't have to be ordered separately, even though they might be listed separately on some sites.


----------



## MarkS99 (Feb 16, 2022)

mindu said:


> Finally got it!
> Now I just have to figure out how to do what I want with it : )
> Takes 2 fisheye pictures on the same full frame. Good in relatively low light, as expected. Its manual focus, which makes sense I guess as it's focusing for both lens at the same time. Also of course it's got a huge depth of field, and I'll be taking pretty composed shots with it and not shapshots so that's fine.
> 
> ...


Does Hugin actually correct for the fisheye effect or are you just going to leave it as is and do an internal crop to leave as is and output them together to display a narrower field of view 3D image?

Have you tried the Canon VR software yet? It is free to use and you can export out wide 180 degree images for viewing in a Quest 2 or whatever VR headset. You will need to copy and paste Metadata from an original R5 jpeg file into your edited raw-to-jpeg file first before the Canon software can make corrections to the file (I use ExifToolGUI for that).


----------



## mindu (Feb 16, 2022)

Disclaimer: I've just started messing with the options, as I also have a day job. : )

But it seems like Hugin will correct for the fisheye effect, as it has that option. So I definitely want to try that. Will also definitely want to try the close crop method too.

I did try the Canon VR software, but was not able to get it to even open the raw .cr3 file I shot with the lens. Or an exported version that was a jpg. The files were grayed out. It seems like it may only recognize video formats?

I'll try a jpg with updated exif data to see if that changes anything.


----------

