I'm not the person you were responding to, and I should probably just stay out of this, but ... as someone interested in stills photography (not video), I find the RF 35mm f/1.8, 50mm f/1.8 and 85 f/2 all very disappointing lenses. I look at lenses for the Sony system such as the Sony 35mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8, the Samyang 35mm f/1.8, 45mm f/1.8 and 75mm f/1.8, and the Sigma 35mm f/2 and 65mm f/2, and I look at the Nikon f/1.8 lenses for the Nikon Z system, and to me the Canon lenses have the worst IQ of the group (I am not talking about sharpness, they all seem sharp enough, but about the overall image), and they aren't even necessarily the smallest, lightest, cheapest, best weather sealed or fastest to AF. For example, the RF 35mm f/1.8 has good enough bokeh when used close up (as just about any lens will), but at typical portrait distances it can produce horrible bokeh (for example see
https://www.canonrumors.com/forum/threads/canon-rf-35mm-f-1-8-is-macro-the-ugly-bokeh-king.36469/), and is not particularly fast to AF. I accept the Canon 35mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/2 are the only lenses in that group with IS and I believe they have the closest minimum focus distance, so if those things are important to you then the Canons have a clear advantage. For me, though, those things are much less important (particularly with newer bodies having IBIS) than other aspects. I feel that so far as RF native lenses go, Canon generally gives you a choice between extremely expensive L lenses which are often large and heavy as well, or disappointing non-L lenses, subject to an exception or two more recently (eg the RF 100-400mm seems to be good for its size, weight and price). Obviously the RF 35mm f/1.8 must suit your uses for the lens very well for you to be so happy with it, but I am afraid I just cannot get excited about the lens.