Great review. I have this lens and I’m loving its sharpness, small size and low weight. It’s been a blast to use so far. As far as the extending barrel goes, I have no worries at all. I have used a 100-400 with an extending barrel for years, and in dusty environments, with no issues.
Great to hear real world user experience Chris! I don't have much experience with extending barrel lenses so I can't comment much on it. But I do enjoy the compact nature of them at times!
I am so glad you talked about the floating elements! Initially I was scared and thought something was broken in transit- but your so right - the images are gorgeous! Great first impressions
yes, thank you so much that you showed the floating elements and that after turning on the camera it goes to normal! i was as well scared of that and as stores are now closed due to lockdown was not sure whom to ask about it 🙈
Great video, great explanations and comparisons. I've watched so many of these and yours felt like the one I could relate to the most because you really cover the details
I have been contemplating for some time on getting this lens. But I glad I got it. All of my recent video thumbnail is taking with this exact same lens and camera body!
I'm also only getting 4 stops of IS with good hand holding on this lens, but I like you do have shakes hands as well. Mine is not a pre production model. But I don't thinks its necessarily me because with my RF 24-104mm f/4L lens I can get 6-7 stops of IS. I also saw another review and they also said all they could get was 4 stops of IS, so I think Canon needs to either come out with update for it or tell the honest truth. But other than that I think this lens is awesome, love how compact and small it is for camera bag. It's also very sharp corner to corner.
I think the 5/6/7 stops are all tested in more controllable environments. And it definitely can't match the variety of possible outcomes (like us having shaky hands). Whilst 5-7 stops of compensation is great, I still wouldn't use it that much because slower shutter speeds just introduce motion blur that is sometimes unwanted so it's not a big issue for me. But yes! I agree the size of the lens is a huge win!
I was about to place the order for the F4 version while watching the review, and the conclusion caught me out of guard. 😆 But I will still go for the f4 version due to the cost and size. Great review, thanks!
Its a great lens for sure! But I don't believe there is a "best lens". There can be the most technically amazing lens but it might not be what you need. Plus, you should never listen to one person's opinions an always take into consideration your needs. But from the sounds of it, you know exactly what you need!
Fantastic lens, but the catch is that you can get a used copy of the EF 70-200 F4 IS II USM for as low as 1/3rd of the price (and it is internally focusing and accepts a teleconverter) I can justify the RF 28-70 F2 as there is nothing like it, but the EF 70-200 F4 versions are so good optically, that the extra cost of that form factor is just massive.
Oh yeah I agree. The only thing you lose out is the compact size with the EF version. Ultimately, it comes down to preference. Do you need to use the teleconverters? Is the compact size worth it? For some, it is and for others not so much. At least we now have choices
Well said everything. :-) about the 2.8 : its better to combine this, the 4.0 , with a 2.0 135 EF and 1.8 85 EF for example than the 2.8 70-200, at least a thought for example. There are never only two lenses only to choose from in this modern world. ;-) Greetings, Onno Nugteren the Netherlands. :-)
I had the 2.8 and like you said, it was too dark at night to be useful. Sold it and got a 50 1.2, thinking of grabbing the 70-200 f/4 as my daytime lens where I'll primarily shoot between f/8 -f/11 during the day. Good idea?
Thank you Martin! That means a lot to me! Oh but I wouldn't call this a review. I don't think you can use a lens for a few days and review it. Needs to be at least a month of heavy use to fully understand what works and what doesn't. This is more of an in depth first impressions
This was great and had awesome information that others don’t cover. I’m using a R6 and trying to decide on the RF 70-200 F4 or F2.8 version. This is for personal use of family photos. I have a 2 year old who will be starting some inside activities soon like gymnastics and skating. I wanted to know your opinion on how you think the F4 version would hold up in an inside environment of a recreation center or gymnastics type environment. Some outdoor winter activities will be starting soon and toddler soccer next summer so I think the F4 will be ok in that type of environment but I’ll have less subject separation vs. the F2.8 version. I’m wondering how much of a difference in background bokeh there would there be when someone is like 30+ feet away from a F4 vs F2.8? Thanks for any help anyone can provide! I don’t own and haven’t had any experience with longer focal lengths (well actually on my old Rebel camera I had the kit lens that went to 135mm (216mm full frame equivalent)) so it’s hard for me to understand what would be decent for indoor and outdoor sports and activities. Part of me thinks I should upgrade my EF 24-70mm F4 to the RF 2.8 version and get the 70-200 F4 for now to see how I would use the 70-200 lens and get a better idea of what I would actually need.
Glad it helped in some way! Well, I would only get the F2.8 if you either want the best or if you work as a professional where the extra stops counts in the paid work. You probably will see more subject seperation with the 2.8 but not exponentially. The R6 is fantastic low light so you won't have much issues indoors. I would ultimately recommend you go with the F4 version and get a faster prime lens in the future if you are finding issues as F4 and F2.8 won't give you much difference in majority of situations, especially with your R6
@@samguw part of me was thinking of getting the RF35 F1.8 to replace my EF50 F1.8 because my house is small and the 50mm is too tight to get decent compositions with a crazy toddler running around and that being said a zoom typically works better for me because of that exact same reason. I was thinking to get the 35mm for video in lower light situations and continue using the EF24-70 F4 for photos. Then I’d go with the 70-200 F4…maybe lol. My brain keeps coming up with situations where one would be better than the other but since I don’t have hands on experience I have to rely on others experiences to help in my decision making. Someone also reminded me that longer focal lengths typically need higher shutter speeds (required for action anyways) because of camera shake but with IBIS and lens IS I might be able to get away with the F4 still. Ultimately I’ll probably have to buy a lens and then I’ll realize I made the “wrong” decision in one way or another 😂. Appreciate your time and response!
I shoot cars drifting 99.9% of the time, would you recommend I stick with EF? Big worried about the extended zoom in my case, lot's of flying objects, dirt, tire, dust, etc....
Disagree. You will also lose out on autofocus as the RF lenses are much faster and quieter than the EF versions. It's also an L lens and that still means something at Canon.
Not necessarily. On paper yes but in real life I don't see AF difference with EF versions. And the EF lenses are pretty quiet so those points are negligible
just a suggestion: I feel like the scene when you are talking in front of cam seems abit less contrast and less clarity and less sharp . maybe a little post edits or better lighting will do?
Ahhh thanks for the suggestion! Appreciate it. Will definitely improve on that aspect but I personally prefer the softer look for talking headshots. I just like the lesser contrast
Not sure what you are getting at but a review is supposed to evaluate to pros, cons and comparisons to alternatives. I think i was pretty clear that the F4 is suited to some and the F2.8 is suited to others. It's all about what you use it for and choosing the right lens for you
If you are doin a review on a lense that you haven't properly field tested it in various weathers and night time use . How can you expect someone like me to believe the above content
Great review. I have this lens and I’m loving its sharpness, small size and low weight. It’s been a blast to use so far. As far as the extending barrel goes, I have no worries at all. I have used a 100-400 with an extending barrel for years, and in dusty environments, with no issues.
Great to hear real world user experience Chris! I don't have much experience with extending barrel lenses so I can't comment much on it. But I do enjoy the compact nature of them at times!
Thank you and for your logical opinion especially the weight and size reduction of the F4.
I am so glad you talked about the floating elements! Initially I was scared and thought something was broken in transit- but your so right - the images are gorgeous! Great first impressions
Thanks Anjeanette! I think the floating lens design is on any lens that has IS I just didn't really notice them until I saw it on this lens
yes, thank you so much that you showed the floating elements and that after turning on the camera it goes to normal! i was as well scared of that and as stores are now closed due to lockdown was not sure whom to ask about it 🙈
Great video, great explanations and comparisons. I've watched so many of these and yours felt like the one I could relate to the most because you really cover the details
Thank you so much for comparing the 2 lenses!
I have been contemplating for some time on getting this lens. But I glad I got it. All of my recent video thumbnail is taking with this exact same lens and camera body!
I'm also only getting 4 stops of IS with good hand holding on this lens, but I like you do have shakes hands as well. Mine is not a pre production model. But I don't thinks its necessarily me because with my RF 24-104mm f/4L lens I can get 6-7 stops of IS. I also saw another review and they also said all they could get was 4 stops of IS, so I think Canon needs to either come out with update for it or tell the honest truth. But other than that I think this lens is awesome, love how compact and small it is for camera bag. It's also very sharp corner to corner.
I think the 5/6/7 stops are all tested in more controllable environments. And it definitely can't match the variety of possible outcomes (like us having shaky hands). Whilst 5-7 stops of compensation is great, I still wouldn't use it that much because slower shutter speeds just introduce motion blur that is sometimes unwanted so it's not a big issue for me. But yes! I agree the size of the lens is a huge win!
I was about to place the order for the F4 version while watching the review, and the conclusion caught me out of guard. 😆
But I will still go for the f4 version due to the cost and size. Great review, thanks!
Me too :)
Its a great lens for sure! But I don't believe there is a "best lens". There can be the most technically amazing lens but it might not be what you need. Plus, you should never listen to one person's opinions an always take into consideration your needs. But from the sounds of it, you know exactly what you need!
Very helpful review. And your conclusion was very clear to me. I am not a pro, and am looking forward to using my F/4!
Informative stuff! thanks!
Welcome!
Fantastic lens, but the catch is that you can get a used copy of the EF 70-200 F4 IS II USM for as low as 1/3rd of the price (and it is internally focusing and accepts a teleconverter)
I can justify the RF 28-70 F2 as there is nothing like it, but the EF 70-200 F4 versions are so good optically, that the extra cost of that form factor is just massive.
Oh yeah I agree. The only thing you lose out is the compact size with the EF version. Ultimately, it comes down to preference. Do you need to use the teleconverters? Is the compact size worth it? For some, it is and for others not so much. At least we now have choices
wow very detailed + organised video
So nice of you
I'd consider getting this.. I have the 70-200 2.8 IS III which is a long lens.. would be nice to have a compact 70-200 even if it's F4
Totally man. The V III is long pretty hard to transport in some situations. If you are looking for a compact size, definitely to way to go
Well said everything. :-) about the 2.8 : its better to combine this, the 4.0 , with a 2.0 135 EF and 1.8 85 EF for example than the 2.8 70-200, at least a thought for example. There are never only two lenses only to choose from in this modern world. ;-) Greetings, Onno Nugteren the Netherlands. :-)
I wish sony have a compact 70-200 f4 also :(
Time to come to Canon ;)
Love your videos ❤️
I had the 2.8 and like you said, it was too dark at night to be useful. Sold it and got a 50 1.2, thinking of grabbing the 70-200 f/4 as my daytime lens where I'll primarily shoot between f/8 -f/11 during the day. Good idea?
Oh yeah! If you are going to be shooting 8-11 most of the time, the RF F4 is a fantastic choice for your needs
Do you know what’s adapter can be perfect to adapter to M50
What about professional bird photography?
Is it best for the beginners to learn photography
Not all L lenses are weather sealed FYI.
Great review. You should have way more subscribers. Hopefully that changes soon.
Thank you Martin! That means a lot to me! Oh but I wouldn't call this a review. I don't think you can use a lens for a few days and review it. Needs to be at least a month of heavy use to fully understand what works and what doesn't. This is more of an in depth first impressions
So you like everything about the girl, but you wont marry her for that one stop?
Good presentation
Can I take a shot every time I see a drop of perspiration?
Also, I didn't know I was going to be in the shot!
I lowered the contrast to see less sweat but I guess it's just too much. Damn I need to cut my hair
This was great and had awesome information that others don’t cover. I’m using a R6 and trying to decide on the RF 70-200 F4 or F2.8 version. This is for personal use of family photos. I have a 2 year old who will be starting some inside activities soon like gymnastics and skating. I wanted to know your opinion on how you think the F4 version would hold up in an inside environment of a recreation center or gymnastics type environment. Some outdoor winter activities will be starting soon and toddler soccer next summer so I think the F4 will be ok in that type of environment but I’ll have less subject separation vs. the F2.8 version. I’m wondering how much of a difference in background bokeh there would there be when someone is like 30+ feet away from a F4 vs F2.8? Thanks for any help anyone can provide! I don’t own and haven’t had any experience with longer focal lengths (well actually on my old Rebel camera I had the kit lens that went to 135mm (216mm full frame equivalent)) so it’s hard for me to understand what would be decent for indoor and outdoor sports and activities.
Part of me thinks I should upgrade my EF 24-70mm F4 to the RF 2.8 version and get the 70-200 F4 for now to see how I would use the 70-200 lens and get a better idea of what I would actually need.
Glad it helped in some way! Well, I would only get the F2.8 if you either want the best or if you work as a professional where the extra stops counts in the paid work. You probably will see more subject seperation with the 2.8 but not exponentially. The R6 is fantastic low light so you won't have much issues indoors. I would ultimately recommend you go with the F4 version and get a faster prime lens in the future if you are finding issues as F4 and F2.8 won't give you much difference in majority of situations, especially with your R6
@@samguw part of me was thinking of getting the RF35 F1.8 to replace my EF50 F1.8 because my house is small and the 50mm is too tight to get decent compositions with a crazy toddler running around and that being said a zoom typically works better for me because of that exact same reason. I was thinking to get the 35mm for video in lower light situations and continue using the EF24-70 F4 for photos. Then I’d go with the 70-200 F4…maybe lol. My brain keeps coming up with situations where one would be better than the other but since I don’t have hands on experience I have to rely on others experiences to help in my decision making. Someone also reminded me that longer focal lengths typically need higher shutter speeds (required for action anyways) because of camera shake but with IBIS and lens IS I might be able to get away with the F4 still. Ultimately I’ll probably have to buy a lens and then I’ll realize I made the “wrong” decision in one way or another 😂. Appreciate your time and response!
I shoot cars drifting 99.9% of the time, would you recommend I stick with EF? Big worried about the extended zoom in my case, lot's of flying objects, dirt, tire, dust, etc....
yeah in your case i would go with the EF version instead
@@samguw thanks so much for replying I’ll be ordering this week! 🙏🙏🙏
Your conclusion had me a little confused..
Ah sorry man. Will try to be a lot more concise next time. Anything I could help with the confusion?
It's pretty clear...I want the f4 to be just as good as the f2.8 too. But it's not. Sorry.
Disagree. You will also lose out on autofocus as the RF lenses are much faster and quieter than the EF versions. It's also an L lens and that still means something at Canon.
Not necessarily. On paper yes but in real life I don't see AF difference with EF versions. And the EF lenses are pretty quiet so those points are negligible
just a suggestion: I feel like the scene when you are talking in front of cam seems abit less contrast and less clarity and less sharp . maybe a little post edits or better lighting will do?
Ahhh thanks for the suggestion! Appreciate it. Will definitely improve on that aspect but I personally prefer the softer look for talking headshots. I just like the lesser contrast
젊고 손목힘이 강하면 2.8이죠
하나 나이들고 오랫동안 촬영하면 가벼운게 우선입니다 무거운 렌즈 이제는 던져버립시다
Dude spend the whole time selling us the f4 BUT for him he wants the f2.8 , you cannot make this up . UA-cam videos guru are halarious
Not sure what you are getting at but a review is supposed to evaluate to pros, cons and comparisons to alternatives. I think i was pretty clear that the F4 is suited to some and the F2.8 is suited to others. It's all about what you use it for and choosing the right lens for you
@@samguw Don't mind Sunny, he's just frustrated that f2.8 might be the right lens for him... Haters "are halarious"
If you are doin a review on a lense that you haven't properly field tested it in various weathers and night time use .
How can you expect someone like me to believe the above content
Maybe look at the title? It's not a review, it's a first impressions and in depth look NOT a review
@@samguw Proving the product's worth is far more important , First impressions doesn't prove anything ..