# Dustin Abbott reviews the RF 24mm f/1.8



## Frodo (Nov 18, 2022)

His review is here: https://dustinabbott.net/2022/11/canon-rf-24mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm-gallery/
Mirrors my experience with this lens.
It would be helpful if he would include aperture data with his images. He notes poor coma performance as demonstrated in one of his photos. This is presumably wide open as I found it reduces significantly at f/2.8 and is largely gone at f/4.
He notes:
Stopping down to F2 produces slightly higher contrast across the frame, with a bigger jump happening at F2.8. There’s quite a noticeable difference in corner performance from F2 to F2.8. There’s very slight additional gains at F4 and F5.6, and very slight regressions at each stop after that. At these landscape apertures details look crisp across the frame.
This reflects my experience.
I'd like to see a comparison with the EF 24mm f/1.4L (both versions).


----------



## Maximilian (Nov 18, 2022)

Thanks for sharing, @Frodo 
Thanks for another very good review @Dustin.


----------



## Click (Nov 18, 2022)

Another excellent review by Dustin.

Thank you for sharing.


----------



## Chaitanya (Nov 19, 2022)

Irrespective of its short comings that is a good lens for wide angle macro work(flowers and herps).


----------



## AJ (Nov 21, 2022)

Full review here: https://dustinabbott.net/2022/11/canon-rf-24mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm-review/

Quote: "What really stands out is the versatility of a lens like this. You can do a LOT of different photography with a lens like this, from up close work, to walk around and street, to landscape and environmental portraits." This is my sentiment too.

After using my 24/1.8 some more, I'm liking this lens a lot. One negative aspect not offered by other online review is the different AF/MF/Control switches. My 16/2.8 has a Control/Focus switch and AF/MF has to be set in a camera menu. The 24/1.8 has an AF/MF switch, so there is no possibility of using the lens' ring as a programmable wheel. Why this difference? Why didn't Canon set a standard when they created the RF line? Why not a three-way AF/MF/CTRL switch?


----------



## OskarB (Nov 21, 2022)

AJ said:


> Full review here: https://dustinabbott.net/2022/11/canon-rf-24mm-f1-8-macro-is-stm-review/
> 
> Quote: "What really stands out is the versatility of a lens like this. You can do a LOT of different photography with a lens like this, from up close work, to walk around and street, to landscape and environmental portraits." This is my sentiment too.
> 
> After using my 24/1.8 some more, I'm liking this lens a lot. One negative aspect not offered by other online review is the different AF/MF/Control switches. My 16/2.8 has a Control/Focus switch and AF/MF has to be set in a camera menu. The 24/1.8 has an AF/MF switch, so there is no possibility of using the lens' ring as a programmable wheel. Why this difference? Why didn't Canon set a standard when they created the RF line? Why not a three-way AF/MF/CTRL switch?


The 24 1.8 has a dedicated control ring, doesn't it?


----------



## TonyG (Nov 21, 2022)

OskarB said:


> The 24 1.8 has a dedicated control ring, doesn't it?


Yes, it does. I am not sure what @AJ is referring too.

The 16 and 50 pancake style lens's only have 1 rotatable control ring and no manual focus ring due to their size. The single switch on those two pancake style lenses is to select whether the ring is used as a control ring or as a focus ring. Because they don't have a dedicated manual focus ring, the option for auto or manual focus is selected in the cameras menu system.

The 24, 35, 85 "macro" lenses are like every other RF lens with a dedicated focus ring and a dedicated control ring. The control ring is customizable to whatever function you desire in the cameras custom dial menu (ie ISO, Aperture, etc..).


----------



## AJ (Nov 23, 2022)

OskarB said:


> The 24 1.8 has a dedicated control ring, doesn't it?


There is is. Duh (embarassed). Never mind my rant in my previous post.


----------



## AJ (Nov 23, 2022)

Chaitanya said:


> Irrespective of its short comings that is a good lens for wide angle macro work(flowers and herps).


I am keen to try it on wildflowers next season. It should be interesting.

Shooting macro with the 24/1.8 is a way different experience than shooting macro with a short telephoto lens (e.g. 100 mm). There is a learning curve with the 24/1.8, and you can throw what you know about "normal" macro out the window.

For one, the wide angle of view allows you to connect the foreground to the background. The wildflower isn't just a wildflower in a meadow full of wildflowers (as would be the case with a normal macro shot showing the flower with defocused flowers in the background); rather, it becomes a flower in a meadow in the mountains. The flower is focused, the meadow is transitional bokeh, and the mountains are blurred yet recognizable.

The above only produces interesting results if the far background and its connection to the foreground have meaning. Maybe the mountain in the background is important to the story, but maybe it isn't. The same goes for portraiture: a short telephoto allows you to take a headshot and blur and unrelated or uninteresting or distracting background. But use a wideangle lens and we now have "environmental portraiture" where the background has meaning. So, think of the RF 24/1.8 as "environmental macro". Dustin Abbott is a master at these sort of photos, and his shots are excellent examples of this genre.

Then there is the short working distance. You will have to crawl on your belly and get close to things. Small changes in camera position will result in vastly different compositions, as is the case with regular wideangle photography. And you will need to come to grips with fstops needed for various working distances. All of this adds up to a learning curve. Which is a good thing.


----------

