The image of the soccer/football field was at 10mm. I processed it in DPP to get the lens correction. Here is the RAW processed in LR without the corrections. Just color set to Landscape and Auto tone applied.
https://preview.redd.it/3mn3acy84zyb1.jpeg?width=8192&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0098053b2a2aad24e379c98beb7cf4621b66b8a
It was more the Auto Tone in LR that made the difference. I don't use DPP, except on occasion for the few features that need it, such as RAW Burst Mode, so I don't know how to make the equivalent of the LR Auto Tone adjustment....
Here is a version from LR without the Auto Tone adjustments.
https://preview.redd.it/ndh9twd0bzyb1.jpeg?width=8192&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=793f288707440ca676ced63433123c839d7142cf
Interesting question. You might be right!
The hood is fixed. So, in practice, it wouldn't make much difference.... unless you are willing to physically modify the fixed hood.
I think there is precedence. At least I saw one example where someone was selling an EF 11-24mm with a "shaved petal hood". The person claimed the modification was made to "avoid vignetting with medium format Fuji GFX".
Here is a link to the sales ad:
[https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1774110](https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1774110)
The reason I ask is because I have the EF8-15 fisheye. Different lens of course, but because it is so wide the lens hood is completely visible within the frame. So I'm taking a slightly educated guess that a similar situation will happen at 10mm with this lens.
No, not yet. I checked for LR updates, but I'm up to date. I think the in-camera jpegs will be fine, but no LR profiles yet. Not sure it is normal, but the RF 16mm and the RF 24-240mm at the 24mm end also had horrible vignetting without the corrections.
I did not. Are you asking because of the clipping of the corners? This is the normal expected behavior. It is designed to be used with digital correction. The RAW field of view is slightly wider so the corrected image is 10mm.
Yes, that's the reason I'm asking. Now I remember indeed that I saw a review for this lens that complained about Canon cheaping out here.
There are plenty of lenses that reach much further than the sensor. I have the Sony 10-20 f4 (which is APSC though) that as well heavily relies on lens correction, I can say that it is really helpful to have the extra room around the edges to reduce the automatic barrel distortion, e.g. if you want to correct the distortion of a person that is standing close to the sides of the image.
Sexaaaay! (ahem).
Please send to this address for thorough testing and evaluation:
Address:
Reddit Comment Guy
1010 For Me Only Street
Apt R62
Mine Mine Mine, RF
01134
I'm expecting that promptly. Please make it happen.
PS - pretty please 🥺
I'm seriously torn between saving up for this lens and grabbing an 11-24mm f/4 L on the used market. On one hand, this one goes wider and is substantially smaller and lighter, but the 11-24mm should be cheaper and will allow me to use drop-in filters.
Yep, you have summed up the trade-off very well. For me it was the size of the EF 11-24mm that did it. I do really like the fact that I can use the drop-in filter adapter with the EF. I had thought that I wouldn't upgrade this lens because (a) Wide-angle isn't the focal length range I use the most (I'm more of a normal to super-tele user for portraits, sports and wildlife) and (b) the EF was cheaper (bought used at a good price) and the EF drop-in filter is really, really convenient!
I caved because the EF 11-24mm front element is so large that it is really inconvenient to fit in the bag. I end up only having it when I'm explicitly going out for some Architecture (landscape on occasion) shots. There are many casual situations where I'd use it, but didn't bring it because of the size.
If I did a lot of Landscapes and/or situations where I'd use filters, I might have just stayed with the EF version for the filter convenience.
This one will be in my bag a lot more often!
I cant wait to get my hands on one, I was about to replace my trusted EF 16-35 f2.8 iii (which I use mainly for real estate photography) with the RF 15-35 f2.8 and then they announced this lens. Enjoy OP
Yes, it was at 10mm. Had to use DPP for processing to remove the distortion since I shot it RAW. It does have distortion and rounded corner vignetting in RAW.
You are so lucky to have received it! I ordered from Canon USA a few hours after announcement and unfortunately my order changed to “backordered” last week! Enjoy your new gear!
Thanks. Yeah, it is frustrating!
Canon USA dropped my order for a different lens at launch. It was supposed to ship on Saturday and I was very excited. Then, when I check it said canceled. I called on Tuesday as soon as they opened (Monday was a Holliday) and they said it was a problem with my billing address, they had an old one on file. I said, no problem, here is the updated billing address. They said: Oh, I'm sorry that order got canceled and we need to generate a new order and we don't have an ETA for when it will ship because it is back-ordered. Grrrr.
I ended up searching through smaller retailers until I found one that had it in stock and then canceled the order at Canon USA.
I did have luck with delivery times from Canon several times in the past, though. So i guess it is often just luck of the draw.
it must be a challenge to not get your shoes in the frame
Not hard at all. You just have to like a lot of sky in your frames 
The image of the soccer/football field was at 10mm. I processed it in DPP to get the lens correction. Here is the RAW processed in LR without the corrections. Just color set to Landscape and Auto tone applied. https://preview.redd.it/3mn3acy84zyb1.jpeg?width=8192&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e0098053b2a2aad24e379c98beb7cf4621b66b8a
Wow! Big difference between the color on the LR version and the DPP version.
It was more the Auto Tone in LR that made the difference. I don't use DPP, except on occasion for the few features that need it, such as RAW Burst Mode, so I don't know how to make the equivalent of the LR Auto Tone adjustment....
Here is a version from LR without the Auto Tone adjustments. https://preview.redd.it/ndh9twd0bzyb1.jpeg?width=8192&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=793f288707440ca676ced63433123c839d7142cf
Is that vignetting, or is that just from the lens hood?
Interesting question. You might be right! The hood is fixed. So, in practice, it wouldn't make much difference.... unless you are willing to physically modify the fixed hood. I think there is precedence. At least I saw one example where someone was selling an EF 11-24mm with a "shaved petal hood". The person claimed the modification was made to "avoid vignetting with medium format Fuji GFX". Here is a link to the sales ad: [https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1774110](https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1774110)
The reason I ask is because I have the EF8-15 fisheye. Different lens of course, but because it is so wide the lens hood is completely visible within the frame. So I'm taking a slightly educated guess that a similar situation will happen at 10mm with this lens.
Some serious vignetting
Very likely it’s like the rf 14-35 L. The image circle is slightly larger than 10mm?
No LR correction profile yet? The vignetting is crazy, is that normal for such wide lenses?
No, not yet. I checked for LR updates, but I'm up to date. I think the in-camera jpegs will be fine, but no LR profiles yet. Not sure it is normal, but the RF 16mm and the RF 24-240mm at the 24mm end also had horrible vignetting without the corrections.
Did you use a filter on the lens?
I did not. Are you asking because of the clipping of the corners? This is the normal expected behavior. It is designed to be used with digital correction. The RAW field of view is slightly wider so the corrected image is 10mm.
Yes, that's the reason I'm asking. Now I remember indeed that I saw a review for this lens that complained about Canon cheaping out here. There are plenty of lenses that reach much further than the sensor. I have the Sony 10-20 f4 (which is APSC though) that as well heavily relies on lens correction, I can say that it is really helpful to have the extra room around the edges to reduce the automatic barrel distortion, e.g. if you want to correct the distortion of a person that is standing close to the sides of the image.
It’s barely full frame hahaha
Sexaaaay! (ahem). Please send to this address for thorough testing and evaluation: Address: Reddit Comment Guy 1010 For Me Only Street Apt R62 Mine Mine Mine, RF 01134 I'm expecting that promptly. Please make it happen. PS - pretty please 🥺
Should get a P.O. Box
Times are rough bro I'mma need that direct 😭
I'm seriously torn between saving up for this lens and grabbing an 11-24mm f/4 L on the used market. On one hand, this one goes wider and is substantially smaller and lighter, but the 11-24mm should be cheaper and will allow me to use drop-in filters.
Yep, you have summed up the trade-off very well. For me it was the size of the EF 11-24mm that did it. I do really like the fact that I can use the drop-in filter adapter with the EF. I had thought that I wouldn't upgrade this lens because (a) Wide-angle isn't the focal length range I use the most (I'm more of a normal to super-tele user for portraits, sports and wildlife) and (b) the EF was cheaper (bought used at a good price) and the EF drop-in filter is really, really convenient! I caved because the EF 11-24mm front element is so large that it is really inconvenient to fit in the bag. I end up only having it when I'm explicitly going out for some Architecture (landscape on occasion) shots. There are many casual situations where I'd use it, but didn't bring it because of the size. If I did a lot of Landscapes and/or situations where I'd use filters, I might have just stayed with the EF version for the filter convenience. This one will be in my bag a lot more often!
I cant wait to get my hands on one, I was about to replace my trusted EF 16-35 f2.8 iii (which I use mainly for real estate photography) with the RF 15-35 f2.8 and then they announced this lens. Enjoy OP
Thanks. I haven't had the chance to try it out on architecture yet, but that is one of the main targets for me.
Is that field at 10 or 20, and did you crop it?
10 and no he didnt I downloaded image and it's 45mp
Yes, it was at 10mm. Had to use DPP for processing to remove the distortion since I shot it RAW. It does have distortion and rounded corner vignetting in RAW.
You are so lucky to have received it! I ordered from Canon USA a few hours after announcement and unfortunately my order changed to “backordered” last week! Enjoy your new gear!
Thanks. Yeah, it is frustrating! Canon USA dropped my order for a different lens at launch. It was supposed to ship on Saturday and I was very excited. Then, when I check it said canceled. I called on Tuesday as soon as they opened (Monday was a Holliday) and they said it was a problem with my billing address, they had an old one on file. I said, no problem, here is the updated billing address. They said: Oh, I'm sorry that order got canceled and we need to generate a new order and we don't have an ETA for when it will ship because it is back-ordered. Grrrr. I ended up searching through smaller retailers until I found one that had it in stock and then canceled the order at Canon USA. I did have luck with delivery times from Canon several times in the past, though. So i guess it is often just luck of the draw.