Jed Grant
Jed Grant
  • 1
  • 59 910
5 Reasons to buy the Canon RF 70-200 f4 instead of the f2.8 version | A Review
Not sure which RF 70-200mm lens you want to buy? This video covers 5 things you should consider before making your purchase and provides some interesting reasons about why you should buy the f4 and use the money you save on other things. Join me as I tool around in my first UA-cam video. :D Your feedback is both welcome and appreciated.
0:00 - Intro
0:51 #1 Sharpness and image quality
2:29 #2 Light?
3:04 #3 Creativity via Bokeh?
3:57 #4 Weight
4:40 #5 Price
5:20 - Bloopers!
Canon RF 70-300 f4
Amazon - amzn.to/2VQPulL
Canon RF 70-300 f2.8
Amazon - amzn.to/3zj8maD
My Gear
Godox Flash Trigger - amzn.to/3yHnA9e
Godox TTL Flash - amzn.to/38EUH2P
Shoot through umbrella - amzn.to/2VkjrdK
Collapsible beauty dish - amzn.to/38H38L2
Canon R6 - amzn.to/3yKmCJ6
Godox Video Light - amzn.to/2WMVM6v
Microphone - amzn.to/3tgeHSS
**Other accessories**
EF → RF lens Adapter - amzn.to/2VdUSyU
Extra Camera Batteries - amzn.to/3h1W8wX
SD Card - amzn.to/3kXiwIM
Bowens mount - amzn.to/3DOLMtR
Light stand - amzn.to/3DMM2JN
Tripod - amzn.to/2WSkSk8
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Over You - Atch soundcloud.com/atch-music
Creative Commons - Attribution 3.0 Unported - CC BY 3.0
Free Download / Stream: bit.ly/_over-you
Music promoted by Audio Library ua-cam.com/video/rlBuOflkHSk/v-deo.html
Переглядів: 59 987

Відео

КОМЕНТАРІ

  • @ruslanss
    @ruslanss 5 днів тому

    F4 is definitely better option that F2.8 especcialy in sharpness of image, it's better that F2.8

  • @IndyVisuals
    @IndyVisuals 7 днів тому

    Beginning of the year I shot car drift competition with Canon R7 and 24-105 F4. And I got some of my best works images looked very sharp. I’m planning on getting the 70-200 F4 for the reach. I rarely shoot at night and indoors so 2.8 to me is nice to have but doesn’t add much to me.

  • @stevenwaldstein2249
    @stevenwaldstein2249 16 днів тому

    I know this has been posted a few years ago but it’s important for new photographers to hear your message. In Canon I own the RF 70-200/2.8 L but I bought it when I first bought the R5. In Sony, which I also shoot, I still have a f/2.8 GM II 70-200 but since they came out with a new f/4 awhile back I bought that for all the reasons you listed. I think Canon and Sony are the only systems with both f/2.8 and f/4 in their family. Thank you and take care.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant 14 днів тому

      You're welcome! I recently bought a 15-35 2.8 - but should have rewatched by own video :D I haven't used an aperture under 4 since I bought it.

  • @DanielDuhon
    @DanielDuhon 24 дні тому

    I’m watching this after buying the f/2.8 one lol, I love it so far

  • @meterVU
    @meterVU 24 дні тому

    What I found, main differences are the lenses inside, coating and of course aparature. Shooting multiple peoples f4 would be great, but in daylight. In sport, I prefer f2.8

  • @DTUFINOPhotography
    @DTUFINOPhotography Місяць тому

    i have the 2 best canon lenses the 28-70 f/2 and rhe 70-200 f.2.8! The 70-200 is crazy light compared to the 28-70... lol

  • @Aneliuse
    @Aneliuse 2 місяці тому

    0:00 Naaah hahaha i already got the f4, im just watching for fun.

  • @eotceotc
    @eotceotc 5 місяців тому

    Another reason is if your primarily using this for studio work then you might consider the F4 because studio work seldom requires you to kill the ambient light to ensure it is not affecting the exposure of your photo and this will require dialing to higher apertures.

  • @pianosfilipem
    @pianosfilipem 6 місяців тому

    seriously skip the L lense all together and get the 100-400. that thing is a beast. couple it with 85mm f2

    • @Aneliuse
      @Aneliuse 2 місяці тому

      Yea, but the low aperture doesnt make it ideal for anything except decent daytime. I would go for it for bird photography though😊

    • @pianosfilipem
      @pianosfilipem 2 місяці тому

      @@Aneliuse when was the last time you needed a telephoto during the night

    • @Aneliuse
      @Aneliuse 2 місяці тому

      @@pianosfilipem Not just at night, but during the evening when sunlight is less. At 158mm the 100-400 has already reached f/7.1. There are times when you need a higher shutter speed, and thats where an f4 lens is fairly useful. Thats a 1 and 2/3 stops more light. The 100-400 is useful in daylight, but then that can also depend on season and amount of daylight, as well as environment. A dense forest for instance might require a higher iso. Weather sealing is also nice Not that its bad or anything, but there are always benefits and cons to every lens :p

  • @esoxhu
    @esoxhu 7 місяців тому

    Hi Jed, I have the EF 70-200 f4 IS MKI with the adapter on R6. Should I move to RF 70-200 F4 IS? AT the moment on mpb it's about 1.449 EUR and I can sell the EF for 274 EUR, so what I need to pay is 1.174EUR. What do you say? I know the RF version is lighter, nicer, but does the image quality and AF speed is also better? I guess yes...please help me out.

  • @ikoknyphausen198
    @ikoknyphausen198 8 місяців тому

    Agreed. Get a Sigma 105mm F1.4 for bokeh, mostly useful for portraits, and the Canon 7-2 F4 for everything else.

  • @markusbolliger1527
    @markusbolliger1527 8 місяців тому

    I agree with every point you make - the f/2.8 is not for me ...

  • @kenhuang3820
    @kenhuang3820 9 місяців тому

    Some people will say you can just step down to f4 😅 using f2.8 and can help with lower light situation...yes I don't have budget for f2.8 so i have to select f4 ... looking forward to black Friday sales hopefully there availability Let me share my disappointment with my EF 70-200 f2.8 mark 2 it's only approximately 75% of the time I get 85% acceptable sharpness and I have to change settings of sharpness up a bit to make it look nicer but that only changes the jpeg not the raw I test on both my R and R7 and especially R7, it can't keep up 30fps and not always can keep up with 15fps consistently so I trade this lens along with rf 24-105 f4 (I have sigma 24-70 f2.8 art) now just patiently waiting for camera store to transfer me the money so I can get lens at another camera shop 😂 this shop I sold it to they won't match lower price of another shop oh well their lost for loosing a sale....😅 I hope I won't be disappointed with RF 70-200 F4

  • @JonMurray
    @JonMurray 9 місяців тому

    Awesome video man! New subscriber ✌🏻

  • @doniscoming
    @doniscoming 10 місяців тому

    I wanna purchase Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2 + EF adapter and brand new it's cheaper cheaper than RF 70-200 f/4 😅

  • @DAVE_WHITE
    @DAVE_WHITE Рік тому

    Most times we are closing the 2.8 down to f4 or above anyway... SO I tried the 70-200 2.8 also tried using it at f4 many times not much of a HUGE difference for what I shoot.. So I took the 70-200 2.8 back and was able to get 70-200 f4 100-400 and a 24-105 and left the shop with 200$ in my pocket.. the 70-200 F4 is great, also lighter and with the software we have to remove noise it is jiffy..

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant Рік тому

      100% agree on the value. I do really like the 2.8 for some situation though. Lower aperture numbers are always fun to have if you've got the extra cash.

  • @taiyulin5316
    @taiyulin5316 Рік тому

    Thanks for your video. Finally I decide to buy RF 70-200mm f4.

  • @CryptoJones
    @CryptoJones Рік тому

    If I buy the F4 version I could use that money and buy a used EF 85mm f/1.2L

  • @dardiry1968
    @dardiry1968 Рік тому

    Thank you so much

  • @majorpayne0195
    @majorpayne0195 Рік тому

    Surely people will buy the f2.8 if they have money to spent. Budget dictates the purchasing power of one person.

  • @Don-yn9ym
    @Don-yn9ym Рік тому

    the form factor also affect video shooting more, they are considered telephoto lenses, it's more difficult to hand hold and get acceptable result. You'll also need a bigger gimbal.

  • @oneuniversestudios-6206
    @oneuniversestudios-6206 Рік тому

    I have the f4 and the 2.8 EF version and the the RF 2.8. Ive been shooting for 14 years and I find my self in situations where a 2.8 is just better. I shoot so many subjects in different places from small offices to studio floor work where I would never really go past f8.........2.8 in my opinion is a better option but just not the price lol I also have the 28 - 70 F2 which I love! I don't even need to go to the gym hahaha. f4 only positive side is the weight and the price.

  • @user-dg6zr2et4d
    @user-dg6zr2et4d Рік тому

    Jed, thanks for video! For long time I want a dream lens for love with this toy (for MAGICAL improvement my work, lol). For example, my friend bought two Sigma Art 35 1.4 on last season for Z6II for reportage and art work (first lens of these 35-s he broke in the bar-shooting). It's his "magical-improvement-lens". Now "magical-improvement-lens" for my is a 70-200 2.8 (in my mind). I love 100+ tele-perspective (now have 100L EF and rf 24-105), bokeh , and BEST gear. But often and often i think that 2.8 apeture dont realy need at this (tele) focal lenges. Maybe 70-300 (budget 4-5.6) will be MORE functional tele-zoom-lens. For my suprise 24-105/4 is the superble universal lense and this lense have beautiful image. I think, maybe 24-70 2.8 will have magical image for me. Maybe 24-70 is "magical-improvement-lens"?)))) Together with that, maybe 2.8 apeture dont realy need at universal-zoom too. What situations realy needs 24-70 2.8 against 24-105/4? Low-light bowling?))) I recently screwed up while filming a bowling alley because of F4 and ISO 5000 (R6) it turns out that zoom-lenses apeture norm is F4 (not 2, not 2.8) and my invistment of 2000-3000$ for the DREAM LENSE will be in primes. It must be realy unical and magical image (like 50 1.2 RF or 85 1.4 EF IS). 70-200 2.8 i want just for light weight (1070g - marvel of engineering) If light weight is prioritet for me and i love Canon I need wait analogs of Sigma 85 1.4 DG DN (~600g) and Sony 35 1.4 GM (~500g). This "light weight" technology is real and we must just wait for realization for Canon. And buy R8! I also seen patent for light weight 85 1.4 IS for RF on /canonwatch/.

  • @basilbcf
    @basilbcf Рік тому

    I agonized for weeks over whether to get the f2.8 or the f4 version. After watching about 100 comparison videos, I decided that the benefits of the 2.8 were not as significant with the new R-body cameras and their capabiities to shoot at higher ISO. So, I decided that the lighter, less expensive f4 version was the logical choice (even though in my heart I still would have loved the 2.8). 90% of what I shoot is landscapes, and the light weight of the f4 is a plus when lugging it around in a back pack, for example. With the money I saved I also bought the RF 85 f/2 and still had money left over.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant Рік тому

      Nice! I felt the same way. It took me year and I was able to buy the F2.8 24-70 which is a great second lens. I think the F4 is a fantastic lens to get started on the R body.

  • @nickalton
    @nickalton Рік тому

    This is EXACTLY what I’ve been struggling with for weeks! Thank you for this video and saving me a TON of money!! R6 should be able to handle the low light settings with higher iso!

    • @DAVE_WHITE
      @DAVE_WHITE Рік тому

      any brand new camera in the past 4 years handles iso 5K and even 6400 just fine.. also there is software like dxopureraw that cleans them up without a lot of garbage like topaz..

  • @Burritosarebetterthantacos

    Forget shooting indoors with f4😂

  • @merwynworkspace
    @merwynworkspace Рік тому

    Hi Jed Grant i wanted a suggestion i have a tamron 24-70 g2 f2.8 which i had been using on eos r i was looking for zoom lense should i consider the tamron 70-200 g2 f2.8 for fashion couple photography wedding landscape considering on budget yes i cant afford the 70-200 rf 2.8 at the end everything is edited in lightroom ua-cam.com/video/owM_ecjn6Cs/v-deo.html

  • @chacmool2581
    @chacmool2581 Рік тому

    Volume, price and you don't shoot in low light? Quite simple, really.

  • @justink.2368
    @justink.2368 Рік тому

    Great video thanks, helping me make my f4 decision:) Surprised this is your one and only video! You should try to put up more content, quality is on par with the channels with 100K+ subs! Cheers and keep shooting-

  • @asmaafreen685
    @asmaafreen685 Рік тому

    Very helpful and educational video ❤

  • @cyrusIIIII
    @cyrusIIIII Рік тому

    20 years of experience tells me f2.8 is another class. If you often don’t encounter situations where you need 2.8 then you have never been shooting in weddings night clubs and professional studios. Just ignore this video.

  • @texmex9721
    @texmex9721 Рік тому

    I just bought a 70-200 RF for $1100 used. Canon has dropped the new price to $1500, while the 2.8 remains $2800 new and very hard to find used for anything less.

  • @castielvargastv7931
    @castielvargastv7931 Рік тому

    Most portrait photographers i knwo shoot at 4.0-f8 so the f4 will be just fine

  • @melvinjohnson2074
    @melvinjohnson2074 Рік тому

    I do like the zoom ring closest to the camera body as on the F/4 version.

  • @omarcaneomedia
    @omarcaneomedia Рік тому

    You convinced me to go with the f4. I was thinking exactly your first point because I do mainly weddings with multiple subjects so going below f4 is probably not going to happen. When lighting is awkward and dynamic I like to run auto (to avoid missing important moments that won't happen again) and knowing that the auto will never fall below f4 is good security for keeping all my subjects in focus. Plus now I can put more money to save up for R(X) as I'm still using the EOS R and pretty happy with it for the time being.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant Рік тому

      I actually bought the 24-70 2.8 thinking it would be better... and it can be for bokeh, but the image distortion down near 24 makes it less worth it (+focus issues), especially for any kind of group photography so I often keep it pushed to 70. I also used it on a wedding recently, and the groom is soft... because I was down at 2.8 as I was quickly shifting shot to shot. Point being, that forced higher aperture is definitely helpful when you're in a rush.

    • @Hubieee
      @Hubieee Рік тому

      Use aperture priority, set the lens to f/4 and use auto ISO with minimum shutter speed and ISO range set in the camera 😅, that is how I would do it.

    • @williamgollatz1911
      @williamgollatz1911 8 місяців тому

      ​@@JedGrantwhich lens was that, the ef or rf?

  • @railx2005
    @railx2005 Рік тому

    bro you should make more videos wth, your channel will blow up

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant Рік тому

      Thanks for the encouragement!

  • @DarkstarDarth
    @DarkstarDarth Рік тому

    Abe’s of Maine offers the F4 for $1299.00 no tax.

  • @adamkatz2003
    @adamkatz2003 Рік тому

    Hi when tge f4 version go to f4 it is sharp as the 2.8 go to f4? I don't know if that is asked correctly

  • @MohondhaY
    @MohondhaY Рік тому

    Get the 2.8 and stop it down, simple. You can also use it at night time when needed too.

  • @JaroslavBengl
    @JaroslavBengl 2 роки тому

    Really good review, thanks for sharing! 😀Liked 👍🏻 Subscribed ⭐

  • @nickreid5939
    @nickreid5939 2 роки тому

    The T Shirt will always have " F2.8 or BUST"😃

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant Рік тому

      The 2.8 is absolutely a great lens if you have enough in your budget for the tools you want to get. I started with the F4 mostly because it fit the budget and let me buy other things while still offering great value. I may still get the 2.8 eventually.

  • @markedwards4787
    @markedwards4787 2 роки тому

    Great point at focal range.. 2.8 is very shallow.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant 2 роки тому

      Glad it was helpful! I bought the 24-70 2.8 thinking it would help me do better with family photos. When I got home it was immediately clear that I'd overused 2.8 when I saw the soft focus on part of the family.

    • @markedwards4787
      @markedwards4787 2 роки тому

      @@JedGrant I'm looking for a lens to do pet photography outside, the standard seems to be 2.8... is that for speed, low light, bokeh? this can all be achieved with an f4 surely.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant 2 роки тому

      @@markedwards4787 - Yep. You shouldn't have any issues with F4 or a 2.8. 2.8 gives you a more shallow depth of field (blurry background), but you can get something pretty similar by using 200mm F4 and getting as close as you can. Easier with 2.8 for the shallow depth of field. 2.8 will also help with low light and bokeh.

  • @skyscraperfan
    @skyscraperfan 2 роки тому

    You may save $1200 compared to the f/2.8, but sadly it is massively more expensive that the EF version of the f/4. So with a budget of $2,000 for a 70-200 lens you used to get the f/2.8 version, but nowadays you only get the f/4 version for it.

  • @chuck7415
    @chuck7415 2 роки тому

    Thank you so much. I can totally afford the 2.8, but am a frugal person by nature, and would prefer to spend the extra money on a nice flash.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant 2 роки тому

      After nearly a year, I'll be super honest, I do portraits mostly and I wound up buying the 24-70 2.8. I like the F4 better for quality and composition, but taking family photos with small kids... the flexibility of 24-70 is hard to beat.

    • @chuck7415
      @chuck7415 2 роки тому

      @@JedGrant I figure I'll replace my 24-105 f4 with the 24-70 2.8 after getting the 70-200. I just hear so many good things about it. From there I think my kit would be complete with a 15-35.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant 2 роки тому

      @@chuck7415 I will say, that when I shot my brother in law's wedding on the 70-200 f2.8, it did an absolutely amazing job. Closeups from a distance, great color and sharpness. Group shots sucked, but the reception was amazing with that lens. If you have the money, you won't regret the 70-200 2.8. Like your comment about the 15-35 implies, having the right lens for the job is always best.

  • @chakoni
    @chakoni 2 роки тому

    Thx for the video dude!! I can't wait to get this lens 😍

  • @unknownKnownunknowns
    @unknownKnownunknowns 2 роки тому

    great vid. helpful thank you

  • @HK-sp1pl
    @HK-sp1pl 2 роки тому

    I bought f4 version to save money for 300mm f2,8 :)

  • @Jvaldes609
    @Jvaldes609 2 роки тому

    Makes sense

  • @MajorTendonitis
    @MajorTendonitis 2 роки тому

    Why can’t we have both ! Not serious. I had a hard time deciding , but relented and ordered the 2.8 after thinking about doing landscape photography during sunsets and sunrises when there’s less light . My thoughts were the noise would be improved , that’s about it

    • @williamgollatz1911
      @williamgollatz1911 8 місяців тому

      so, was it worth it?

    • @MajorTendonitis
      @MajorTendonitis 8 місяців тому

      @@williamgollatz1911 no idea , I rarely actually take pictures . I always have these ambitious ideas, but rarely go through with them lately. Was going to take a trip to the ice fields on the way to grand prairie this fall, and opted out when I did the math on the cost of fuel

  • @njrivetelite
    @njrivetelite 2 роки тому

    I have the EF 70-200 2.8 IS III and love it.. But if the RF 70-200 F4 is small, inexpensive and light.. I'd snag it for my travel gigs.

    • @JedGrant
      @JedGrant 2 роки тому

      I assume you're using the EF on an RF mount camera? How do you find the quality? I've debated getting an EF mount lens for my R6 but have hesitated.