EF 24mm F/1.4 II USM good for Videography on R6 mkII?

[otagg]

Hi,

I recently got myself an R6 Mkii as an upgrade for my older 5D. The main reason for choosing Canon was of course to keep all my old EF lenses. A while ago I discovered my interest in videography and started to heavily use my R6 for video along with an RF 24-70 f/2.8. The only downside here is that the 24-70 is not optimal for bad lighting because of the large aperture of 2.8, this also affects depth of field.

Some pro videographers I know recommend I using a smaller aperture lens... here comes the issue.

Currently, Canon only offers the RF 50 1.2L and the RF 85 1.2L for small aperture, but the focal length is too large for me, I need something in the range of 18-35, preferably either 24mm or 35mm and Autofocus is crucial.

Therefore, I would like to know if it's a good idea to get an EF 24mm F/1.4 II USM.
Is it good for usage in video?

The only other option would be a used CN-E 24 T/1.5 but these are very heavy and expensive

[shadowsports]

Greetings,

If maximizing low light performance and wide angle are paramount, the EF 24mm is a good FL and choice.  I also think the RF 24 or 35 would be good options depending on the FOV you want to achieve.  I don't believe you are going to notice additional light gathering capability between f1.4 and f1.8, but you might see slightly more background blur which probably won't matter as much shooting in low light.  There is nothing wrong with EF glass, but RF is a wiser long term investment.  There is also a big difference between size, weight and price.  Before buying any EF glass, I would do a little research and confirm there isn't something about the particular lens that is less than optimal for use with a mirrorless body.

Compare Canon RF 35mm f 1.8 Macro IS STM Lens vs Canon RF 24mm f 1.8 Macro IS STM Lens vs Canon EF 2...

[Waddizzle]

I suspect you should expect only Csnon EF lenses on this list to be fully compatible with the advanced focus and subject tracking in the R series camera bodies.