Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

EF 50mm 1.8 vs RF 35mm 1.8 vs EFS 24mm on a Canon R?


I’m looking at purchasing the RF 35mm 1.8 as I want another lightweight lens as a walkaround during festivals as such.

I love my 50mm so much, but sometimes I wish I could capture more of the scene and crop as I wish in post. One example is a fairly small stage that even when I’m right at the back on the marquee - I can only just get the whole band in view.

I do have the 24-105 L series but it’s too heavy to have with me all day, I save that for when I really need to zoom in.

Am I right in thinking the 35mm gives me a greater field of view? I was looking at a cheapy EFS 24mm pancake otherwise - which Google tells me crops to 38mm but may have a problem with vignetting.

I tend to photograph people and musicians, indoors and out.

If you were me, would you go for the RF 35 or EFS 24?

Thank you!!



I will leave the choice of focal length up to you.  You listed a variety of focal lengths.

It is better to use an RF mount lens on an R series body, over using an EF mount lens with the RF-EF mount adapter.

"The right mouse button is your friend."

If you find the 24-105mm too heavy, then I would recommend the upcoming RF 28mm f/2.8 STM, or a similar wide angle prime for the RF mount. 

"The right mouse button is your friend."


Yes, a 35mm lens will give you a wider field-of-view than a 50mm lens (horizontal angles about 54º vs 39º respectively).

The RF-S 24mm lens would have a horizontal angle of around 49º.  So you'd be better off with the RF 35mm.


Camera: EOS 5D IV, EF 50mm f/1.2L, EF 135mm f/2L
Lighting: Profoto Lights & Modifiers


You're not clear about what camera you're talking about.  When you say "Canon R", do you literally mean the Canon EOS R?

On a full-frame camera, like the R, an EF-S lens is a bad idea.  It will put the camera into crop mode, which means you will get a narrower field of view -- that EF-S 24mm lens would give you a field of view equivalent to to a 36mm.  (It's still a 24mm lens, but the camera is reading a smaller part of the image.)

Worse, you will only be using a percentage of the camera's pixels, so you will be getting much less resolution than you're paying for, like 11.6 megapixels instead of 30.1.

OTOH, if you're looking at APS-C cameras, like the R10, then it doesn't matter.