Agree love the mini R3 and the first time I use for night soccer match, I was shocked at how good the tracking is and how clean it is at ISO 20000, this is with 100-500mm f4.5-7.1.
I use R5 + 28-70 2.0 and a second R5 + 85 1.2, what is an amazing combo to work with 🎉 For big indoor-scenes I also have the 16 2.8 and for ring macros the 35 1.8. My second shooter has a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8. So we‘re prepared for EVERYTHING😁🙏
Great breakdown! I’m an architectural photographer but I always love watching your videos from a different genre. As someone who shot on the r6 and r6 II I will tell you the 45mp was f the r5 II along with the Retina pupil focus through the viewfinder would probably blow your mind for weddings. Rent one for fun ;). Your husband might not like it though because you will want to buy it.
I think you undersell the RF 100 Macro. I use it for portraits. I got great results in a small church and back yard wedding. It sometimes replaces my 70-200mm in some situation. I love the 85mm. It actually sells my portfolio. The images it produces are amazing. Again the 100mm is super sharp especially on my R5. I highly recommend
This is the exact kit I ended up with! It’s literally perfect and I haven’t wanted for anything else for photography. The only other lens I ever got (and kept) were the Helios 44M / Jena Zeiss 58mm f2’s….for the swirly bokeh thing.
100% agree on all your assessments. After shooting about 600 weddings with a similar lineup. Now that I’m more casual and only shoot short elopements with less gear, definitely miss the 70-200. It’s a ceremony necessity.
Excellent recommendations! I’m so glad I followed KJ’s recs when purchasing - I mainly use these exact for sports/action and events, but can do portraits too.
70-200 is my goto for most of my event work, 24-70 does my portraits and shot the wedding so awesome, while the 150-600 does my wildlife shots. I have a 50mm macro and a 24-105 macro for the tight stuff and they are all on my 5D iv. I'm only part time currently, but things seem to be picking up. Thanks for everything!
Love the breakdown and the journey! When I saw the 100 mm macro, I immediately knew what you were going to say about it. You never realize how close up yet so far away you need for details until your camera bumps into someone's face or their decorations 😭😂 BRAVO KJ!
wow! we came to the same lenses though my conclusions are a little different. I totally agree that the 28-70 f2 is a beast, and it's a de facto lens for me. if I have a 1-camera event or situation, that is the lens I grab. However, if I have a 2-camera situation where I wear a harness, I have the 28-70 on my R5ii and the 85 1.2 on my R5. My 85 is the first I go for because I love the look so much. But in those very often scenarios where I don't have room or time to frame it properly, I switch to the 28-70. I also agree that my 100 2.8 macro is barely used. In fact (and a lot of people will criticize me for this), I often think I prefer the macro images from my 35 1.8. So I do regret buying this before the 70-200. And yes, the 70-200 2.8 is fantastic because it's so small and the images are great. But it's not a lens I use that much either.
I don't do photography professionally and somehow I have these same lenses. I mainly use the 28-70 and 85mm. I should use the other two more, however, when I need them I need them. Watching this video makes me wonder if shooting a wedding would be fun (without the pressure of having to deliver results to a client).
I love that you are still using the R6i. I never saw the need to upgrade to r6ii. Also the r6i has killer 1080P video, it looks like it's properly downsampled, where as the 1080P on the r6ii looks line skipped and moire ish. I use r6i for real estate Photography. I've never felt that the R5 was a worthwhile purchase, and the r5ii impressed me for video but not for photography as it has less dynamic range for some reason. I do have to admit that I have bought a few Sonys for video as the R6ii although better at 4k video then r6i just did not delivery to Sony standards, Sony just knocked it out of the park with ZV--E1 and Zv-e10ii. But none of those camera's would really ever be used for wedding as they will leave you crying when they overheat at 4k60, and lack of dual card slots. I could go on :)
Love the video! I use the R6 Mk II as well with the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 for wedding photography and video and I think those are the only essentials you actually need. You get good enough wide-angle shots with the 24-70 and great portraits and reach for the ceremony with the 70-200. The rest is luxury. However I totally share your obsession with the 85 F1.2. I used it once on a photoshoot and I've been dreaming about it ever since. The 70-200mm is really good, but the 85 is on another level.
Honestly I can not imagine shooting a candles lit dinner or any other near dark wedding program with lenses as dim as f/2.8. Even with f/1.4 the ISO often runs toward 6400 or even 12800.
@@juljanskurani Like really :-\ ? To ruin the nice dim atmosphere for everyone by strobing all around? That is SO unprofessional. And also the resulting photos lose the real atmosphere. Moreover very often bouncing the flash simply is not an option - too high, dark or no ceiling etc. Or flashing is also often forbiden because if all those amateurs without a proper gear wrongly thinking flash solves it...
@@petrpohnan875 bro, photos ARE PART OF THE ATMOSPHERE! Noone is arguing physics here, 1.4 and 1.2 lenses are much better, but they aren’t a musst. If it‘s that dark the guests have to be willing to deal with flash or there will be no good photos, period. Also, the average couple doesn‘t have the budget for a perfectly equipped photographer, and it‘s not necessary either. If they have the budget, we can rent the lenses, otherwise, it is what it is. I Personally like flash photos more anyways so, you do you but please don‘t walk around calling others unprofessional because they can‘t afford these super specialised lenses yet. There‘s many who love this job and are in their beginnings. I don’t think your judgement helps them. And you can‘t tell me you started with all the perfect gear in your own beginnings, assuming you are an experienced professional photographer.
@@juljanskurani You use what you have and in time you add more gear. It's nice to have the other lenses, that's what keeps you excited for the next one. I've been a full time wedding photographer for over 30 years. I'll warn you.... it' never ending wanting something new hahah
I didn't get the 100mm macro because really, just having a specialty lens for a few photos each day and at that price point, it wasn't necessary. Instead, I use the RF 35 f/1.8 which has macro capability that aren't quite as spectacular as the 100, but totally do the job for ring photos and detail shots. Plus, it's a wonderful lightweight lens to switch to for dance floor later in the evening when your wrist is tired from the heavier lenses. You should try it! You might be surprised that you like it :-)
It depends. Sometimes it is, other times it is not. Luckily there is so much more other use cases for 28-70/2 than just large family shots in tight spaces that it does not bother me at all.
There is more magic at 1.2 But you don't always shoot at that. I have the RF 35 1.4 RF 50 1.2 RF 85 1.2 RF 100 2.8 and the RF 135 1.8 as my primes but I use my 28-70 more than any of those lenses. It's an amazing lens and most of the time gives me what I need. When I want that special image then yes out comes one of the primes specifically for that shot. Same goes for the wide and longer zooms. I would give up one of my primes before giving up the 28-70 I like it that much :)
Have faith 😊 Canon Rumours wrote some weeks ago that Canon is working on a genuine macro lens. Let us hope it will be materialized. The 28-70mm f2.0 is such an underrated lens among other groups of canon shooters.
You lose 1 stop of light with the DS version. I remember struggling with this same question 3 years ago. Chris Frost’s comparison of the two versions of the 85mm f/1.2 helped me go with the non-DS version.
So I know it’s not the same image quality as the RF 28-70/2 L but how would you rate the RF 24-70/2.8 L if you have to substitute it in for the midrange? Or would you advise against it and work to get the 28-70/2 L ? Interested in your opinion. Thank you and take care. Oh, what are your thoughts on using the R5 or R5 Mark II?
I sold my RF 24-70 for the 28-70 Canon gave me that lens to try out for a week. Both lenses are amazing. But there is that extra magic shooting at 2.0 and this lens is sharper even corner to corner, Closest you can get with not being a prime. I use primes when I have more time, but the 28-70 is amazing when not switching lenses so often. You cover the 35 and 50 with this lens. But adding the 85 1.2 is a must when you can add another lens to your gear.
Have you look3d at the new 70-200? It’s back to the original length but 82mm; wider. Most importantly, it does 70-200 range internally with one finger.
Based on the points she mentioned in her original RF 70-200 video, I don't think there's any positives (other than the shooter zoom throw) that she would like. I got used to the longer throw because the weight and height savings were so worth it! I shoot on it 90% of the time for my events and would never want to go back to a lens that long if I can avoid it.
Hey, I was wondering if anybody has had any issues / concerns with free hanging the 28-70 f2 off their lens mount for a day of capturing? I use 2 R6 Mark ii and will be trusting the lens mount to hold the full weight well moving about.
I have the vertical grip on my R5 and R3 is built in. I really like the balance of having the grip Not so front heavy. Also saves your wrists on turning the camera horizontal to vertical Yes its more weight but being more balanced makes it feel better while shooting.
For me canon EOS R5C ii will come after but for BLACKMAGIC POCKET 6K PRO IS EF mounting if it have adapter which can convert it too RF LENS adapter it will be very cool but for this I will use of irix lens for it even I plan to buy ursa mini pro 12k olpf camera this too I must go with EF adapter for lens but I want ADAPTER RF for this camera because I can buy RF lens for all my camera I will have I will have BLACKMAGIC POCKET 6K PRO and BLACKMAGIC URSA MINI PRO 12K OLPF and CANON EOS R5C II and insta ×4 and 3drone of dji only for making a film for my mother because till I was born she give me to a Foster parents to raise me till I was grown up it time for me to does a film seriously for her because she really need this film only too of me only.
24-70 f/2, "you get the look of a prime"... my f/1.2s (Nikon Z 50 and 85) would disagree. the proper composition at 1.2 is just magical. annoying comment over.
The R6 MKII is a steal. That thing is a workhorse of a camera! Two R6 MKII bodies and 3 or 4 lenses and you're set!
it is but in darker scenes it does not focus thattttt great. at daylight, yes amazing!
Agree love the mini R3 and the first time I use for night soccer match, I was shocked at how good the tracking is and how clean it is at ISO 20000, this is with 100-500mm f4.5-7.1.
I use the 135 1.8 RF and choose 1.6 crop if needed. I love it. For me, it replaces the 85 and the 70-200, and one less lens to carry. That's just me.
I use R5 + 28-70 2.0 and a second R5 + 85 1.2, what is an amazing combo to work with 🎉 For big indoor-scenes I also have the 16 2.8 and for ring macros the 35 1.8. My second shooter has a 24-70 2.8 and a 70-200 2.8. So we‘re prepared for EVERYTHING😁🙏
Great breakdown! I’m an architectural photographer but I always love watching your videos from a different genre. As someone who shot on the r6 and r6 II I will tell you the 45mp was f the r5 II along with the Retina pupil focus through the viewfinder would probably blow your mind for weddings. Rent one for fun ;). Your husband might not like it though because you will want to buy it.
I think you undersell the RF 100 Macro. I use it for portraits. I got great results in a small church and back yard wedding. It sometimes replaces my 70-200mm in some situation. I love the 85mm. It actually sells my portfolio. The images it produces are amazing. Again the 100mm is super sharp especially on my R5. I highly recommend
I love my 85 1.2 soooo much!
My favourite lens by far
This is the exact kit I ended up with! It’s literally perfect and I haven’t wanted for anything else for photography. The only other lens I ever got (and kept) were the Helios 44M / Jena Zeiss 58mm f2’s….for the swirly bokeh thing.
4 years ago??? And I remember you being one of the later ppl to switch to mirrorless.
Time flies 😭
100% agree on all your assessments. After shooting about 600 weddings with a similar lineup. Now that I’m more casual and only shoot short elopements with less gear, definitely miss the 70-200. It’s a ceremony necessity.
WAIT A MINUTE! The 85 is your FAV? OVER the 28-70? I've watched so many vids on the 28-70. It blows my mind. Great info as always! BYYYYYYYYYE. Ha!
Excellent recommendations! I’m so glad I followed KJ’s recs when purchasing - I mainly use these exact for sports/action and events, but can do portraits too.
70-200 is my goto for most of my event work, 24-70 does my portraits and shot the wedding so awesome, while the 150-600 does my wildlife shots. I have a 50mm macro and a 24-105 macro for the tight stuff and they are all on my 5D iv. I'm only part time currently, but things seem to be picking up. Thanks for everything!
Thank you for the time and knowledge you put into each and every video!!
Love the breakdown and the journey! When I saw the 100 mm macro, I immediately knew what you were going to say about it. You never realize how close up yet so far away you need for details until your camera bumps into someone's face or their decorations 😭😂
BRAVO KJ!
No wide Angle? For photos of the venue
Goodness this is so helpful!
wow! we came to the same lenses though my conclusions are a little different. I totally agree that the 28-70 f2 is a beast, and it's a de facto lens for me. if I have a 1-camera event or situation, that is the lens I grab. However, if I have a 2-camera situation where I wear a harness, I have the 28-70 on my R5ii and the 85 1.2 on my R5. My 85 is the first I go for because I love the look so much. But in those very often scenarios where I don't have room or time to frame it properly, I switch to the 28-70. I also agree that my 100 2.8 macro is barely used. In fact (and a lot of people will criticize me for this), I often think I prefer the macro images from my 35 1.8. So I do regret buying this before the 70-200. And yes, the 70-200 2.8 is fantastic because it's so small and the images are great. But it's not a lens I use that much either.
I don't do photography professionally and somehow I have these same lenses. I mainly use the 28-70 and 85mm. I should use the other two more, however, when I need them I need them. Watching this video makes me wonder if shooting a wedding would be fun (without the pressure of having to deliver results to a client).
This is my exact wedding lineup and maybe a wide angle to capture the interior of the location. My cameras are the R5ii and the R6ii.
I love that you are still using the R6i. I never saw the need to upgrade to r6ii. Also the r6i has killer 1080P video, it looks like it's properly downsampled, where as the 1080P on the r6ii looks line skipped and moire ish. I use r6i for real estate Photography. I've never felt that the R5 was a worthwhile purchase, and the r5ii impressed me for video but not for photography as it has less dynamic range for some reason. I do have to admit that I have bought a few Sonys for video as the R6ii although better at 4k video then r6i just did not delivery to Sony standards, Sony just knocked it out of the park with ZV--E1 and Zv-e10ii. But none of those camera's would really ever be used for wedding as they will leave you crying when they overheat at 4k60, and lack of dual card slots. I could go on :)
Honest, great video
I'm still using my EF system. Can't justify going to mirrorless. I'm 66 years old, retired and use my camera once or twice a year now.
Love the video! I use the R6 Mk II as well with the 24-70 f2.8 and the 70-200 f2.8 for wedding photography and video and I think those are the only essentials you actually need. You get good enough wide-angle shots with the 24-70 and great portraits and reach for the ceremony with the 70-200. The rest is luxury. However I totally share your obsession with the 85 F1.2. I used it once on a photoshoot and I've been dreaming about it ever since. The 70-200mm is really good, but the 85 is on another level.
Honestly I can not imagine shooting a candles lit dinner or any other near dark wedding program with lenses as dim as f/2.8. Even with f/1.4 the ISO often runs toward 6400 or even 12800.
@ I use a speedlite for that
@@juljanskurani Like really :-\ ? To ruin the nice dim atmosphere for everyone by strobing all around? That is SO unprofessional.
And also the resulting photos lose the real atmosphere. Moreover very often bouncing the flash simply is not an option - too high, dark or no ceiling etc. Or flashing is also often forbiden because if all those amateurs without a proper gear wrongly thinking flash solves it...
@@petrpohnan875 bro, photos ARE PART OF THE ATMOSPHERE! Noone is arguing physics here, 1.4 and 1.2 lenses are much better, but they aren’t a musst. If it‘s that dark the guests have to be willing to deal with flash or there will be no good photos, period. Also, the average couple doesn‘t have the budget for a perfectly equipped photographer, and it‘s not necessary either. If they have the budget, we can rent the lenses, otherwise, it is what it is. I Personally like flash photos more anyways so, you do you but please don‘t walk around calling others unprofessional because they can‘t afford these super specialised lenses yet. There‘s many who love this job and are in their beginnings. I don’t think your judgement helps them. And you can‘t tell me you started with all the perfect gear in your own beginnings, assuming you are an experienced professional photographer.
@@juljanskurani You use what you have and in time you add more gear. It's nice to have the other lenses, that's what keeps you excited for the next one. I've been a full time wedding photographer for over 30 years. I'll warn you.... it' never ending wanting something new hahah
I all of these lens except for the 28 to 70 which I will be getting next.. and have teo Bodies R6 Mark ii. And R5
I didn't get the 100mm macro because really, just having a specialty lens for a few photos each day and at that price point, it wasn't necessary. Instead, I use the RF 35 f/1.8 which has macro capability that aren't quite as spectacular as the 100, but totally do the job for ring photos and detail shots. Plus, it's a wonderful lightweight lens to switch to for dance floor later in the evening when your wrist is tired from the heavier lenses. You should try it! You might be surprised that you like it :-)
Great video! Is the 28mm focal length on the 28-70mm wide enough to capture group photos of a venue interior and large family shots in tight spaces?
For me yes. I actually used a 35 in a pretty tight space and that was wide enough
It depends. Sometimes it is, other times it is not. Luckily there is so much more other use cases for 28-70/2 than just large family shots in tight spaces that it does not bother me at all.
Thanks !!
I love my 70-200 EF iii I have borrowed the 85 but I don’t own it.
There is more magic at 1.2 But you don't always shoot at that. I have the RF 35 1.4 RF 50 1.2 RF 85 1.2 RF 100 2.8 and the RF 135 1.8 as my primes but I use my 28-70 more than any of those lenses. It's an amazing lens and most of the time gives me what I need. When I want that special image then yes out comes one of the primes specifically for that shot. Same goes for the wide and longer zooms. I would give up one of my primes before giving up the 28-70 I like it that much :)
Have faith 😊 Canon Rumours wrote some weeks ago that Canon is working on a genuine macro lens. Let us hope it will be materialized. The 28-70mm f2.0 is such an underrated lens among other groups of canon shooters.
Is the defocus smoothing option worth it on the new rf 85mm? Trying to see if I should buy that version. Thanks!
You lose 1 stop of light with the DS version. I remember struggling with this same question 3 years ago. Chris Frost’s comparison of the two versions of the 85mm f/1.2 helped me go with the non-DS version.
@@cjm8160 totally agree on that. Lens produces such amazing images don't need the DS version. This is my favorite lens in the Canon line-up
R6 Mark III cant wait to see.. hoping will be 30MP.. 😄 😂
So I know it’s not the same image quality as the RF 28-70/2 L but how would you rate the RF 24-70/2.8 L if you have to substitute it in for the midrange? Or would you advise against it and work to get the 28-70/2 L ? Interested in your opinion. Thank you and take care. Oh, what are your thoughts on using the R5 or R5 Mark II?
I sold my RF 24-70 for the 28-70 Canon gave me that lens to try out for a week. Both lenses are amazing. But there is that extra magic shooting at 2.0 and this lens is sharper even corner to corner, Closest you can get with not being a prime. I use primes when I have more time, but the 28-70 is amazing when not switching lenses so often. You cover the 35 and 50 with this lens. But adding the 85 1.2 is a must when you can add another lens to your gear.
#70to200 lover here! haha. Whenever I go to weddings, or events, it lives on my camera. Unless I'm doing video.
Have you look3d at the new 70-200? It’s back to the original length but 82mm; wider. Most importantly, it does 70-200 range internally with one finger.
Based on the points she mentioned in her original RF 70-200 video, I don't think there's any positives (other than the shooter zoom throw) that she would like. I got used to the longer throw because the weight and height savings were so worth it! I shoot on it 90% of the time for my events and would never want to go back to a lens that long if I can avoid it.
Interesting so 28-70 is the best
You know you've been following KJ when you have her same line-up.....
So your still satisfied with the original r6 results ?
Hey, I was wondering if anybody has had any issues / concerns with free hanging the 28-70 f2 off their lens mount for a day of capturing? I use 2 R6 Mark ii and will be trusting the lens mount to hold the full weight well moving about.
I have the vertical grip on my R5 and R3 is built in. I really like the balance of having the grip Not so front heavy. Also saves your wrists on turning the camera horizontal to vertical Yes its more weight but being more balanced makes it feel better while shooting.
For me canon EOS R5C ii will come after but for BLACKMAGIC POCKET 6K PRO IS EF mounting if it have adapter which can convert it too RF LENS adapter it will be very cool but for this I will use of irix lens for it even I plan to buy ursa mini pro 12k olpf camera this too I must go with EF adapter for lens but I want ADAPTER RF for this camera because I can buy RF lens for all my camera I will have I will have BLACKMAGIC POCKET 6K PRO and BLACKMAGIC URSA MINI PRO 12K OLPF and CANON EOS R5C II and insta ×4 and 3drone of dji only for making a film for my mother because till I was born she give me to a Foster parents to raise me till I was grown up it time for me to does a film seriously for her because she really need this film only too of me only.
the 28-70 sure "feels" like 4 lens in one lol
fyi canon just released new rf 70-200 at the same size as the old ef, cause internal zoom is more pro.
Weddings = 28-70 2.0, 100 macro, 70-200 2.8 ...... DONE
I hate weddings…!!!
Like the same videos over and over again
They all very cheap lenses
24-70 f/2, "you get the look of a prime"... my f/1.2s (Nikon Z 50 and 85) would disagree. the proper composition at 1.2 is just magical. annoying comment over.