I definitely think a “portrait lens” shootout between the 28-70, 85, 100, 135, and 70-200 would be interesting. Each of those lenses has its own pros/cons and aesthetic qualities so it would be a pretty fun comparison. I’ve been forcing myself to use the 135mm more often because I REALLY love its look (even more than my RF 85 1.2), but the 85mm is definitely a more convenient working distance in lots of situations.
@@KatelynJamesif you do it as a test can you do it in your normal blown out wedding look then also correct exposure? Blown out is an awesome wedding look but not for all shooters. Thank you! Right at transitioning to RF now
This was the first RF lens I upgraded back in 2019. For me it was the easiest decision of any of the EF -> RF upgrades. The EF is a monster with an adapter. I've been so happy with it and the improvements in speed and sharpness are just icing on the cake.
If your EF 70-200 f)2.8 version was version 3, then the only improvement is weight. because there was no improvement in optical quality. It's more of a psychological factor on your part. It even has graphics showing that the EF III version is a little sharper than the RF version. But in practice they are exactly the same.
@@felipecastro8668 I owned the EF version II and upgraded to the RF. Net cost was $1000 after selling the EF. Slight improvements in sharpness and contrast. Big improvement in autofocus and silence. But what was worth every penny, even if there were zero IQ improvements is the fact that this lens sits vertically in my roller bag, taking up the same amount of space as any other L lens (2.8s, 1.4s and 1.2s). This is a workflow thing. I can throw it in any bag, any time, swap lenses, etc without any fuss. No adapter. At a wedding this is invaluable.
@@jeffsellenrick6635 Today, I would trade my EF 70-200 f2.8 version 3 for the RF 70-200 f4. Just because of the weight and size. And I can't see a significant difference between f2.8 and f4 on a telephoto lens. But the weight and size between them is very significant. I just saw a review from an extremely competent RUclipsr, and he did a comparison between wide-angle Canon lenses. And as I've always said that the EF 16-35mm f2.8 version 3, which is the one I have, doesn't have any difference in relation to the RF 15-35mm f2.8. And I downloaded the raw files that he makes available and compared them here. And it's the same thing. And in the corners, the EF has a little more sharpness than the RF version. The latest updates of Canon EF version 3 lenses have the same quality as the RF version. Look at this link below: ruclips.net/video/zrmUj_8CLDU/видео.html
You haven't seen speed or sharpness improvements, its what you've done to justify the cost of your purchase. The RF version is optically the same as the ef mkiii and the mkiii is optically the same as the mkii, just with some anti flare coatings... The only advantage you have is the smaller size/weight, which is fair enough.
Yes finally about time! The RF 70-200mm lens has been one of my favorite lenses of all time and I always carry it in my travel bag or when I do portraits cause it’s give me a unique look and awesome compression especially when you do real creative compositions. The RF version is crazy sharp and quick. I’m always shocked at how go and sharp my portraits look. Aloha from Hawaii.
I've had RF 70-200 for 2 months now. It's a great lens. Before I used EF 100 L macro for babies, but now with the closer focus distance, this lens is great! I listened to your advice and bought rf 28-70. Superb lens. Thanks Katelyn
@@Reviveftp very fast and precise af. Bokeh superb. I don't find it to be so heavy. I am selling my Ef 35 1.4 L II. Not using it any more. Keeping my EF 85 1.4 until rf 135 comes out :) You will not regret purchasing the lens, is all that you ever want
Yesss thank you for this review..been waiting for this one! But I did go out and buy it a couple of weeks ago and OMG 😲 I love this lens and probably love it even more now after watching this!
I'm neither a wedding photographer nor a professional, but enjoy your videos. The EF version was my first L lens purchase and I loved it for several years while doing local sports photography. However, as I get older, the weight is not ideal. I recently purchased the f/4 version of the RF 70-200 and love it. At only 1.5 lbs, I pick it up more often than I do the old one. I'm on the fence with selling it though because of the 2.8.
Thanks for the review! I have had the EF 70-200 F2.8 IS II USM and the 70-200 F2.8 IS III. Now I own a R6. From what I have seen from the specifications, one big difference between the EF and the RF version is the minimum close distance. With the RF version you can get much closer to your object/subject. I would be happy to see how this affects the bokeh. Also the firmware of the RF version can be updated.
I really love this lens, The only reason I haven’t bought it is because I currently have the 100-500, and for portraits I have 85mm 1.2 which is my favorite for events and weddings.
Would absolutely love to see a shootout video! I have the RF 28-70 and the RF 100 and have managed to make weddings work between those two lenses. The 100 has come in clutch for me when I’ve not been allowed in the aisle, it’s such a great and versatile lens; details, portraits, and some distance shots! Saving up for the 70-200 and then hoping someday I can sell an arm or a leg in order to get that 85! 🙃 awesome video!
I photograph dog sports mostly so yes I grab the 70-200 ALL the time it's my main lens I just bought the RF version. And your videos are much appreciated.
I am having a very similar kit now but instead of the RF 85 1.2, I decided to go for the RF 50 1.2, at least for now. I think the RF 70-200 can produce results quite close to that of the 85, we will see. Still waiting for my RF 28-70 in March. It's crazy, I ordered that beast in November 2021.
Whoa! That’s quite the supply chain backlog. I am looking for a b cam for my Canon R6 but I am terrified that whenever Canon gets around to releasing an RP mk2 or R mk2 I will have to wait a year for mine to actually be delivered 🤦🏽♂️
I wish I could make my drone video look like your RUclips videos! The thing people don’t like on that lens is that the part that is exposed when it’s long can possibly carry dirt or moisture inside the lens when it goes back in. People also fear it pumps air in and out somewhere possibly pulling someone dust inside. In practice they are sealed well and it’s fine.
The 70-200 RF f4 version is only 1 pound, which blows my mind and makes me almost want to get that over the 2.8 version. Shoot out for portraits on the 2.8 vs f4 ;)
FYI, my 70-200 2.8 II might be heavy, but it’s all metal and build to last. I have used this lens all over the world in dusty, humid and in rain too. It still looks like new and there’s no ingress of water or dust. Of course I am not a wedding photographer, and do not baby my equipment. All of the newer RF lenses are built as plastic fantastic, with elevated prices. The RF 15-35 2.8 matches the EF 16-35 2.8 III, but the built quality of the EF is far superior, same with the EF 24-70 2.8 II. My EF 85 1.2 II is amazingly sharper when used with mirrorless bodies, due to better focusing systems in mirrorless. I agree the RF lenses are lighter but their build quality is not as robust. The R5 plastic build does not inspire confidence compared to the 5D series. But technology moves on and significant compromises need to be made. I was hoping that this would reflect on prices, but the lightly build RF system seems more expensive. And they are selling, go figure!
There is a way of making the EF model easier to handle and that is to get a closed up monopod with a detachable mounting plate and attach it to the tripod collar and use the monopod as a handle to hold the camera. I am not a wedding photographer so it may or may not work for them. I can understand when you are using the camera commercially and very quick responses are required the RF lens would likely be better. While all the RF lenses are nice and light you do have to wonder if the new plastic RF lenses are going to last as long as the all metal EF L lenses.
I have the r6 and have the ef 70-200 f4,I sold the ef f2.8 because of its weight. I didn’t use it much because of the weight.Now I love the 2.8 aperture of it be seriously considering the rf 2.8 as it’s quite a bit lighter.
*The 70-200 has some weight, and you can get much more stability if you hold you lens from below, with your left hand.* "Chicken winging" as photographers call it, can add a lot of extra wobble or camera shake into your shots! 🙂 Could be why you dislike it. Also Camera Strap!
Great video. I"m not a wedding shooter, but I'm obsessed with 70-200 lenses.I couldn't swing the RF Canon 70-200 2.8 lens, so I bought the Sigma version. It's nice, but it's still an EF mount. Plus, it's over 4 pounds, and that's not including the adapter!!! I just rented the RF 70-200 f4 for the weekend. The weight savings is GINORMOUS! And so much easier on my bad wrist. So needless to say, I will be saving up for the Canon version.
I too would like you to compare the 70-200mm f2.8 to the 100-500mm RF lens. Even though it's not f2.8, the 100-500 creates very good bokeh because of the focal lengths. I just have the 28-70 and 100-500 and those two lenses meet MY needs. Two camera bodies, two lenses, done.
I would LOVE to see a comparison! I am trying to hold out for the RF 135 as that is my golden child. I have been very tempted with this lens but I am now highly considering the 28-70 thanks to your recommendation. I never thought I would lust after a zoom lens before. I am so use to working my 35, 50, 100 and 135 on a wedding day. Side note, I tend to use my 100mm macro for corporate headshots.
Great video! Thank you for this! I have that EF version and you’re not kidding, I end up with a neck ache every time I use it! Ugh! Maybe time to upgrade because I use it ALL THE TIME! Lol
I think the RF 70-200 f/2.8 is my next lens. I'm not shooting weddings but have a need for a zoom in that range and I hear nothing but good things about that lens.
Did I hear you correctly, you found the RF sharper then the EF mii on the R6? On the R5 I do see the limitations of some lenses. I did just purchase the 70 to 200 f4 purely for size and kept a older Tamron f2.8. I cannot justify the size of the f2.8 for family trips.
Yes!!!!! I would love to see a "shoot out" comparing different lenses. I'm a family and senior portrait photographer and I love the 100 for portraits. I know many portrait photographers love the 70-200, but I've never purchased it because it's SO CLUNKY! But...I'm curious to see how the 100 comparea to the 70-200!
While I absolutely love the pictures that come out of my RF 70-200, I am conflicted about its handling. When I got the lens, the zoom throw was quite loose and unfortunately screeched while zooming. I sent it in for repair and now the screeching is gone, but the zoom throw feels stiff. This in combination with the veeery long zoom throw distance makes it very uncomfortable to use… just my personal experience.
I would love to see how you could use the 100 macro as a versatile option. For portraits too perhaps. I’m building up a kit and started with the 50 1.2. I can’t justify spending all that money just to shoot a few close up photos now and again.
I got the Ef 70-200 f2.8 ii and using it with the adapter I must admit, it tires out your left arm. But I've essentially turned my camera strap to attach to the lens and after that minor adjustment it became one of my favorite lenses to use. I get it the RF is a much more practical version, but you're paying a hefty premium for it. I love my EF 70-200 2.8 and don't plan on giving it up anytime soon. :)
While I have the R6 body, I also have the traditional 70-200 as you have, (with the adapter)-but can't justify $2800 for a lens I already have, although as a professional as you are, having to move around a lot, I get that. Thanks for the comparison!
This is timely. I am a Nikon shooter, have been for over 20 years. I am at a stage in my life I want/need a lighter set up. I am ready to pull the trigger to sell all of my Nikon gear. I am going to go ML and at this stage I am not confident in the Nikon Z cameras. The Canon R6 is at the top of my list. I have been debating on the kit lens the RF 24-105 f/4 or picking up a 70-200 f/4.
I definitely advise people rent the RF before buying. The throw of the lens is insane and you can't zoom in with just your thumb. I ended up selling it and downgrading to the EF. The EF ii/iii is just as sharp and fast focusing.
I agree with you, ppl should rent it before investing a lot money on RF, as the EF III in my opinion is much better than the RF as you can go from 70 to 200 very easily with just your thumb.
There’s more to it: Despite the weather sealing, any zoom with an extending tube sucks in air and, when retracted, blows the air onto the sensor. And air usually carries microscopic dust … no further comment, your honor.
@@COLORADO69 having owned it over 2 years now, since release, I have no issues whatsoever with build quality including no issues with dust. Lensrental did a tear down shortly after release and showed how extremely well built it is. However it ain’t perfect and the throw is an issue initially but you get use to it. Also it can’t take tele converters! Apart from that it is excellent and the size means it has gotten way more use in the 2 years than my previous 70-200 due to the size and weight.
Just to talk about the weight issue: for me, lighter gear holds a real value to my style of wedding photography. I know it's different since you're shooting full frame, but I'm on the *ahem* lowly Micro four-thirds system. My entire wedding gear (not including flashes), is 2747 grams. That's two cameras and five lenses. The Canon 28-70 and 85 alone is close to that weight. Which of course isn't to say one is better than the other! Full frame is better in lower light with nice high ISO performance. An extra stop or so of dynamic range. It's all about what tradeoffs, and for sure no camera system is perfect. :) Obviously, you found a system that works wonderfully for you and your business :)
I would love that ef just got Canon R6 and now saving for 20-70mm. Reasons for R6 was it's autofocus since I'm partially sighted and can't see the sharpness so we'll. But Wonder why you said you are going to give it away. I will be second shooter candidate next summer for weddings.
I have two 70-200mm lenses. The mark II and the mark III. Both are amazing and I've shot several weddings with the mark II. I upgraded to the mark III instead of buying the RF lens to save a bit of money and I regret not going straight to the RF version.
Keep in mind you lose about 1 stop of light with the DS version. So it’s up to you whether the smoother background is worth the loss of light and a higher price.
HI there Katelyn, not a wedding photographer here, but I'm curious, what is a "first look"? By the name, I assumed it was when the bride comes out, and the Bride and groom get their first looks at each other, but by your photos, I see that is not the case. Thank you!
My EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS is probably the second oldest of my lenses in active use… after my macro lens that I bought in 2002. I used to use it almost exclusively for sports, and in that case, I used it with a monopod. But using it for events and weddings and portraits… ugh! I love the compression, but it’s a beast to hold. And now with the RF adapter, it’s even more annoying. I am ready to replace it with the RF version. But I also want the 28-70… need to find a way to sell some stuff first!
Could you speak on the question of a doubling adapter; as far as I know you can’t use the rf version with 1.4 or 2 times adapter. A doubling adapter on the old Ef version gives you a 400 Mm lens. Thank you
I love this lens so much. However, I found some very odd results in post. Shooting at 200 while at 2.8 from distance gives a tiltshift effect. I can frame it perfectly and when editing, I see my subject(s) as miniatures. There can be an art to this, but im just trying to get the shallow depth of field. Seems like I'm plagued with the tiltshift most of the time. I now use my rf 28-70mm f2 for shoots unless I need the reach. Shooting on an R5
I notice that you've gotten the RF 100mm macro. Was it you who did a review to say that you didn't think it was worth an upgrade from the EF 100mm macro?
Love this video and review. Looking at my photos in the past 15 years, my best images were from my 70-200/2.8 lens, yet I keep upgrading to 85 1.2 and other fun lens. But these days, all I shoot are my kids, once they're a bit older for their sports I'll be picking up one of these rf 70-200/2.8, in the meanwhile using my 85 1.2 rf daily but man, that lens is so huge its a bit obnoxious for candid photos. Keep up the great videos
I see the cinema camera makers are ditching the EF mount, because Cannon is no longer supporting those lenses. For decades cinema camera makers used that mount because it was the largest, and nearly all other lenses could be adapted to that mount. Now Cinema camera makers are going to Leica mounts, the 2nd biggest mount.
:-). So, finally you replaced your most unloved lens. But a very useful review. Now what lens is next? RF 35mm 1.2 (as and when it arrives)? Or you are content with what you already have in your professional lens kit?
Interesting - I didn't realize I'm probably staying away from specific lenses because of their size. So it makes sense that a smaller and lighter lens would be used more.
I’m still at a toss up between the R5 and R6. Not a pro but still shoot 2-3 weddings a year with maybe a few other events thrown in. I have all my lenses from owning the Mark II (haven’t upgraded from that one yet) would you recommend the 5 or the 6. Kind of leaning to the 6 for now
I would definitly recommend the R6, I've shot multiple Events from weddings to prom nights with it and even with "just" 20 Megapixels I can crop in without any problems. The high amount of megapixels would be enough reason for me to not choose the R5 because you'll have a MASSIV use of storage. Even with just the R6 I need nearly 60-70GB storage for approximately 2000 photos and espacially when shooting weddings you'll reach the 2000 photos within very few hours. So yeah, I can only truly recommend the R6, love it since I got it over a year ago. :)
It's the fastest L lens that I have ever used. I was shooting high school football and it would focus on the chain link fence 60 yards away from the subject in a split second when the player would juke to the side.
Great video. 70-200mm f2.8 is my go to for my local sports shooting. I shoot it on a EOS RP. What body do you use for your weddings. Also do you run one body primarily and have a lower back up. Or are both your cameras the same model.
QUESTION: I think im one of the only event and portrait photographers who doesnt own a 70-200 im finally going to purchase one, but im torn between the EF & RF 2.8, I currently shoot with an R6, I honestly only use 3 lenses, Sigma 35, Sigma 135, and Canon 24-70, I can afford either, do you think the RF is worth it or the verion 3 of the EF
Wonderful stuff as always!!! I’ll definitely take that 70-200 EF from you if you’re giving it away😬😬 I’m still saving up for the R6, so it would save so much in rental prices for wedding days😬😬
I worry about the durability...I shoot a lot outside/in sand. I'll likely just get an adapter when I move to mirrorless unless Canon releases an internal zoom version, but I'm also considering the jump to Nikon
You are right about the dust. I have the EF iii version and I would never change because of 2 reason. First, I like to use my built-in filters on the adapter. And second, the dust. I have the RF 24-70 f2.8 and I already can see a few dust particles if I look into the front element which annoys me a lot. So my recommendation is, buy the EF version and use the adapter with the built-in filters.
I’m thinking of selling my ef 70-200 f2.8 mark 2 and ef 24-70mm f2.8 mark 2 and then oust an extra 650€ to but the rf 70-200 f2.8. Would this be a good investment you think? I’m mostly using my 70-200 for almost everything. Thank you!
Okay....I just have to ask. You mentioned you had a problem with the weight of the 70-200 EF, but the 28-70 RF is close in weight. Has that not been a problem? Or is the weight distributed differently? I'm super close to pulling the trigger on the 28-70 and the weight is the only thing standing in my way.
She’s ranting and complaining about a few oz in the weight of old model 70-200. In reality, 70-200 is All around beast. Mine still out performs all my other lenses if I only have 1 lense that I could carry being light weight. You should invest in sling if weight is your concern. I would not upgrade my older 70-200 for a few oz in weight and little to no difference in speed of the shorter new one.
Also, her older 70-200 is f4 which is a small one already. I carry the 70-200 f2.4 a much bulkier and heavier and have no problem carrying it. It makes you stand out carrying the f2.4 70-200 and it takes amazing photos.
![Natanael Cano - Amor Eterno [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EO4prCs6WpM/mqdefault.jpg)
I definitely think a “portrait lens” shootout between the 28-70, 85, 100, 135, and 70-200 would be interesting. Each of those lenses has its own pros/cons and aesthetic qualities so it would be a pretty fun comparison.
I’ve been forcing myself to use the 135mm more often because I REALLY love its look (even more than my RF 85 1.2), but the 85mm is definitely a more convenient working distance in lots of situations.
That’s a great idea!
Don't forget 80-200 2.8L
@@KatelynJamesif you do it as a test can you do it in your normal blown out wedding look then also correct exposure? Blown out is an awesome wedding look but not for all shooters. Thank you! Right at transitioning to RF now
This was the first RF lens I upgraded back in 2019. For me it was the easiest decision of any of the EF -> RF upgrades. The EF is a monster with an adapter. I've been so happy with it and the improvements in speed and sharpness are just icing on the cake.
Totally Agree Jeff!
If your EF 70-200 f)2.8 version was version 3, then the only improvement is weight. because there was no improvement in optical quality. It's more of a psychological factor on your part. It even has graphics showing that the EF III version is a little sharper than the RF version. But in practice they are exactly the same.
@@felipecastro8668 I owned the EF version II and upgraded to the RF. Net cost was $1000 after selling the EF. Slight improvements in sharpness and contrast. Big improvement in autofocus and silence. But what was worth every penny, even if there were zero IQ improvements is the fact that this lens sits vertically in my roller bag, taking up the same amount of space as any other L lens (2.8s, 1.4s and 1.2s). This is a workflow thing. I can throw it in any bag, any time, swap lenses, etc without any fuss. No adapter. At a wedding this is invaluable.
@@jeffsellenrick6635
Today, I would trade my EF 70-200 f2.8 version 3 for the RF 70-200 f4. Just because of the weight and size. And I can't see a significant difference between f2.8 and f4 on a telephoto lens. But the weight and size between them is very significant.
I just saw a review from an extremely competent RUclipsr, and he did a comparison between wide-angle Canon lenses. And as I've always said that the EF 16-35mm f2.8 version 3, which is the one I have, doesn't have any difference in relation to the RF 15-35mm f2.8. And I downloaded the raw files that he makes available and compared them here. And it's the same thing. And in the corners, the EF has a little more sharpness than the RF version.
The latest updates of Canon EF version 3 lenses have the same quality as the RF version. Look at this link below:
ruclips.net/video/zrmUj_8CLDU/видео.html
You haven't seen speed or sharpness improvements, its what you've done to justify the cost of your purchase. The RF version is optically the same as the ef mkiii and the mkiii is optically the same as the mkii, just with some anti flare coatings... The only advantage you have is the smaller size/weight, which is fair enough.
Yes finally about time! The RF 70-200mm lens has been one of my favorite lenses of all time and I always carry it in my travel bag or when I do portraits cause it’s give me a unique look and awesome compression especially when you do real creative compositions. The RF version is crazy sharp and quick. I’m always shocked at how go and sharp my portraits look. Aloha from Hawaii.
Couldn't agree more!
I've had RF 70-200 for 2 months now. It's a great lens. Before I used EF 100 L macro for babies, but now with the closer focus distance, this lens is great! I listened to your advice and bought rf 28-70. Superb lens. Thanks Katelyn
I’m going to die before my back order is filled haha
@@Reviveftp here in Romania is on stock. Many stores has is but is 3300 euro. :)
@@MariusPavelFotograf I’ve been waiting here in the US:( how do you like it?
@@Reviveftp very fast and precise af. Bokeh superb. I don't find it to be so heavy. I am selling my Ef 35 1.4 L II. Not using it any more. Keeping my EF 85 1.4 until rf 135 comes out :) You will not regret purchasing the lens, is all that you ever want
@@MariusPavelFotograf so good to hear! Thank you!
Great videos Katelyn , would be interesting to compare EF 100mm macro , the 24 105 F4 at 100mm , the 100 to 500 at 100mm , the 70 200 at 100mm and 85
Great idea!
Exactly what we need, a real world review without the techy jargon. Great video!
Ha ha glad you appreciate it!
Yesss thank you for this review..been waiting for this one! But I did go out and buy it a couple of weeks ago and OMG 😲 I love this lens and probably love it even more now after watching this!
Hope you enjoy it!
Yes! I would like to see a shoot out with several lenses. I hope a lot of people want that too. I can't wait to see that video!
Thanks for sharing!
YES for a Showdown of Lenses !!!!!
Yes! I would love to see a shoot out of both lenses. So helpful!
Coming soon!
Make those thoughts a reality for us, please! Because of you I now own the 28-70 and I’m in love!
Thanks for watching!
I'm neither a wedding photographer nor a professional, but enjoy your videos. The EF version was my first L lens purchase and I loved it for several years while doing local sports photography. However, as I get older, the weight is not ideal. I recently purchased the f/4 version of the RF 70-200 and love it. At only 1.5 lbs, I pick it up more often than I do the old one. I'm on the fence with selling it though because of the 2.8.
Love it Kim!!
Perfect timing. I have had the R5, for about a year. And I actually just bought a second-hand EF 70-200/F2.8L IS II USM...
Thanks for watching!
How much did you pay for it?
@@shamikbernard84 I paid 13000 SEK (swedish krona) at an online retailer.
Thanks for the review! I have had the EF 70-200 F2.8 IS II USM and the 70-200 F2.8 IS III. Now I own a R6. From what I have seen from the specifications, one big difference between the EF and the RF version is the minimum close distance. With the RF version you can get much closer to your object/subject. I would be happy to see how this affects the bokeh. Also the firmware of the RF version can be updated.
I really love this lens, The only reason I haven’t bought it is because I currently have the 100-500, and for portraits I have 85mm 1.2 which is my favorite for events and weddings.
Yes, would love to see a comparison of the lenses! trying to figure out what to buy next!
Thanks for watching!
I would be very interested in seeing a comparison video Katelyn!! I love all the tidbits you provide in your videos ♥️📸
Thanks for watching Jodie!
Would absolutely love to see a shootout video! I have the RF 28-70 and the RF 100 and have managed to make weddings work between those two lenses. The 100 has come in clutch for me when I’ve not been allowed in the aisle, it’s such a great and versatile lens; details, portraits, and some distance shots! Saving up for the 70-200 and then hoping someday I can sell an arm or a leg in order to get that 85! 🙃 awesome video!
Great idea!
Save some money and buy the RF 70-200mm f4L IS USM its little brother is fantastic.
Yes please. I would like to see the comparison between all the portrait lenses ✌️
Coming soon!!
Would definitely love to see a comparison of different zooms and focal lengths you were talking about!!
Great idea!
I LOVE my 70-200! It’s literally my favorite lens and I almost never take it off my camera except to use the 28-70. 😊😊😊
Thanks for sharing!
I photograph dog sports mostly so yes I grab the 70-200 ALL the time it's my main lens I just bought the RF version. And your videos are much appreciated.
Glad it is helpful!
I am having a very similar kit now but instead of the RF 85 1.2, I decided to go for the RF 50 1.2, at least for now.
I think the RF 70-200 can produce results quite close to that of the 85, we will see.
Still waiting for my RF 28-70 in March. It's crazy, I ordered that beast in November 2021.
Wow that’s a major back order!! You will love it!!
Whoa! That’s quite the supply chain backlog. I am looking for a b cam for my Canon R6 but I am terrified that whenever Canon gets around to releasing an RP mk2 or R mk2 I will have to wait a year for mine to actually be delivered 🤦🏽♂️
Agreed… I changed for the size alone, but the sharpness was great!
Thanks for watching!
YES PLEASE to the shootout you mentioned at the end 👍🎉
Yes!!
YES! Please compare images from all the lenses!
Great idea!
I wish I could make my drone video look like your RUclips videos!
The thing people don’t like on that lens is that the part that is exposed when it’s long can possibly carry dirt or moisture inside the lens when it goes back in. People also fear it pumps air in and out somewhere possibly pulling someone dust inside. In practice they are sealed well and it’s fine.
Thanks for sharing Mark!
The RF 70-200 f/4L is my favorite lens of all my 6 RF and couple EF lenses. The rendering is superb and almost matches the magickal 135 L.
Thanks for sharing Barry!
Barry, what situations in your job realy needed the 70-200 2.8? I alreday have 24-105|4? 100L, and now look between 70-200/4, 85 1.4 and 70-200 2.8.
The 70-200 RF f4 version is only 1 pound, which blows my mind and makes me almost want to get that over the 2.8 version. Shoot out for portraits on the 2.8 vs f4 ;)
Great idea!
FYI, my 70-200 2.8 II might be heavy, but it’s all metal and build to last. I have used this lens all over the world in dusty, humid and in rain too. It still looks like new and there’s no ingress of water or dust. Of course I am not a wedding photographer, and do not baby my equipment.
All of the newer RF lenses are built as plastic fantastic, with elevated prices. The RF 15-35 2.8 matches the EF 16-35 2.8 III, but the built quality of the EF is far superior, same with the EF 24-70 2.8 II.
My EF 85 1.2 II is amazingly sharper when used with mirrorless bodies, due to better focusing systems in mirrorless.
I agree the RF lenses are lighter but their build quality is not as robust. The R5 plastic build does not inspire confidence compared to the 5D series.
But technology moves on and significant compromises need to be made. I was hoping that this would reflect on prices, but the lightly build RF system seems more expensive. And they are selling, go figure!
Valid points!!
Great video! Yes, bring on the comparison shots!
Coming soon!
Yessss!! To seeing the comparison videos of lens!!
Coming soon!
There is a way of making the EF model easier to handle and that is to get a closed up monopod with a detachable mounting plate and attach it to the tripod collar and use the monopod as a handle to hold the camera. I am not a wedding photographer so it may or may not work for them. I can understand when you are using the camera commercially and very quick responses are required the RF lens would likely be better. While all the RF lenses are nice and light you do have to wonder if the new plastic RF lenses are going to last as long as the all metal EF L lenses.
I LOVE LOVE LOVE this lens......yes do the shoot out.
Thanks for watching!
Thank you for this great run down on the lens. I completely agree with you 🙂
I have the r6 and have the ef 70-200 f4,I sold the ef f2.8 because of its weight. I didn’t use it much because of the weight.Now I love the 2.8 aperture of it be seriously considering the rf 2.8 as it’s quite a bit lighter.
Thanks for watching!
*The 70-200 has some weight, and you can get much more stability if you hold you lens from below, with your left hand.* "Chicken winging" as photographers call it, can add a lot of extra wobble or camera shake into your shots! 🙂 Could be why you dislike it. Also Camera Strap!
Great video. I"m not a wedding shooter, but I'm obsessed with 70-200 lenses.I couldn't swing the RF Canon 70-200 2.8 lens, so I bought the Sigma version. It's nice, but it's still an EF mount. Plus, it's over 4 pounds, and that's not including the adapter!!!
I just rented the RF 70-200 f4 for the weekend. The weight savings is GINORMOUS! And so much easier on my bad wrist. So needless to say, I will be saving up for the Canon version.
The weight really is a game changer!
I too would like you to compare the 70-200mm f2.8 to the 100-500mm RF lens. Even though it's not f2.8, the 100-500 creates very good bokeh because of the focal lengths. I just have the 28-70 and 100-500 and those two lenses meet MY needs. Two camera bodies, two lenses, done.
Interesting idea thanks for sharing!
How do you deal with the gap in focal length from 70 to 100mm? Do you just use the 28-70 and stand closer to your subject?
@@cjm8160 Use 1.6 Crop feature on camera
I would LOVE to see a comparison! I am trying to hold out for the RF 135 as that is my golden child. I have been very tempted with this lens but I am now highly considering the 28-70 thanks to your recommendation. I never thought I would lust after a zoom lens before. I am so use to working my 35, 50, 100 and 135 on a wedding day. Side note, I tend to use my 100mm macro for corporate headshots.
I have rf 28-70 and rf 70-200 both are great. But if rf 135 1 4 comes out. I will buy it even if it's 3000usd.
I am waiting for the 135 too!!
The RF 70-200mm f4L IS USM is a stop slower but much lighter, smaller and cheaper. The image quality is stellar and I would highly recommend it.
Thanks for sharing!
Great video! Thank you for this! I have that EF version and you’re not kidding, I end up with a neck ache every time I use it! Ugh! Maybe time to upgrade because I use it ALL THE TIME! Lol
I would recommend renting it first but I think you will love it!
I think the RF 70-200 f/2.8 is my next lens. I'm not shooting weddings but have a need for a zoom in that range and I hear nothing but good things about that lens.
I have really been impressed with it!
I just got a 70-200 Sony GM 2. I love it!!
Thanks for watching Tricia!
Did I hear you correctly, you found the RF sharper then the EF mii on the R6? On the R5 I do see the limitations of some lenses. I did just purchase the 70 to 200 f4 purely for size and kept a older Tamron f2.8. I cannot justify the size of the f2.8 for family trips.
Thanks for sharing!
Yes!!!!! I would love to see a "shoot out" comparing different lenses. I'm a family and senior portrait photographer and I love the 100 for portraits. I know many portrait photographers love the 70-200, but I've never purchased it because it's SO CLUNKY! But...I'm curious to see how the 100 comparea to the 70-200!
Coming soon!
Yes to the shootout!
Coming soon!
Thanks!!! I switched last month.
Love it!
While I absolutely love the pictures that come out of my RF 70-200, I am conflicted about its handling. When I got the lens, the zoom throw was quite loose and unfortunately screeched while zooming. I sent it in for repair and now the screeching is gone, but the zoom throw feels stiff. This in combination with the veeery long zoom throw distance makes it very uncomfortable to use… just my personal experience.
Interesting! I have not experienced that.
I would love to see how you could use the 100 macro as a versatile option. For portraits too perhaps. I’m building up a kit and started with the 50 1.2. I can’t justify spending all that money just to shoot a few close up photos now and again.
Great idea!!
I got the Ef 70-200 f2.8 ii and using it with the adapter I must admit, it tires out your left arm. But I've essentially turned my camera strap to attach to the lens and after that minor adjustment it became one of my favorite lenses to use. I get it the RF is a much more practical version, but you're paying a hefty premium for it. I love my EF 70-200 2.8 and don't plan on giving it up anytime soon. :)
I really like my ef 70-200 2.8 iii on my r6. It’s my favorite lens by far. And i don’t mind the size at all and im only 5’7 120lbs guy very skinny
Thanks for sharing!!
While I have the R6 body, I also have the traditional 70-200 as you have, (with the adapter)-but can't justify $2800 for a lens I already have, although as a professional as you are, having to move around a lot, I get that. Thanks for the comparison!
Thanks for watching!
Yesss Ive been waiting for this!!
Thanks for watching!
This is timely. I am a Nikon shooter, have been for over 20 years. I am at a stage in my life I want/need a lighter set up. I am ready to pull the trigger to sell all of my Nikon gear. I am going to go ML and at this stage I am not confident in the Nikon Z cameras. The Canon R6 is at the top of my list. I have been debating on the kit lens the RF 24-105 f/4 or picking up a 70-200 f/4.
Thanks for watching Chester!
I definitely advise people rent the RF before buying. The throw of the lens is insane and you can't zoom in with just your thumb. I ended up selling it and downgrading to the EF. The EF ii/iii is just as sharp and fast focusing.
I agree with you, ppl should rent it before investing a lot money on RF, as the EF III in my opinion is much better than the RF as you can go from 70 to 200 very easily with just your thumb.
There’s more to it: Despite the weather sealing, any zoom with an extending tube sucks in air and, when retracted, blows the air onto the sensor. And air usually carries microscopic dust … no further comment, your honor.
… and the EF version has internal focusing …no air, no dust ….
Thanks for sharing!
@@COLORADO69 having owned it over 2 years now, since release, I have no issues whatsoever with build quality including no issues with dust. Lensrental did a tear down shortly after release and showed how extremely well built it is. However it ain’t perfect and the throw is an issue initially but you get use to it. Also it can’t take tele converters! Apart from that it is excellent and the size means it has gotten way more use in the 2 years than my previous 70-200 due to the size and weight.
Yep, always like the shoot-out comparisons!
Coming soon!
Canon rf 70-200 f2.8 is very expensive and I have canon rp and I use my canon EF 70-200 f2/.8with adapter and the photos are very beautiful
Just to talk about the weight issue: for me, lighter gear holds a real value to my style of wedding photography.
I know it's different since you're shooting full frame, but I'm on the *ahem* lowly Micro four-thirds system. My entire wedding gear (not including flashes), is 2747 grams.
That's two cameras and five lenses.
The Canon 28-70 and 85 alone is close to that weight.
Which of course isn't to say one is better than the other! Full frame is better in lower light with nice high ISO performance. An extra stop or so of dynamic range.
It's all about what tradeoffs, and for sure no camera system is perfect. :) Obviously, you found a system that works wonderfully for you and your business :)
Thanks for sharing Jason!
I would love that ef just got Canon R6 and now saving for 20-70mm. Reasons for R6 was it's autofocus since I'm partially sighted and can't see the sharpness so we'll. But Wonder why you said you are going to give it away. I will be second shooter candidate next summer for weddings.
Thanks for watching!
YES PLEASE
Coming soon!
I have two 70-200mm lenses. The mark II and the mark III. Both are amazing and I've shot several weddings with the mark II. I upgraded to the mark III instead of buying the RF lens to save a bit of money and I regret not going straight to the RF version.
Yes! Yes! Comparison video!
Yes!!
Hey Kate. Do you have input on RF 85MM 1.2 vs. RF 85MM 1.2 DS ? Is it worth the xtra 300 usd?
I can't imagine the DS is worth the extra....I have never tried it, but I love the normal 85
Keep in mind you lose about 1 stop of light with the DS version. So it’s up to you whether the smoother background is worth the loss of light and a higher price.
It was my first RF lens. Then the 50 1.2 then the 100mm macro
That’s a great lineup!
HI there Katelyn, not a wedding photographer here, but I'm curious, what is a "first look"? By the name, I assumed it was when the bride comes out, and the Bride and groom get their first looks at each other, but by your photos, I see that is not the case. Thank you!
When the bride and groom see each other before the ceremony and we are able to shoot some portraits before the ceremony.
My EF 70-200 f/2.8 IS is probably the second oldest of my lenses in active use… after my macro lens that I bought in 2002. I used to use it almost exclusively for sports, and in that case, I used it with a monopod. But using it for events and weddings and portraits… ugh! I love the compression, but it’s a beast to hold. And now with the RF adapter, it’s even more annoying. I am ready to replace it with the RF version. But I also want the 28-70… need to find a way to sell some stuff first!
Makes total sense!
Could you speak on the question of a doubling adapter; as far as I know you can’t use the rf version with 1.4 or 2 times adapter. A doubling adapter on the old Ef version gives you a 400
Mm lens. Thank you
I am not familiar with that.
As always, great video. "Happy Days."
I love this lens so much. However, I found some very odd results in post. Shooting at 200 while at 2.8 from distance gives a tiltshift effect. I can frame it perfectly and when editing, I see my subject(s) as miniatures. There can be an art to this, but im just trying to get the shallow depth of field. Seems like I'm plagued with the tiltshift most of the time. I now use my rf 28-70mm f2 for shoots unless I need the reach.
Shooting on an R5
I have not experienced that but I will keep an eye out! Thanks for sharing!
Thats focus breathing. It zooms out when trying to focus.
I notice that you've gotten the RF 100mm macro. Was it you who did a review to say that you didn't think it was worth an upgrade from the EF 100mm macro?
Correct!
I got the canon rf70-200mm f/4, it’s a beauty.
Thanks for sharing!
What situations in your job realy needed the 70-200 2.8? I alreday have 24-105|4? 100L, and now look between 70-200/4, 85 1.4 and 70-200 2.8.
Love this video and review. Looking at my photos in the past 15 years, my best images were from my 70-200/2.8 lens, yet I keep upgrading to 85 1.2 and other fun lens. But these days, all I shoot are my kids, once they're a bit older for their sports I'll be picking up one of these rf 70-200/2.8, in the meanwhile using my 85 1.2 rf daily but man, that lens is so huge its a bit obnoxious for candid photos. Keep up the great videos
Great review. It's next on my list to get.
I see the cinema camera makers are ditching the EF mount, because Cannon is no longer supporting those lenses. For decades cinema camera makers used that mount because it was the largest, and nearly all other lenses could be adapted to that mount. Now Cinema camera makers are going to Leica mounts, the 2nd biggest mount.
Great review...now I just have to figure out how I'll be able to afford this great lens.
You can do it!!
Omg you’re title screws me up. Tough it was RF85mm vs RF70-200mm pictures compare. Well will still awaiting for it. Cheers
Thanks for watching!
Love those video ideas!
Thanks for watching!
:-). So, finally you replaced your most unloved lens. But a very useful review.
Now what lens is next? RF 35mm 1.2 (as and when it arrives)? Or you are content with what you already have in your professional lens kit?
Haha finally!! I’m waiting for a rf 135!!
Interesting - I didn't realize I'm probably staying away from specific lenses because of their size. So it makes sense that a smaller and lighter lens would be used more.
Totally agree!
I’m still at a toss up between the R5 and R6. Not a pro but still shoot 2-3 weddings a year with maybe a few other events thrown in. I have all my lenses from owning the Mark II (haven’t upgraded from that one yet) would you recommend the 5 or the 6. Kind of leaning to the 6 for now
I would definitly recommend the R6, I've shot multiple Events from weddings to prom nights with it and even with "just" 20 Megapixels I can crop in without any problems. The high amount of megapixels would be enough reason for me to not choose the R5 because you'll have a MASSIV use of storage. Even with just the R6 I need nearly 60-70GB storage for approximately 2000 photos and espacially when shooting weddings you'll reach the 2000 photos within very few hours. So yeah, I can only truly recommend the R6, love it since I got it over a year ago. :)
We love the r6!!
Thanks for this. Have you ever felt you need a wide lens, like a rf 15-35 f2.8? Your widest seems to be 28mm
I love that len
Thanks for watching!
It's the fastest L lens that I have ever used. I was shooting high school football and it would focus on the chain link fence 60 yards away from the subject in a split second when the player would juke to the side.
Thanks for sharing and thanks for watching!
Always amazing reviews and videow.
Glad you like them!
I totally agree.
Thanks for watching!
Would love to see the shootout! Haha. Thank you!
Coming soon!
Great video. 70-200mm f2.8 is my go to for my local sports shooting. I shoot it on a EOS RP. What body do you use for your weddings. Also do you run one body primarily and have a lower back up. Or are both your cameras the same model.
We have 2 r6's But one just stays in my bag as a backup!
How do you like the R6 cause that’s the one I’m looking at?
QUESTION: I think im one of the only event and portrait photographers who doesnt own a 70-200 im finally going to purchase one, but im torn between the EF & RF 2.8, I currently shoot with an R6, I honestly only use 3 lenses, Sigma 35, Sigma 135, and Canon 24-70, I can afford either, do you think the RF is worth it or the verion 3 of the EF
Thanks for watching!
I want it !! I’ll buy it 😁
Go for it!
Do you think sports action shots with RF would be much improved over the EF? Or would they be similar?
Great work nice video what CAMERA are you using for video
c200
This lens alone has me debating whether I should switch back to canon after shooting with Sony since 2016
Wonderful stuff as always!!! I’ll definitely take that 70-200 EF from you if you’re giving it away😬😬 I’m still saving up for the R6, so it would save so much in rental prices for wedding days😬😬
Thanks for watching!!
I worry about the durability...I shoot a lot outside/in sand. I'll likely just get an adapter when I move to mirrorless unless Canon releases an internal zoom version, but I'm also considering the jump to Nikon
You are right about the dust.
I have the EF iii version and I would never change because of 2 reason. First, I like to use my built-in filters on the adapter.
And second, the dust.
I have the RF 24-70 f2.8 and I already can see a few dust particles if I look into the front element which annoys me a lot.
So my recommendation is, buy the EF version and use the adapter with the built-in filters.
I love your channel!
Thanks for watching!
I agree with you.
shoot out video... yes please!!!
Coming soon!!
Yes do the shoot out! 😂
Coming soon!
I’m thinking of selling my ef 70-200 f2.8 mark 2 and ef 24-70mm f2.8 mark 2 and then oust an extra 650€ to but the rf 70-200 f2.8. Would this be a good investment you think? I’m mostly using my 70-200 for almost everything. Thank you!
If you use the 70-200 alot it might be worth it!
Okay....I just have to ask. You mentioned you had a problem with the weight of the 70-200 EF, but the 28-70 RF is close in weight. Has that not been a problem? Or is the weight distributed differently? I'm super close to pulling the trigger on the 28-70 and the weight is the only thing standing in my way.
The length is the big difference
@@KatelynJames Thank you. That makes sense!
She’s ranting and complaining about a few oz in the weight of old model 70-200. In reality, 70-200 is All around beast. Mine still out performs all my other lenses if I only have 1 lense that I could carry being light weight. You should invest in sling if weight is your concern. I would not upgrade my older 70-200 for a few oz in weight and little to no difference in speed of the shorter new one.
Also, her older 70-200 is f4 which is a small one already. I carry the 70-200 f2.4 a much bulkier and heavier and have no problem carrying it. It makes you stand out carrying the f2.4 70-200 and it takes amazing photos.