The Canon lens is an L lens, therefore the quality should be consistent with their premium/professional line. The Nikon lens is not an S lens, therefore the quality will likely not be up to the level of their premium/professional line.
A better focusing motor, at least in theory, and hopefully significantly better image quality?
Also the Canon has a stylish red ring
I did say 'hopefully'. No information required for hope.From where do you have the Information about the "better image quality" ?
RF 35 1.4 L VCM is the worst RF L Prime I tested so far.
Read better. He said 'hopefully' so why would you think there are comparative data? Having said that, given that the Canon is a professional series lens and the Nikon is not, it's a very reasonable expectation. Time will tell.From where do you have the Information about the "better image quality" ?
That could mean you haven't tested many lenses, that your testing is poor, or that you have a bad copy of one or more lenses.
The reviews, btw
A bit off topic, but I believe that a ‘bad copy’ should not be deemed an acceptable excuse. If Canon’s quality assurance has permitted the sale of a lens, then it is only fair to subject it to testing. Quality invariably exists on a spectrum, but I see no justification for rating products based on the best possible copy, rather than the one a customer might receive in reality.
This is just so confusing due to the fact that Nikon already has a Z 35 f/1.8 S.I just pray that it is not that sharp so I will not be tempted
I have an ongoing love/hate relationship with my RF35/1.8
I agree that ratings should not be based on the best possible copy. But that just highlights the fact that basing decisions on reviewers who test one copy of a lens is not wise. Since that's almost all reviewers, the only viable approach is effectively a meta-analysis of multiple reviews for a particular lens. The one exception to that is when LensRentals runs optical bench testing on ~10 copies of a given lens and reports those data.
Agreed. Personally, I do have the time and ability to properly test a new lens, and I do so with every one that I purchase. That's how I choose to deal with the problem of reviews based on one copy – I evaluate the one copy that is shipped to me, since that's really the only one that matters.
An MFT Chart doesn't say anything about the overall Optical Quality of a Lens, it says something about it's sharpness, thats one part nothing more.
I test Lenses and Cameras for a Living. Have to be over 200 Lenses so far. But what do I know.
Well, sharpness and contrast. But I get your point.
I don't know what you know. Personally, I've tested only about 50 lenses (all Canon save two).I test Lenses and Cameras for a Living. Have to be over 200 Lenses so far. But what do I know.
