So I have been staring at my B&H cart for like three days now trying to pull the trigger on a wide lens for my R6 and I am just stuck. I am mostly doing real estate walkthroughs and some travel vlog stuff for my channel and I am really torn on which way to go. Right now I am looking at the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L and the 14-35mm f/4L. My logic was that the 15-35 is obviously the king of the lineup but it is so freaking heavy and expensive. I am based in Seattle so I am doing a lot of moody, low light indoor shots in older houses and I worry the f/4 just wont cut it even with the R6's decent high ISO performance. But then I think about carrying that heavy 15-35 on a gimbal all day... my wrists already hurt just thinking about it lol.
Then there is the RF 16mm prime which is dirt cheap and tiny but I am worried the distortion might be too much for professional real estate work where lines actually need to be straight. My budget is around $2,200 so I could technically afford the 15-35 but it would basically tap me out for the rest of the year and I still need to buy a new wireless mic setup. The 14-35mm is tempting because of that extra 1mm on the wide end which actually makes a huge difference in small bathrooms and tight hallways.
Is the f/2.8 really worth the extra grand and the weight for video specifically? I have seen some reviews saying the 14-35 is actually sharper in the corners but then others say the vignette is crazy and relies too much on software correction which might look weird or jittery in video once the IBIS kicks in. I am leaving for a trip to Tokyo in three weeks and I really want to have this sorted by then so I can get some practice in before I go. If you guys were in my shoes which one would you pick for pure video work on the R6? The IBIS is great on this camera but I am just paralyzed by the choice right now...
> Is the f/2.8 really worth the extra grand and the weight for video specifically? Probably not for your use case. The Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM is basically the more practical choice because that extra 1mm is vital in small rooms. The R6 handles high ISO well enough that f/4 isnt an issue for video, honestly. It is also much safer for your wrists and gimbal motors during long shoots. Get the lighter lens and a good mic.
Catching up on this thread and I gotta agree, the f/4 zoom is the smarter play here. Youll thank yourself when youre walking around Tokyo all day.
- The money you save pays for that wireless mic setup you need
- Lighter weight means your gimbal motors wont struggle as much Just bump your ISO for those dark Seattle interiors, the R6 sensor can totally handle it.
> Is the f/2.8 really worth the extra grand and the weight for video specifically? In my experience, no. Honestly, shooting real estate at f/2.8 is usually a mistake because the depth of field gets way too thin and you lose detail in the back of the rooms. You usually want to be around f/5.6 or f/8 anyway to keep everything sharp. The Canon RF 14-35mm f/4L IS USM is the smarter tool here. That extra 1mm on the wide end is a total lifesaver for small bathrooms, literally the difference between getting the whole sink in the shot or missing it. I have tried using the Canon RF 16mm f/2.8 STM for pro work and the barrel distortion is just too much. It makes walls look like they are bending which looks super amateur for real estate. The f/4 zoom is also much lighter, so it wont kill your arms on a gimbal like the DJI RS 3. Grab the f/4, use the leftover cash for a DJI Mic 2 setup, and enjoy Tokyo. Your back will thank you for not lugging that heavy 15-35 around all day.
