I’m shocked but I like the RF better. I appreciate the contrast, skin tone, and clarity in the image.

Thanks a lot, very useful comparison. To note: as long as DR is sufficient, it's easier to pull down contrast in post than add contrast were there is none in the first place - and these substantial CAs of the CN glass wouldn't be appreciated for stills, either. That said, the baked-in low contrast of the CN lens certainly is a benefit especially when used with analog media, or older cinema cameras with a more limited DR.

Thanks a lot for the comparison, Bryan ✨ It's amazing to see how big difference in the contrast and skin softness is there between those two lenses 😎 Big kudos to your aspiring model! She did great👍🏻

Good stuff. As a fellow Canon shooter, your content is really super useful!

Edit ** just purchased the LUT pack as well since all I run is Canon’s R line. Looking forward to using them later today** Dude I love this channel for so many reasons. This is an epic comparison. Dude you better not stop doing KZread 🙌🏼🙌🏼

This channel is great 😊

Great comparison! I have been looking to buy one or the other. I love the look of the CN-E but sometimes need the autofocus and sharpness of the RF. I'm wondering if a Hollywood Black Magic filter would make the RF look similar to the CN-E.

The Rf lens is sharper and more contrasty, but you are shooting faces and the cine lens is a win to win since the rendering of the textures is much better. Maybe the rf lens for creepy, horror, thrilling scenes would be great. Thank you that was really a brilliant helpful video

I think usability is a big deal with lenses. photography lenses are fantastic and work great with autofocus. but for video work, they're hard to use (ok, impossible really) in manual mode. but for image quality, I do love the cinema lenses because they have that kind of somewhat surreal look. But I just slap on Maxon's Magic Bullet Cosmo II on my RF lens footage. :D

Did you make sure your CN primes was calibrated - maybe you need to shim your lens.

Wow the RF is really good compared to the Cine, I’d say I like the look better

The cine lens looks fuzzy, almost like a motion blur. Doesn't look good at all to me, as if it's some poor quality lens. Also a lot of CA compared to the RF lens, which is pretty bad too.

I like the RF better.

That cine lens should have been compared to Canon 50mm f1.2 EF mount instead of RF mount. On that case I don't think we would have seen a dramatic difference.

@DeafDirector

Ай бұрын

I would have liked to see that, too. Alas, I only own the 50 RF not EF. Have a great day!

What is onion ring?

@DeafDirector

Ай бұрын

If you look in the highlights in the bokeh, you will see some faint circular lines that look (a little) like the inside of an onion. Have a great day!

I don't like rf 50 1.2. RF 85 1.2 is drastically better from it. Have both regret buying rf 50 1.2 even my sigma 40 art is better than rf 50 1.2. Why so many focuses on boring focal like 50mm. 35 and than 85mm is way to go. I find 45-65 most boring focals in the world. As for the cn-e lens image from it looks like crap! business in the bokeh and background blur, onion rings in the bokeh, low contrast, bad CA & LOCA, weak skintone color rendering and many more! CN-E was designed 25years ago for film cameras. Canon will make new RF cinema prime set with AF lenses very soon. Those new rf cines which are 1 to 1 rehoused ef cnes are industry joke in many people opinion.