I love how you get directly to the point. I hate it when other UA-camrs stall and avoid the main subject. I guess you already know your fans admire your work and we watch you in hopes of becoming better photographers.
Oh man totally agree, I find I have to skip the first minute or two of most videos because they give their lengthy "context" and personal path explanation. Its like they all follow this formula and it gets really old and time-wasting fast. Yes, so thank you for just getting to the point. Most of us watching you already know who you are and for many who consume a lot of videos just want the meat and potatoes...
I switched from Nikon to Canon this year and one of the reasons why was the 28-70! It's a great lens and it has not left my R5 since I got it. I've always been a prime girl but this lens just works so well and is so sharp. It's magic!
Sigma was trying to make something like this in a while. They make 24-35 and 28-45 1.8. Tamron seems to be on it too. They already made a 35-150 that's just as big and heavy, haha. I hope a 28-70 is underway.
I just had the proudest day of my life at my daughter’s wedding. I was astounded by the 12+ hour stint put in by their photographer. 2 camera bodies, hip holster, heavy lenses, and she still somehow still managed to melt into the event and somehow become a part of it. Sheer graft. Respect to your profession.
The 28-70 is truly godlike. I use it for theatre photography, at f/2 in a dark theatre the photos come out so clean it's like I shot them in daylight. Absolutely game changing to get prime lens speed on a versatile zoom!
Agree. It's a beast - hoofed mine through to London, Venice, Florence, Rome, Amalfi, Costa Rica, Japan...images are worth every penny, even if my right arm is now slightly larger than my left.
Couldn't agree more about the 28-70 F2. First time I used it was doing senior pictures for my niece when the lens initially became available. Used it alongside an 85mm 1.2 (EF mount adapted). The 28-70 blew me away. I would have left the 85 1.2 at home had I known the 28-70 would perform so well.
After spending way too much on RF gear last year, this superb review has got me wanting a new lens. Love the channel and the great points you make in these reviews.
The 28-70mm f/2 is a fine lens. I have the 28-70mm f/2.8 I also have the following prime lenses: 24mm f/2 28mm f/2 35mm f/1.4 50mm f/1.4 85mm f/1.4 Since I prefer primes, I use my 28-70mm as a backup to my primes.
I've owned my 28-70 since 2019 and it still is my main lens (81% of all my frames shot since then) for all the reasons you pointed out. It is an absolute tank as well as it being immaculate in image quality and character. With IBIS on all pro bodies going forward, I just don't see this changing for a decade, unless there's a mark 2 with a breakthrough on optical quality (similar to the EF 35 1.4L Mark 1 vs Mark 2), or if the wide end dropped down to 24mm or wider. A 24-105 2.0L would be my ultimate lens to rule them all, and would pair perfectly with my 100-300L that I'm patiently waiting to ship...
I don't even care about the weight of this lens, the image quality is mind blowing. I don't regret a single dollar spent on this glass and paired up to my R6, results are simply beyond rewarding.
Using that lens since may 2022 and can certainly confirm that this is a kickass lens for event photography. 95% of the time I'm using this lens. Wide open it has wicked tack sharp quality!
Best video I’ve seen of yours yet, and I’ve watched sooo many! Your style, giving the punch line up front, making fun of trolls, shooting yourself on the 85 1.2, and just amazing skill behind the camera over so many videos just got you another subscriber. Love your work! ❤
ha ha, yes, I made that same choice, 85mm or 28-70...chose the 28-70 and next lens will likely be the 85mm DS (its bright here in Texas and that creamy bokeh so sooooo smooooooth, like buttah!).
Vanessa: I just recently found your channel and although I'm a Nikon user I truly enjoy your presentations. I really like the way you explain things in an interesting and entertaining way while getting the important information across. Keep up the great work.
I've done weddings with the 28-70 and loved it. My one caveat is that I'm scared all the time I'll break it and also when it was turned on me I realised it's enormous and quite intimidating to look down.
I’m with you 100%. It is my favorite lens for events. It’s hard to describe the look of the photos. They are phenomenal. Paired with the R5 the combo is a workhorse with special picture quality.
I rented it once and still love the quality of that one photoshoot. It was a lot to carry, with the 70-200 f2.8 on the other body. If I didn't have to carry both cameras on me I'd love this lens.
What's your thought on 50mm 1.2? I just feel like 50mm is bit boring focal length to me. I feel like it doesn't have characteristic(not too wide, not too tight). It's perfect focal length but that's what it make it bit boring.
This, I feel, is... Which is the most versatile wedding/portrait lens, yes, maybe this one, the best lens is probably something really quite different, and at the risk of swearing, [whispers], Sigma 24mm f1.4 Art and 35mm f1.4 Art, for a very significant saving. Still no fast wide RF primes... 😪 The best lens, 135mm, and prey you have enough room to use it!😁 Still, what's not to love about Ranty McRantaJoy... I'll get my coat!
Well just as I was sold on getting this lens, Canon releases the 24-105 F2.8!! Now I have to wait to see the reviews on this one… hopefully you have that video coming soon Vanessa!
I mean, sure a 28-70 sounds like a very useful range, but I've been using the EF 35 1.4 and honestly it's such a God tear lens I'm willing to take some extra steps moving back and forth..
35-85mm f/2 is my dream lens to replace the holy trinity of primes. I could use some more reach at weddings and photojournalism and forgo some width. Meanwhile 28-70mm will do.
I used to be all about prime lenses, but I can't afford the super fast prime lenses, so I have the Tamron 20mm 2.8, Samyang 35mm 1.4, and Sony 85mm 1.8, but now I have the Tamron 35-150mm 2-2.8, and it's the only lens I'm using right now. I do carry the 20mm 2.8 just in case I need an ultra wide lens.
From a business perspective, buying the 28-70mm makes more sense than the 3 primes shown in your video. Also, I agree with your comment about the coverage that zooms afford. I love shooting with primes but zooms are more versatile. Clients don't care which lens you shoot with as long as you get the shot. Finally, tell Ms. Killjoy to take some time away from the computer she reminds me of a keyboard warrior.
Bit of a math error my friend. At a crop of 1.6 you will see the equivalent of 44 to 112mm. The 112 is closer to a good start for portraits. I prefer 135 and longer. F2.0 is a start for compression. The 70 to 200mm is a better solution. As you said, if one lens is chosen the 28 to 70 is the only one.
Flex 'em if ya got 'em!! Is missing out on 24mm made up for by getting to F2? I think it would be, especially for weddings where lighting is going to often be awful. I love my 24-70 F2.8, but I would definitely love for it to be F2!!
I just shot an event with a 70-200 after usually using my 24-70 mostly. It was heavy and my arm is killing me, but I really loved the images I got out of it. My hand and shoulder, though! What was I thinking? I need to get the Z version, though. Love this video!
It's great to have those RF lenses but for the everyday person, older EF L lenses and ART lenses are spectacular when adapted onto the RF mount. They're even better than they were on the EF bodies. There are no flies on them and, frankly, are better than what 99.9% of people will even need or be able to realize with them.
Hands down, 28-70 is the best lens I've ever owned and used. It never leaves my camera. As a wedding photographer, 28-70mm, is a very what I use 90% of the time. Is the 28-70 heavy?.... Hit the gym and it won't be heavy 😂 10/10 recommend
Beautiful lens, one I doubt I'll ever buy, but I do use the EF 28-70L 2.8 that came out in 94 on my R6MII and R7. Not as sharp, but works for what I do.
You hear that trolls??!! You just got burned!! Finally bought my 28-70. Now I have 2 R6, 28-70, 24-70, 70-200 all RF and a 85 sigma. Very happy with that and my Low pro 550 AW II Bag. Thanx Venessa for all the help over the last 3 years. Hope I get to work with your team one day
@@VanessaJoy your telling me. It can carry eeeeverything. I even had a light stand, a glow para snap 36”, and tripod attached to it. Sure it weighted 42lbs but I was very happy to have that with me. I can’t thank you enough for the influence you have had on me, I just second shot my 9th wedding last weekend ❤️
if you just run the holy trinity with the 105 macro, you're still just running 4 lenses. if 28-70 f2 gets brought to all the big 3 platforms though it would probably quickly replace the 24-70 pretty quick
Great video as always Ms. Joy! I work with Nikon and Sigma Art lenses and love them both! It's great when Canon and Sony create great products like the Canon RF 28-70 2.0 as it puts pressure on Nikon and the others players to up their games. Please keep your great videos coming!
If I were to switch back to Canon I would probably just get the 24-105. It’s not fast but I can shoot a portrait. I can shoot landscape with the 24. Finally I don’t have to switch lenses and the amount of stuff I’m packing is simplified.
My RF 600 F4 doesn't have a control ring, you wedding and portrait shooters get all the fancy new options. I would love to buy 28-70 and an 85 1.2 but as a wildlife photographer I can't really justify it. The only time I really could've used either of those lenses was in Botswana last year where we had a male lion just waking up after sunset 20 ft from are vehicle.
I can see why you like the f2, and no mistake it's a great lens, but for me, the lack of stabilization plus the weight pushed me back to the f2.8 version, especially in low light where I get more from the extra stab than I lose from the aperture.
Only lens I think that would seriously compete with the Canon 28-70 F2 is the new Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8, it’s not built for canon but just comparing all lenses.
I gotta hand it to you... aside from the obvious "charm", your videos are so dam* entertaining. I don't shoot "people" subjects (95% Aviation, Airshows, etc)... but if I see a Vanessa Joy video, I do a "fly by" 😉 - I am a Canon user (R5, R6m2, RF100-500 - BEAST of a combination tracking a fighter jet pushing near Mach1 ~ 760 mph) ... The "KillJoy" character is the "bonus" 😂
Unfortunately, it is a lens that is too expensive for me, but even if I could afford it, I would have liked it to be brighter, perhaps an f/1.8. For now, I am in love with lenses with fixed focal lengths. Maybe in 3 or 4 years I can buy that lens and, at the same time, migrate to the Canon R5 Mark II. For now, my wish is to buy a sigma art 40mm f/1.4
Wish I had one in my bag! It would be great if the settings, like focal length, aperture, etc… were indicated on the shots you showed. At this price, I’d almost force myself to shoot wide-open for everything 😂
Haha look at the rest of the educational videos if you want all of the settings. Unfortunately, it takes an extraordinary amount of time to put all the settings in every photo so I try not to kill my editor with that on gear reviews
@@VanessaJoy Canon R5... I am a dance photographer... I tried this lens in a show and some pictures were soft in the eyes... in the same day, same camera setup, I tried the RF 24-70 2.8 and had no issues. I'm also used to shoot with RF 70-200 2.8 and have no problem. But the images from RF 28-70 are gorgeous! I'm big fan of your videos!
@@gustavoumeno Funny - I shot a recital last week with the the 28-70 just beyond the orchestra pit and with the RF 70-200 2.8 the following night. The 28-70 hardly missed, but maybe because I was using an R3. The 28-70 was a bit slower racking focus between upstage and downstage, but it had much less hunting than the 70-200 probably because the bright F2. The dual nano motors are so fast compared to ring usm. If I weren’t using the R3 I might have went with the RF 24-105 F4L because the AF is very fast.
@@mxilplict I shoot dance people moving almost randomly on a stage... they do fast movement with their head... glass elements on RF 28-70 are too heavy... for this situation I prefer RF 24-70 and RF 70-200 2.8. But when the subject is almost static, I prefer RF 28-70.
People are amazed at this lens because it's a full stop faster than the 2.8. True enough, but the 1.4 is a full stop faster than it! That said, most people realize that there is a point of diminishing returns and OFTEN people shoot with a depth of field that is TOO SHALLOW. I use my primes at F/2 and up usually. While we photographers may love a razor thin depth of field, clients usually like it if BOTH of their eyes are in focus and, I dunno, if eveyone in the picture is in focus.
I used to carry lots of lenses to weddings, now I only take the canon 24-70 mm f4 (my f2.8 is broken :-( ),sigma 35 mm f1.4, canon 85 mm f1.4 and the canon 100 mm f2.8 macro. In my opinion 50 mm is too boring a focal length.
Can I register my vote for the channel the internet troll lady talked about starting... despite being incandescently angry and somewhat short-sighted she was very watchable and strangely attractive! Oh... just ordered this lens and looking forwards to enjoying that too, cheers, great advice and content! :)
Aw haha.. Love the video ! I Use the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 Z and the 105mm f1.4 combo for most wedding shots these days. I wish we had an f2 equivalent, it Just seems to have that edge on focus separation. I couldn't agree with you more on what was said. It's giving you a prime, when you don't have time!
I wish you had gone over why anyone would or should purchase the 28-70 over the 24-70. I may have missed it in the video but what is your take on this? It's a few hundred more dollars going to the 28-70 and it doesnt have Image Stabilization.
To me the 2.8 aperture versus the F2 aperture is a huge difference. The 24-70 2.8 has zoom lens quality, it’s good quality, but the 28 to 70 F2 has a prime lens quality to it and it’s just wildly better my opinion.
@@VanessaJoythank you for that feedback. Your video literally just inspired me to purchase the 28-70. I bought one from KEH not 2 mins after watching your video. 🫡📷🤜🏾
I bought this lens at the height of COVID lockdown and the only one in stock in all of Ontario Canada! Came with a free Canon protect filter and polarizing filter that probably cost more than some lenses haha!
@@VanessaJoy Thanks for responding and always loved your content. The funny thing is good lens and glass are timeless. This lens is released when? 2018 and we are still raving about it haha
Vanessa you are awesome!! I love your videos! I no use my RF 24-105 f2.8 for just about everything. I have seen great things about the 85mm 1.2, 15-35 f2.8 and the 28-70 f2. It is so hard to determine what else i really need in addition to my rf 24-105, and 50mm 1.8. Do I really need a new one? I shoot on r6 mark ii. The rf 24-105 f2.8 L has been incredible, its my baby lol
I shoot 8K video with the Canon R5 C and I've been using the Canon RF 24-70 f2.8, so I have a couple of related questions: (1) Is the 2.0 vs. 2.8 valuable to you mostly because of the shallow depth of field, or because you really shoot wide open a lot because of low light? (2) How does the 28-70 2.0 compare to the 24-70 2.8 when stopped down to around f5.6 or more? For video, I find the shallow depth of field when shooting wide open to be an obstacle to holding focus on my main subject, and I have found that the extra noise I get from doubling or quadrupling the ISO is perfectly acceptable if it helps me stay in focus. And I'm viewing the images on a 65-inch 8K screen, so I can see every detail. I understand that noise on a large print is different from--and maybe more objectionable than--noise on a video screen, so that's part of what I'm asking here.
Great questions! 1- for both. I shoot low light a TON and that extra little bit helps for sure. Plus I do see a DOF difference between 2 and 2.8. 2- personally I find the 28-70 much more crisp and clear overall than the 24-70 at any point **when shooting natural light** and potentially difficult ambient light (tungsten etc). If you used both of them side by side in a controlled studio lighting environment I don’t know that I’d be able to tell the difference, but probably could. The 28-79 is just a higher quality lens For video I can definitely see the potential struggle with keeping focus, but with the R5C in auto focus I would think you’d be ok but of course there are a lot of other factors. Hope that helps!
I tried this lens last week and it was fantastic, but I am a snowflake and couldn't handle the weight with a 2nd body and rf 85mm 1.2 on. Great video and I really like the internet troll version of you (or is that the real you?)
I am just a hobby photographer. Just playing... sell nothing, show nothing, don't even share much because nobody wants anything. I have always liked the zoom lenses for ease of use. Just fun getting out on occasion. I do not need to spend the money for just my hobby use so I don't even look at the expensive lenses.
Considering the size of the 135mm f/1.2, I'm a little scared of how large an 85-135mm f/2 zoom would be... Two years carrying the 28-70mm f/2 has been a great gym workout for you! 💪
I got one recently (only other ones I have are a 50 and the 70-200 F2.8) and am a pretty big guy - I still found it damn heavy to carry around all day lol... It is nice though :)
You definitely know what you're talking about. I love watching your videos. I know a lot about what you are speaking of and do it myself some of it. What I like most about you is you are not a "know it all" arsehole like certain other UA-camrs that I won't name names that I have met in person and were total douche bags. You are funny and collected and have over the many years gained a lot of my respect. AND... you don't clickbait like the same other UA-camrs do, just to get views. You have integrity and honesty. What you say in your Titles is exactly what you mean and what you talk about and not misleading cover photos. So thank you so much for that. I have a business to run at the same time and I spend a large amount of my time just researching and educating myself, so I don't have time for the bs. In fact, it pisses me off and I report those UA-camrs for the false titles or misleading titles. Thanks for all the time and effort you put into giving us all the information, keeping it entertaining, real, and upfront. It is very appreciated. Btw, I almost crapped ... or peed myself when you held those three lenses like you did in your hand like that. .. My nerves definitely went into overload... like OH DEAR GOODNESS... EEEEEEKKK PLEASE DON"T DROP THOSE!!!
I cannot begin to tell you how much I appreciate you taking the time to write this! Means the world to me. I'll do my best to keep creating videos like this that get you the information FAST - haha though my know-it-all DOES come out when the trolls come knocking. Thanks for being here!
@@VanessaJoy eh... trolls knock because they don't have a house or home, just a bridge that they live under. They are ugly on the inside, who knows, maybe the outside too .. and no one likes them in reality so they have to make other people's lives miserable. One thing that truly gets on my last nerve is how you don't have the millions of followers that this other UA-camr ego *ssH-le has. You're more relevant, respectful, yet have less than 100k subs? What kinda messed up crap is that about?.
Vanessa, please, please, pleeeease 🙏 ask Canon to work on a longer f2.0 zoom I photograph indoor sport and some venues have such poor lighting that I’m at ISO8000 even at f2.0 If I used one of the f2.8 zooms I might as well just point my camera at a sandbox.
There's already RF 50mm F1.2 it is just expensive but canon already have it. 😅, but like what you've said 28-70mm F2 is great choice all around 1 lens rule them all. But the weight of it 50.5 oz (1430g) is heavy for me, compare to my sony 24-70 F2.8 G-master II 695 grams 😅 smaller and lighter than any other F2.8, 24-70mm available in the market right now.
I originally wanted to get the R5 and RF 28-70mm F2 lens, but I noticed on e-infinity that I could get the R5 Mark II with the 24-105mm F4 lens for the same price. I plan to use it as my main lens for event photography and some portraits. Which of the two options would you pick and why?
For all the reasons I state in the video I’d get the first option. Spend more on the better lens, even at the sacrifice of the camera. Lenses last longer in your bag and the R5 is a great camera - although I’d honestly get the r6 mark ii over the R5
I am hoping this comment is helpful for some people that are on the fence if they should buy the RF 28-70 f2.0. I personally do not own this lens and don't really have plans on buying this lens. I have heard many great things about this lens, some people saying this is Canon's best lens, and some people even shooting specifically Canon because of this unique lens etc. I know this lens is great and special and many people say it's worth the money. I mostly shoot events, and weddings and own the ef 24-70mm f/2.8l ii which is my workhorse when shooting events (I shoot with an R5 and R6). As I was thinking of possibly upgrading to this beast, I checked out my Lightroom metadata and was very surprised to see that I shoot at 24mm a lot (Surprised because I am aware of the distortion it could cause on the edges, especially when shooting people, the slight softness, etc so I always try to step back and zoom in at least a little) but I guess this is my shooting style, making venues look bigger, sometimes taking group shots when I can't move back any further, and don't feel like changing lenses etc. I sometimes record at the 24mm wide end when I am doing some video as well because I use the digital IS enhanced a lot, so I don't have to use a gymbal haha. The lens that I would probably buy is the RF version, 24-70mm because of the IS (more and more people are requesting video). I've also came to the conclusion that most clients don't really care how blurry the backgrounds are. They mostly care how they look. Vanessa, or anyone else, feel free to convince me that I am wrong though lol. I know shooting with that lens is probably a joy 🙌
I’d venture to guess that you shoot at 24 a lot because you naturally zoom out as far as the lens goes. I do not think you would miss the 4 mm. 😉 would love to hear back if you do!
@@VanessaJoy You most likely have a good point :) I am hoping Canon comes out with a portrait zoom lens like the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 or even some kind of 70-150 f2 would be great, but I am sure companies rare working on something like this or maybe there is a limitation that I am not aware of that it makes it impossible to build a lens like this without being too heavy.
I have the 24-70, was just wondering if you’ve done a comparison? I have a wedding coming up and will have the 70-200 and 14-35(holy trinity?). (I don’t think I’ve seen any of your videos where you’ve added so much of your quirkiness, and I love it!) 😎
Whatever we have in our bag will get the job done for a wedding or two. A lens like the 28-70mm f/2 is more about creating our style and portfolio with the extra stop of shallow depth of field. Alternatively, using two primes like the 35mm and 85mm creates the style of only two perspectives, producing a more consistent look to the wedding album.
the EF 24-70 2.8 was one of my first L lenses I ever bought (maybe the very first). It's a GREAT lens, but to me doesn't compare to this one. this is so much more crisp and the difference between 2.8 and f2 is big IMO
@@VanessaJoy Yes, sometimes we have to remind ourselves that the lens creates an image based on more than just the f-stop. Here, it's also what the lens is designed to do at f/2 that sets it apart from the 24-70 f/2.8.
I love how you get directly to the point. I hate it when other UA-camrs stall and avoid the main subject. I guess you already know your fans admire your work and we watch you in hopes of becoming better photographers.
I'm working on getting to the point even faster! trying out some "cold starts" coming in soon. glad you like
Vanessa is all killer, No filler!
Oh man totally agree, I find I have to skip the first minute or two of most videos because they give their lengthy "context" and personal path explanation. Its like they all follow this formula and it gets really old and time-wasting fast. Yes, so thank you for just getting to the point. Most of us watching you already know who you are and for many who consume a lot of videos just want the meat and potatoes...
I switched from Nikon to Canon this year and one of the reasons why was the 28-70! It's a great lens and it has not left my R5 since I got it. I've always been a prime girl but this lens just works so well and is so sharp. It's magic!
same! I was always about the primes until this baby!
If you were to add a prime to compliment this lens, which would you choose? Just curious
@@CapturedByKen 24mm f1.4
Sharpness is the only thing that counts nowadays
#sarcasm
Sigma was trying to make something like this in a while. They make 24-35 and 28-45 1.8. Tamron seems to be on it too. They already made a 35-150 that's just as big and heavy, haha. I hope a 28-70 is underway.
I just had the proudest day of my life at my daughter’s wedding. I was astounded by the 12+ hour stint put in by their photographer. 2 camera bodies, hip holster, heavy lenses, and she still somehow still managed to melt into the event and somehow become a part of it. Sheer graft. Respect to your profession.
aw thanks for sharing that!
This should he a pinned comment lol
ত/
তচ/
টটটটচচট
The 28-70 is truly godlike. I use it for theatre photography, at f/2 in a dark theatre the photos come out so clean it's like I shot them in daylight. Absolutely game changing to get prime lens speed on a versatile zoom!
Yes!!
No question this is awesome lens. I shoot all wedding with rf 28-70mm f2 lens only.
I probably like rf 50mm f1.2 a bit more.
Agree. It's a beast - hoofed mine through to London, Venice, Florence, Rome, Amalfi, Costa Rica, Japan...images are worth every penny, even if my right arm is now slightly larger than my left.
haha - gotta start finding something for our left arms to work with
I just noticed my right side is sooooo much tighter than my left! Now I know why!
Awesome!! I don’t know why you don’t have 500k subscribers already!! Spread the word everyone!!
Would really appreciate that!!! ❤️
Couldn't agree more about the 28-70 F2. First time I used it was doing senior pictures for my niece when the lens initially became available. Used it alongside an 85mm 1.2 (EF mount adapted). The 28-70 blew me away. I would have left the 85 1.2 at home had I known the 28-70 would perform so well.
It’s amazing 🤩
After spending way too much on RF gear last year, this superb review has got me wanting a new lens. Love the channel and the great points you make in these reviews.
thanks so much!!
The 28-70mm f/2 is a fine lens. I have the 28-70mm f/2.8
I also have the following prime lenses:
24mm f/2
28mm f/2
35mm f/1.4
50mm f/1.4
85mm f/1.4
Since I prefer primes, I use my 28-70mm as a backup to my primes.
Nice setup!
I've owned my 28-70 since 2019 and it still is my main lens (81% of all my frames shot since then) for all the reasons you pointed out. It is an absolute tank as well as it being immaculate in image quality and character. With IBIS on all pro bodies going forward, I just don't see this changing for a decade, unless there's a mark 2 with a breakthrough on optical quality (similar to the EF 35 1.4L Mark 1 vs Mark 2), or if the wide end dropped down to 24mm or wider. A 24-105 2.0L would be my ultimate lens to rule them all, and would pair perfectly with my 100-300L that I'm patiently waiting to ship...
I think I'm around that same percentage too - did you use a program to figure that out to an exact %?
I rented it after seeing this video. You are 100 correct at how great it is. You are my favorite photographer to follow on UA-cam.
Great to hear! So glad you liked it. And thanks ☺️
I don't even care about the weight of this lens, the image quality is mind blowing. I don't regret a single dollar spent on this glass and paired up to my R6, results are simply beyond rewarding.
Ive just ordered one, Im happy to do whatever you tell me ❤
haha amazing! have fun with it! That's an order ;-)
Really a great Lens. I bought this with my original R6. The R6 is gone(have a MkII now). But the 28-70 is a forever keeper.
Definitely a keeper
Using that lens since may 2022 and can certainly confirm that this is a kickass lens for event photography. 95% of the time I'm using this lens. Wide open it has wicked tack sharp quality!
Nice!
just picked up the 28-70! sooooo worth it!
Yayyyyy
Best video I’ve seen of yours yet, and I’ve watched sooo many! Your style, giving the punch line up front, making fun of trolls, shooting yourself on the 85 1.2, and just amazing skill behind the camera over so many videos just got you another subscriber. Love your work! ❤
Aw thank you so much!!!
ha ha, yes, I made that same choice, 85mm or 28-70...chose the 28-70 and next lens will likely be the 85mm DS (its bright here in Texas and that creamy bokeh so sooooo smooooooth, like buttah!).
Good choice!
Vanessa:
I just recently found your channel and although I'm a Nikon user I truly enjoy your presentations. I really like the way you explain things in an interesting and entertaining way while getting the important information across. Keep up the great work.
Welcome aboard! so happy you're here :-)
My favorite RF was 85 1.2 DS, just sold it last week now I’ve got 2 cameras, one with 28-70 2 and one with 70-200 2.8 . I’m all set
Nice!
I've done weddings with the 28-70 and loved it. My one caveat is that I'm scared all the time I'll break it and also when it was turned on me I realised it's enormous and quite intimidating to look down.
haha yeah i could see it being intimidating
Makes you get respect as a photographer. 😉
I’m with you 100%. It is my favorite lens for events. It’s hard to describe the look of the photos. They are phenomenal. Paired with the R5 the combo is a workhorse with special picture quality.
so true!
I too use the 28-70 lens on every shoot, although I always try to use my rF85 1.2 whenever I can. I want the RF135 1.8
both great lenses combo'd with this one
I want the 135 1.8 too. Sold out everywhere
The 28-70 is perfect for basketball games when shooting under the net as well! The f2.0 helps so much more as compared to the 24-70 f2.8. :)
ooo fun!
@@VanessaJoy forgot to also say, even though I already love the 28-70, the video was very entertaining! Loved how you presented it. 🤩
OMG I love that she Brough back Kill Joy. To funny.. Keep them coming Vanessa.
Haha sheeee’sssss baaaaaaackkk!!!
I rented it once and still love the quality of that one photoshoot. It was a lot to carry, with the 70-200 f2.8 on the other body. If I didn't have to carry both cameras on me I'd love this lens.
Oof yeah I don’t carry two bodies
What's your thought on 50mm 1.2? I just feel like 50mm is bit boring focal length to me. I feel like it doesn't have characteristic(not too wide, not too tight). It's perfect focal length but that's what it make it bit boring.
This is what I think of a 50 :) ua-cam.com/video/H1VsjkhlDI4/v-deo.html
This, I feel, is... Which is the most versatile wedding/portrait lens, yes, maybe this one, the best lens is probably something really quite different, and at the risk of swearing, [whispers], Sigma 24mm f1.4 Art and 35mm f1.4 Art, for a very significant saving. Still no fast wide RF primes... 😪
The best lens, 135mm, and prey you have enough room to use it!😁
Still, what's not to love about Ranty McRantaJoy...
I'll get my coat!
It's refreshing to see someone still using Canon these days. That looks like a great lens!
It really is!
I learned allot but the humor was a bright spot to me love your videos and your fun approach!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Well just as I was sold on getting this lens, Canon releases the 24-105 F2.8!! Now I have to wait to see the reviews on this one… hopefully you have that video coming soon Vanessa!
Can’t wait to give it a try and let you guys know!
Absolutely great lens! I wasnt excited about EF to RF change but this is why they did.
yup!!! worth the pain to change :-)
I mean, sure a 28-70 sounds like a very useful range, but I've been using the EF 35 1.4 and honestly it's such a God tear lens I'm willing to take some extra steps moving back and forth..
Nice!
35-85mm f/2 is my dream lens to replace the holy trinity of primes. I could use some more reach at weddings and photojournalism and forgo some width. Meanwhile 28-70mm will do.
That sounds nice!
I used to be all about prime lenses, but I can't afford the super fast prime lenses, so I have the Tamron 20mm 2.8, Samyang 35mm 1.4, and Sony 85mm 1.8, but now I have the Tamron 35-150mm 2-2.8, and it's the only lens I'm using right now. I do carry the 20mm 2.8 just in case I need an ultra wide lens.
From a business perspective, buying the 28-70mm makes more sense than the 3 primes shown in your video. Also, I agree with your comment about the coverage that zooms afford. I love shooting with primes but zooms are more versatile. Clients don't care which lens you shoot with as long as you get the shot. Finally, tell Ms. Killjoy to take some time away from the computer she reminds me of a keyboard warrior.
😂
Bit of a math error my friend.
At a crop of 1.6 you will see the equivalent of 44 to 112mm.
The 112 is closer to a good start for portraits. I prefer 135 and longer. F2.0 is a start for compression. The 70 to 200mm is a better solution.
As you said, if one lens is chosen the 28 to 70 is the only one.
Flex 'em if ya got 'em!! Is missing out on 24mm made up for by getting to F2? I think it would be, especially for weddings where lighting is going to often be awful. I love my 24-70 F2.8, but I would definitely love for it to be F2!!
Yeah absolutely- they keep in mind I do have the 15 to 35 just in case I need something wider but honestly I rarely use it
I just shot an event with a 70-200 after usually using my 24-70 mostly. It was heavy and my arm is killing me, but I really loved the images I got out of it.
My hand and shoulder, though! What was I thinking? I need to get the Z version, though.
Love this video!
The 70-200mm is the way to go. 24-70 and you’ll be getting in the other photographers or videographers way
28-70 would be the main reason I would consider getting and R mount FF camera.
It’s worth the move for sure
❤ Just wow. Always has my full attention.
Aw thx ☺️
It's great to have those RF lenses but for the everyday person, older EF L lenses and ART lenses are spectacular when adapted onto the RF mount. They're even better than they were on the EF bodies. There are no flies on them and, frankly, are better than what 99.9% of people will even need or be able to realize with them.
so true and only a $99 adaptor!
I switched from Sony to Canon for this lens. There were other reasons, but that was the big one. Don't regret it.
welcome :-)
The lens is awesome for photos. I went with the RF24-70 though as it does not tend to focus breath and the IS helps for video and low light.
Nice
Hands down, 28-70 is the best lens I've ever owned and used. It never leaves my camera. As a wedding photographer, 28-70mm, is a very what I use 90% of the time. Is the 28-70 heavy?.... Hit the gym and it won't be heavy 😂 10/10 recommend
haha hit the gym for sure!
The crazy part is that she is not exaggerating about the trolls. Lol. Love your work, you’re helping me tremendously!
Haha - not an exaggeration at all. 😂 Glad to hear I’ve helped you!
This video is great. You are fun to watch.
Thanks for watching ☺️
Beautiful lens, one I doubt I'll ever buy, but I do use the EF 28-70L 2.8 that came out in 94 on my R6MII and R7. Not as sharp, but works for what I do.
You mean the 24-70 2.8?
@@VanessaJoy nope, it's a 28-70L 2.8 usm, 24-70 2.8 replaced it in 2002.
You hear that trolls??!! You just got burned!! Finally bought my 28-70. Now I have 2 R6, 28-70, 24-70, 70-200 all RF and a 85 sigma. Very happy with that and my Low pro 550 AW II Bag. Thanx Venessa for all the help over the last 3 years. Hope I get to work with your team one day
Oooo that’s a nice gear bag!!
@@VanessaJoy your telling me. It can carry eeeeverything. I even had a light stand, a glow para snap 36”, and tripod attached to it. Sure it weighted 42lbs but I was very happy to have that with me. I can’t thank you enough for the influence you have had on me, I just second shot my 9th wedding last weekend ❤️
if you just run the holy trinity with the 105 macro, you're still just running 4 lenses. if 28-70 f2 gets brought to all the big 3 platforms though it would probably quickly replace the 24-70 pretty quick
Great video as always Ms. Joy! I work with Nikon and Sigma Art lenses and love them both! It's great when Canon and Sony create great products like the Canon RF 28-70 2.0 as it puts pressure on Nikon and the others players to up their games. Please keep your great videos coming!
Thanks for sharing!
Vanessa knows it! Great video!
Thank you!
You’re such a badass! ❤.
That intro was the best! 😂 Even non photographers would love that. You should make that a reel lol.
Haha I took your advice and just posted it on Instagram: instagram.com/reel/CtG6FPGps3X/?igshid=ZWQyN2ExYTkwZQ==
Thanks for the idea!!
If I were to switch back to Canon I would probably just get the 24-105. It’s not fast but I can shoot a portrait. I can shoot landscape with the 24. Finally I don’t have to switch lenses and the amount of stuff I’m packing is simplified.
My RF 600 F4 doesn't have a control ring, you wedding and portrait shooters get all the fancy new options. I would love to buy 28-70 and an 85 1.2 but as a wildlife photographer I can't really justify it. The only time I really could've used either of those lenses was in Botswana last year where we had a male lion just waking up after sunset 20 ft from are vehicle.
hmmmmm yeah I don't think I would use this lens for wildlife - at least not from far away!
LOL! Love the rants! You rant like a PRO! Love it!
😂
i'm not a canon shooter, but i use the 24-70mm and i use it just like you said you use your canon lens
I just bought mine. Soon, I too will have Vanessa Joy biceps.
Haha 😆
I had rested my 35mm and 85mm on 2 bodies setup for weddings until i forgot my 2nd body. My trusted 24-70 came through.. AGAIN
Changing that lens right beside a lake 😮
haha
I can see why you like the f2, and no mistake it's a great lens, but for me, the lack of stabilization plus the weight pushed me back to the f2.8 version, especially in low light where I get more from the extra stab than I lose from the aperture.
Only lens I think that would seriously compete with the Canon 28-70 F2 is the new Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8, it’s not built for canon but just comparing all lenses.
Great Review, thanks for sharing, I use the 24-240 zoom on my Canon R5 C, it allows me to cover almost 3 EF lens in my kit! thanks for sharing
Thanks for sharing!
For me it would be the new 24-105 2.8
I gotta hand it to you... aside from the obvious "charm", your videos are so dam* entertaining. I don't shoot "people" subjects (95% Aviation, Airshows, etc)... but if I see a Vanessa Joy video, I do a "fly by" 😉 - I am a Canon user (R5, R6m2, RF100-500 - BEAST of a combination tracking a fighter jet pushing near Mach1 ~ 760 mph) ... The "KillJoy" character is the "bonus" 😂
Haha thx
Was going to get this but got the 85 1.2 might get it later on but that 85 is insane smooth as butter.
It’s a beauty!
Unfortunately, it is a lens that is too expensive for me, but even if I could afford it, I would have liked it to be brighter, perhaps an f/1.8. For now, I am in love with lenses with fixed focal lengths. Maybe in 3 or 4 years I can buy that lens and, at the same time, migrate to the Canon R5 Mark II. For now, my wish is to buy a sigma art 40mm f/1.4
Chase the bag lil homie. I’m buying lens every paycheck. All 1.2 or 1.4 when available. Chase the bag don’t be a slack.
Wish I had one in my bag! It would be great if the settings, like focal length, aperture, etc… were indicated on the shots you showed. At this price, I’d almost force myself to shoot wide-open for everything 😂
Haha look at the rest of the educational videos if you want all of the settings. Unfortunately, it takes an extraordinary amount of time to put all the settings in every photo so I try not to kill my editor with that on gear reviews
Loving Vanessa-troll back
Hehe Killjoy got out of her dungeon
The only flaw is autofocus...when compared to RF 24-70, it misses focus sometimes, specially for moving people. But f2 is perfect!
not for me whatsoever - what camera are you using it with?
@@VanessaJoy Canon R5... I am a dance photographer... I tried this lens in a show and some pictures were soft in the eyes... in the same day, same camera setup, I tried the RF 24-70 2.8 and had no issues. I'm also used to shoot with RF 70-200 2.8 and have no problem. But the images from RF 28-70 are gorgeous! I'm big fan of your videos!
@@gustavoumeno Funny - I shot a recital last week with the the 28-70 just beyond the orchestra pit and with the RF 70-200 2.8 the following night. The 28-70 hardly missed, but maybe because I was using an R3. The 28-70 was a bit slower racking focus between upstage and downstage, but it had much less hunting than the 70-200 probably because the bright F2. The dual nano motors are so fast compared to ring usm. If I weren’t using the R3 I might have went with the RF 24-105 F4L because the AF is very fast.
Oh and I also would suggest shooting at 2.5 for moving targets and duos/groups since that DOF can be brutally thin lol
@@mxilplict I shoot dance people moving almost randomly on a stage... they do fast movement with their head... glass elements on RF 28-70 are too heavy... for this situation I prefer RF 24-70 and RF 70-200 2.8. But when the subject is almost static, I prefer RF 28-70.
People are amazed at this lens because it's a full stop faster than the 2.8. True enough, but the 1.4 is a full stop faster than it! That said, most people realize that there is a point of diminishing returns and OFTEN people shoot with a depth of field that is TOO SHALLOW. I use my primes at F/2 and up usually. While we photographers may love a razor thin depth of field, clients usually like it if BOTH of their eyes are in focus and, I dunno, if eveyone in the picture is in focus.
that and you don't always have to use a lens to it's maximum aperture
I used to carry lots of lenses to weddings, now I only take the canon 24-70 mm f4 (my f2.8 is broken :-( ),sigma 35 mm f1.4, canon 85 mm f1.4 and the canon 100 mm f2.8 macro. In my opinion 50 mm is too boring a focal length.
Thanks for an excellent video. What filter, if any , do you use for protection?
I don't ☺️
Can I register my vote for the channel the internet troll lady talked about starting... despite being incandescently angry and somewhat short-sighted she was very watchable and strangely attractive!
Oh... just ordered this lens and looking forwards to enjoying that too, cheers, great advice and content! :)
Haha glad you like Ms killJoy
I have the EF version got a great deal on it. Just got my Mark II and will have to just adapt it. Someday I’ll step up to the RF.
There is no EF version. There’s a 24-70 f2.8 which is quite different. ☺️ if you have the chance to rent this RF28-70 f2 definitely check it out!
@@VanessaJoy oops you’re correct, I stand corrected. Still a very good lens
Aw haha.. Love the video ! I Use the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 Z and the 105mm f1.4 combo for most wedding shots these days. I wish we had an f2 equivalent, it Just seems to have that edge on focus separation. I couldn't agree with you more on what was said. It's giving you a prime, when you don't have time!
ahhhh love that last sentence!
I wish you had gone over why anyone would or should purchase the 28-70 over the 24-70. I may have missed it in the video but what is your take on this? It's a few hundred more dollars going to the 28-70 and it doesnt have Image Stabilization.
To me the 2.8 aperture versus the F2 aperture is a huge difference. The 24-70 2.8 has zoom lens quality, it’s good quality, but the 28 to 70 F2 has a prime lens quality to it and it’s just wildly better my opinion.
@@VanessaJoythank you for that feedback. Your video literally just inspired me to purchase the 28-70. I bought one from KEH not 2 mins after watching your video. 🫡📷🤜🏾
I bought this lens at the height of COVID lockdown and the only one in stock in all of Ontario Canada! Came with a free Canon protect filter and polarizing filter that probably cost more than some lenses haha!
That’s amazing!!
@@VanessaJoy Thanks for responding and always loved your content. The funny thing is good lens and glass are timeless. This lens is released when? 2018 and we are still raving about it haha
Never watched one of your videos and I can't afford this lens, this is just a hobby... But I loved your video. Subscribed!
Thank you SO MUCH Ashley!! Happy to have you here!
Is it actually enough better than 24-70mm 2.8 that you can tell??
Yes. 100% yes
Have you ever used 24-70mm
OMG! 😂😂😂 I loved this video! You had me cracking up the entire time 😅 thank you 🙏🏼 keep it up! 😊
Glad you enjoyed!
Vanessa you are awesome!! I love your videos! I no use my RF 24-105 f2.8 for just about everything. I have seen great things about the 85mm 1.2, 15-35 f2.8 and the 28-70 f2. It is so hard to determine what else i really need in addition to my rf 24-105, and 50mm 1.8. Do I really need a new one? I shoot on r6 mark ii. The rf 24-105 f2.8 L has been incredible, its my baby lol
I shoot 8K video with the Canon R5 C and I've been using the Canon RF 24-70 f2.8, so I have a couple of related questions: (1) Is the 2.0 vs. 2.8 valuable to you mostly because of the shallow depth of field, or because you really shoot wide open a lot because of low light? (2) How does the 28-70 2.0 compare to the 24-70 2.8 when stopped down to around f5.6 or more? For video, I find the shallow depth of field when shooting wide open to be an obstacle to holding focus on my main subject, and I have found that the extra noise I get from doubling or quadrupling the ISO is perfectly acceptable if it helps me stay in focus. And I'm viewing the images on a 65-inch 8K screen, so I can see every detail. I understand that noise on a large print is different from--and maybe more objectionable than--noise on a video screen, so that's part of what I'm asking here.
Great questions! 1- for both. I shoot low light a TON and that extra little bit helps for sure. Plus I do see a DOF difference between 2 and 2.8. 2- personally I find the 28-70 much more crisp and clear overall than the 24-70 at any point **when shooting natural light** and potentially difficult ambient light (tungsten etc). If you used both of them side by side in a controlled studio lighting environment I don’t know that I’d be able to tell the difference, but probably could. The 28-79 is just a higher quality lens
For video I can definitely see the potential struggle with keeping focus, but with the R5C in auto focus I would think you’d be ok but of course there are a lot of other factors.
Hope that helps!
No the part you do the angry girl typing is awsome😂😂😂
😂 glad you get my humor
I tried this lens last week and it was fantastic, but I am a snowflake and couldn't handle the weight with a 2nd body and rf 85mm 1.2 on. Great video and I really like the internet troll version of you (or is that the real you?)
haha - time to start curling with the lenses. haha - oh... well.. I mean... it's a little bit the real me
I believe the wide end on a crop sensor will be 44mm equivalent...
Yup!
Your perfectly correct 👍🏾.
Thanks for watching!
I am just a hobby photographer. Just playing... sell nothing, show nothing, don't even share much because nobody wants anything. I have always liked the zoom lenses for ease of use. Just fun getting out on occasion. I do not need to spend the money for just my hobby use so I don't even look at the expensive lenses.
Considering the size of the 135mm f/1.2, I'm a little scared of how large an 85-135mm f/2 zoom would be...
Two years carrying the 28-70mm f/2 has been a great gym workout for you! 💪
haha it sure has
I got one recently (only other ones I have are a 50 and the 70-200 F2.8) and am a pretty big guy - I still found it damn heavy to carry around all day lol... It is nice though :)
It is heavy but worth it!
Great overview and review! The faux troll bit is classic...and accurate 😂
Haha thx
You definitely know what you're talking about. I love watching your videos. I know a lot about what you are speaking of and do it myself some of it. What I like most about you is you are not a "know it all" arsehole like certain other UA-camrs that I won't name names that I have met in person and were total douche bags. You are funny and collected and have over the many years gained a lot of my respect. AND... you don't clickbait like the same other UA-camrs do, just to get views. You have integrity and honesty. What you say in your Titles is exactly what you mean and what you talk about and not misleading cover photos. So thank you so much for that. I have a business to run at the same time and I spend a large amount of my time just researching and educating myself, so I don't have time for the bs. In fact, it pisses me off and I report those UA-camrs for the false titles or misleading titles.
Thanks for all the time and effort you put into giving us all the information, keeping it entertaining, real, and upfront. It is very appreciated.
Btw, I almost crapped ... or peed myself when you held those three lenses like you did in your hand like that. .. My nerves definitely went into overload... like OH DEAR GOODNESS... EEEEEEKKK PLEASE DON"T DROP THOSE!!!
I cannot begin to tell you how much I appreciate you taking the time to write this! Means the world to me. I'll do my best to keep creating videos like this that get you the information FAST - haha though my know-it-all DOES come out when the trolls come knocking. Thanks for being here!
@@VanessaJoy eh... trolls knock because they don't have a house or home, just a bridge that they live under. They are ugly on the inside, who knows, maybe the outside too .. and no one likes them in reality so they have to make other people's lives miserable.
One thing that truly gets on my last nerve is how you don't have the millions of followers that this other UA-camr ego *ssH-le has. You're more relevant, respectful, yet have less than 100k subs? What kinda messed up crap is that about?.
haha I'm trying to get more - it's a LONG climb that's for sure! Any sharing you do is always helpful and appreciated!
Vanessa, please, please, pleeeease 🙏 ask Canon to work on a longer f2.0 zoom
I photograph indoor sport and some venues have such poor lighting that I’m at ISO8000 even at f2.0
If I used one of the f2.8 zooms I might as well just point my camera at a sandbox.
Lol didn’t you hear my request? 85 to 135 F2? I’m hoping they hear us!!!
@@VanessaJoy I did, I just understood your comment to be more of a “wishlist”, as opposed a flexing of your mighty muscles 😉
There's already RF 50mm F1.2 it is just expensive but canon already have it. 😅, but like what you've said 28-70mm F2 is great choice all around 1 lens rule them all. But the weight of it
50.5 oz (1430g) is heavy for me, compare to my sony 24-70 F2.8 G-master II 695 grams 😅 smaller and lighter than any other F2.8, 24-70mm available in the market right now.
Thanks for sharing ☺️
I originally wanted to get the R5 and RF 28-70mm F2 lens, but I noticed on e-infinity that I could get the R5 Mark II with the 24-105mm F4 lens for the same price. I plan to use it as my main lens for event photography and some portraits. Which of the two options would you pick and why?
For all the reasons I state in the video I’d get the first option. Spend more on the better lens, even at the sacrifice of the camera. Lenses last longer in your bag and the R5 is a great camera - although I’d honestly get the r6 mark ii over the R5
informative lens based video.
I am hoping this comment is helpful for some people that are on the fence if they should buy the RF 28-70 f2.0. I personally do not own this lens and don't really have plans on buying this lens. I have heard many great things about this lens, some people saying this is Canon's best lens, and some people even shooting specifically Canon because of this unique lens etc. I know this lens is great and special and many people say it's worth the money. I mostly shoot events, and weddings and own the ef 24-70mm f/2.8l ii which is my workhorse when shooting events (I shoot with an R5 and R6). As I was thinking of possibly upgrading to this beast, I checked out my Lightroom metadata and was very surprised to see that I shoot at 24mm a lot (Surprised because I am aware of the distortion it could cause on the edges, especially when shooting people, the slight softness, etc so I always try to step back and zoom in at least a little) but I guess this is my shooting style, making venues look bigger, sometimes taking group shots when I can't move back any further, and don't feel like changing lenses etc. I sometimes record at the 24mm wide end when I am doing some video as well because I use the digital IS enhanced a lot, so I don't have to use a gymbal haha. The lens that I would probably buy is the RF version, 24-70mm because of the IS (more and more people are requesting video).
I've also came to the conclusion that most clients don't really care how blurry the backgrounds are. They mostly care how they look.
Vanessa, or anyone else, feel free to convince me that I am wrong though lol. I know shooting with that lens is probably a joy 🙌
I’d venture to guess that you shoot at 24 a lot because you naturally zoom out as far as the lens goes. I do not think you would miss the 4 mm. 😉 would love to hear back if you do!
@@VanessaJoy You most likely have a good point :)
I am hoping Canon comes out with a portrait zoom lens like the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8
or even some kind of 70-150 f2 would be great, but I am sure companies rare working on something like this or maybe there is a limitation that I am not aware of that it makes it impossible to build a lens like this without being too heavy.
Great vid VJ.
Did you have one go to lens on the DSLR?
Thanks! I sure did ☺️ ua-cam.com/video/H1VsjkhlDI4/v-deo.html
I have the 24-70, was just wondering if you’ve done a comparison? I have a wedding coming up and will have the 70-200 and 14-35(holy trinity?). (I don’t think I’ve seen any of your videos where you’ve added so much of your quirkiness, and I love it!) 😎
Whatever we have in our bag will get the job done for a wedding or two. A lens like the 28-70mm f/2 is more about creating our style and portfolio with the extra stop of shallow depth of field. Alternatively, using two primes like the 35mm and 85mm creates the style of only two perspectives, producing a more consistent look to the wedding album.
the EF 24-70 2.8 was one of my first L lenses I ever bought (maybe the very first). It's a GREAT lens, but to me doesn't compare to this one. this is so much more crisp and the difference between 2.8 and f2 is big IMO
@@VanessaJoy Yes, sometimes we have to remind ourselves that the lens creates an image based on more than just the f-stop. Here, it's also what the lens is designed to do at f/2 that sets it apart from the 24-70 f/2.8.