A sleeper of a lens is the RF 100-400mm F5.6-8. So much reach, great image quality, light and easy to carry, plus it has Image Stabilization. People get too hung on the narrow aperture, it is such a steal of a deal for what it provides.
@@HeathBlythe I don't think most rational people would try to shoot in bad indoor lighting at F6.1 or higher. I'm referring to using this lens more for outdoor landscape and wildlife, not portraits - although it would still be an okay option if lighting and depth of field isn't a paramount concern. Also worth mentioning is Lightroom's denoise feature. It works incredibly well to reduce more than 80% of noise.
I got that lense. Using it with a Canon R8. I can go on a walk with the camera + lense in my hand. No trypod or bag needed. So light and versatile. Got really good shots with it. bang for the buck!
@@HeathBlythe If you need 400mm indoors for professional work, buy a professional lens. The comment you’re responding to never said they could shoot indoors at f8 in bad light. Just weird that you felt the need to pipe up at all.
R6 owner. I got the RF Rokinon 14mm for starscapes, the RF 70-200 F4 to pretend like I know what I'm doing, and just got the RF 35mm macro. I'm already in love with the 35mm. The 35 looks like it was made for the camera, they have chemistry, they're thinking about moving in together. The test pictures I took with it already has me daydreaming about the possibilities. I need a lightweight tripod. Lugging the one I have around through the woods is awkward.
what about aps-c rf ? im not sure which to buy , the 24mm , 28mm or 35 mm, what u think ? i really love having 28mm because it will be closer to the 50mm look, but it has only 2.8 aperature without is
Great choices and motivations behind them. Loved to see you went with a non-blurred non click-baity thumbnail for the video. More RUclipsrs should do that!
unlikely to have OS because it's such an immense amount of glass that needs to be stabilized. the lens would have to be even larger to accommodate the motor to stabilize and the slight extra room for that as well. It would be incredible if a mark ii version did have it, but if you're waiting and hoping, I wouldn't wait.
not quite, when a lens with OIS is paired with IBIS it results in 7 stops of Image Stabilization, where as just having IBIS is closer to 4-5 stops. Not that many people would really notice this in the real world however.
@@wesleychapman9001 you are incorrect.. From Canon directly "When using either the RF 28-70mm F2L USM or the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM, for example, the EOS R7 will deliver the same 8-stops of IS as the other cameras with IBIS. We're not expecting that many EOS R7 users will be using more expensive pro lenses like these, though."
I know this video is little bit old, but I'm hoping to get an answer here since you seems like you totally know what you're talking about. So my situation at the moment is, I can get a USED 15-35L f2.8 for ard $1,480 or get a NEW 14-35L f4 for ard $1,250. I've been waiting and searching for the used market for 14-35f4 for months but none are available. So for that little difference in $, which do you think I should go for? My used case is, travel, kids, and family events (mostly indoor). My other lenses are RF70-200f4L, EF17-40L(gonna get sold since I hate adapters), and RF35mm f1.8 (also gonna get sold and replaced with rf50mm). Lastly, my camera is Canon r8. Thank you very much in advance. Liked and subbed
Fellow R5C/28-70 f2 here. Absolutely the combo costs nearly both of my kidneys but for tripod shooting it just slashes, hard. Love it. I did took it to the streets (handheld) once and the moment I was outside I immediately felt like an idiot, I mean look at the size... and weight... and the fact that neither the body nor the lens had IS. Definitely tricky if you haven't got steady hands. Perhaps the lens couples better with R5, which has IBIS. Anyway, love the camera and the lens and they are most likely endgame for me for a long while, and for most people as well.
It is the other way around, the shorter length can do without IS and 2.8, the longer one is where you benefit from both more, but then again I shot with no IS for years at 2 and 300 😁
Bro I'm from India love your videos and I got more knowledge of photography, thanks for that. Now I'm confused which camera I've to buy (Sony Alpha 6100 or Sony zv e10) If possible then plz make a short on Sony Alpha 6100 and plz give some advice to me about this Thanks ❤❤
Great video! One thing I have to say though. Because your video guality is 11/10 incredible the big blurry "RODE" text on the mic stand is crazily distracting 😅 Maybe put some black tape on top? Just a tip. Great content 🙂
Those Canon RF lenses, woo! they've got a very Hefty price tag. I brought one of the amazing lenses you spoke about, the Canon RF 28-70 F2 and lets just say I felt the $4500 whole in my pocket. I also currently own the RF 70-200 F2.8 and the Canon RF 100mm F2.8 Macro.
I prefer the rf 85mm 1.2 over the 28-70. Just a bit creamier and nicer pics coming from it - I've had both and gravitate to the 85. Both good tho for different purposes I guess.
You must shoot portraits. The 28-70 is an event lens. It can do portraits in a pinch but 85 is just perfection for that. For most general purpose shooting I keep the 28-70 snd 135 f2
why is the title full frame lenses? aren't all lenses full frame? list of lenses mentioned: 70-200mm f/4 24-70mm f/2.8 50mm f/1,8 16mm f/2.8 28-70mm f/2
It doesn't make sense to me: On your list you mention (lens #2) the 24-70mm f2.8 and in 5th place you bring in the "super heavy, super expensive behemoth 28-70mm f2 (without IS)! For that price, in my humble opinion (as an enthusiast), I would just settle for prime lenses 28mm, 50mm, 85mm for half the price, half the weight and space. One of the most annoying things about lenses is their size and weight. Once a person realizes its too heavy to lug around eventually it ends up on the shelf.
If that 28-70 had i.s, it would be the holy grail. Most of my work is hand held doco stuff so I stay with the 24-70. Good call on the 16mm, I may get one.
Oh Zac, right about 50 1.8 I was convincing myself that I don’t need the 28-70 so I could more easily buy the 70-200 2.8, then you mentioned the 28-70😢
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
Totally agree, R6mii and I have only 28-70 f2 lens shoot full wedding. I do have 85mm but only used it 1% of the time.
the 28-70 is an all in one beast hey!
A sleeper of a lens is the RF 100-400mm F5.6-8. So much reach, great image quality, light and easy to carry, plus it has Image Stabilization. People get too hung on the narrow aperture, it is such a steal of a deal for what it provides.
@@HeathBlythe I don't think most rational people would try to shoot in bad indoor lighting at F6.1 or higher. I'm referring to using this lens more for outdoor landscape and wildlife, not portraits - although it would still be an okay option if lighting and depth of field isn't a paramount concern. Also worth mentioning is Lightroom's denoise feature. It works incredibly well to reduce more than 80% of noise.
I got that lense. Using it with a Canon R8. I can go on a walk with the camera + lense in my hand. No trypod or bag needed. So light and versatile. Got really good shots with it. bang for the buck!
100-400 doesn’t leave my r7 for wildlife such clean shots with denoise
@@HeathBlythe lol who’s shooting 400mm indoors?
@@HeathBlythe If you need 400mm indoors for professional work, buy a professional lens. The comment you’re responding to never said they could shoot indoors at f8 in bad light. Just weird that you felt the need to pipe up at all.
Paying back the cost of these is insane. Especially just getting started. How many weddings would it take to pay back all the stuff?😂
Maybe 5 weddings
No need for any weeding, just one good trade 😉
Just buy each of the lenses one at a time.
Weddings sound miserable
R6 owner. I got the RF Rokinon 14mm for starscapes, the RF 70-200 F4 to pretend like I know what I'm doing, and just got the RF 35mm macro. I'm already in love with the 35mm. The 35 looks like it was made for the camera, they have chemistry, they're thinking about moving in together. The test pictures I took with it already has me daydreaming about the possibilities.
I need a lightweight tripod. Lugging the one I have around through the woods is awkward.
The RF35 1.8 macro hasn't moved off my R6 in the last. I might as well glue them together. Great pairing!
The RF 35 is amazing indeed
I got the 35mm. It is so sloooow to focus in video. It's great for photos
what about aps-c rf ? im not sure which to buy , the 24mm , 28mm or 35 mm, what u think ? i really love having 28mm because it will be closer to the 50mm look, but it has only 2.8 aperature without is
I have the 50 1.8. Great lens.
Great choices and motivations behind them. Loved to see you went with a non-blurred non click-baity thumbnail for the video. More RUclipsrs should do that!
What is the best RF lens for wildife and sports photography?
Rf 112 f1.0
Loved that u put the 28-70mm f2 as number one!! It's an absolute beast. I kinda expect version II of it to have OS.
unlikely to have OS because it's such an immense amount of glass that needs to be stabilized. the lens would have to be even larger to accommodate the motor to stabilize and the slight extra room for that as well. It would be incredible if a mark ii version did have it, but if you're waiting and hoping, I wouldn't wait.
It seems Nisi VND filter you have for RF 28-70L f2. Is it available putting a lens hood when is filter on it? If so waht about vinetting?
I love your energy and calm nature in front of the camera. Liked and subscribed!
The 28-70 F2 is just as stabilized as the 24-70 F2.8 on any RF body with IBIS.
not quite, when a lens with OIS is paired with IBIS it results in 7 stops of Image Stabilization, where as just having IBIS is closer to 4-5 stops. Not that many people would really notice this in the real world however.
@@wesleychapman9001 you are incorrect.. From Canon directly
"When using either the RF 28-70mm F2L USM or the RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM, for example, the EOS R7 will deliver the same 8-stops of IS as the other cameras with IBIS. We're not expecting that many EOS R7 users will be using more expensive pro lenses like these, though."
I know this video is little bit old, but I'm hoping to get an answer here since you seems like you totally know what you're talking about.
So my situation at the moment is, I can get a USED 15-35L f2.8 for ard $1,480 or get a NEW 14-35L f4 for ard $1,250.
I've been waiting and searching for the used market for 14-35f4 for months but none are available. So for that little difference in $, which do you think I should go for?
My used case is, travel, kids, and family events (mostly indoor).
My other lenses are RF70-200f4L, EF17-40L(gonna get sold since I hate adapters), and RF35mm f1.8 (also gonna get sold and replaced with rf50mm).
Lastly, my camera is Canon r8.
Thank you very much in advance.
Liked and subbed
Thanks for your feedback. Really helpgul for me as i have my 1st Eos R camera
Fellow R5C/28-70 f2 here. Absolutely the combo costs nearly both of my kidneys but for tripod shooting it just slashes, hard. Love it. I did took it to the streets (handheld) once and the moment I was outside I immediately felt like an idiot, I mean look at the size... and weight... and the fact that neither the body nor the lens had IS. Definitely tricky if you haven't got steady hands. Perhaps the lens couples better with R5, which has IBIS. Anyway, love the camera and the lens and they are most likely endgame for me for a long while, and for most people as well.
24-105 F4 + prime lenses 👌🏼
100% a good combo!
rf 28-70 f2 is my favourite lens too❤
Subscribed and liked based on your great and extensive review
Thanks for this video. Which camera and lens did you use for this video, nice colors, good background blur? Please let me know. Thanks in advance.
This 4:17
Cameras he said he has are R6 and R5C
It is the other way around, the shorter length can do without IS and 2.8, the longer one is where you benefit from both more, but then again I shot with no IS for years at 2 and 300 😁
Bro I'm from India love your videos and I got more knowledge of photography, thanks for that. Now I'm confused which camera I've to buy (Sony Alpha 6100 or Sony zv e10)
If possible then plz make a short on Sony Alpha 6100 and plz give some advice to me about this
Thanks ❤❤
What did u buy?
Great video! One thing I have to say though. Because your video guality is 11/10 incredible the big blurry "RODE" text on the mic stand is crazily distracting 😅 Maybe put some black tape on top? Just a tip. Great content 🙂
Hey I really appreciate the feedback! It is well and truly gone! All videos from the past few months have no longer got rode plastered all over 😅💀
Those Canon RF lenses, woo! they've got a very Hefty price tag. I brought one of the amazing lenses you spoke about, the Canon RF 28-70 F2 and lets just say I felt the $4500 whole in my pocket. I also currently own the RF 70-200 F2.8 and the Canon RF 100mm F2.8 Macro.
Wait till the Canon RF 1-250mm F1
@@Life_Through_Galleriesyeah that couldn’t be focused.
@@Life_Through_Galleriesit's gonna be a few million
Where do you live? The 28-70mm f/2 is $3000
I prefer the rf 85mm 1.2 over the 28-70. Just a bit creamier and nicer pics coming from it - I've had both and gravitate to the 85. Both good tho for different purposes I guess.
You must shoot portraits. The 28-70 is an event lens. It can do portraits in a pinch but 85 is just perfection for that. For most general purpose shooting I keep the 28-70 snd 135 f2
bro the EF 24-70 and 24-105 has a really really good IBS
50mm 1.2 is beautiful
No love for 85mm 1.2 ?
The 28-70 seemed very soft to me for $3k… but everyone else seems to love it?
How much for the 24-70??
120 Dollar
28-70 F2 is a legend
These aren’t the top 5 rf lenses, these are the top 5 lenses he could afford
Wow! So big and expensive. Are there alternatives?
Yes iPhone 5
why is the title full frame lenses? aren't all lenses full frame?
list of lenses mentioned:
70-200mm f/4
24-70mm f/2.8
50mm f/1,8
16mm f/2.8
28-70mm f/2
It doesn't make sense to me: On your list you mention (lens #2) the 24-70mm f2.8 and in 5th place you bring in the "super heavy, super expensive behemoth 28-70mm f2 (without IS)! For that price, in my humble opinion (as an enthusiast), I would just settle for prime lenses 28mm, 50mm, 85mm for half the price, half the weight and space. One of the most annoying things about lenses is their size and weight. Once a person realizes its too heavy to lug around eventually it ends up on the shelf.
THIS is the ONE&DONE lens for me …
except for my OTHER One&Done lens … 🤨
RF35 all the way
If that 28-70 had i.s, it would be the holy grail. Most of my work is hand held doco stuff so I stay with the 24-70.
Good call on the 16mm, I may get one.
Oh Zac, right about 50 1.8 I was convincing myself that I don’t need the 28-70 so I could more easily buy the 70-200 2.8, then you mentioned the 28-70😢
Include some photos / video taken from each lens next time.
Nice video though