This is why I own all three lenses (24-70, 35 and 85) and they're the only lenses I own. I use 24-70 when I need to get the shot and when I need to get through a shoot quickly. I use the 35 and 85 combo when I have time to move around and get creative and pose my subjects.
@@FMJP I've owned a 70-200 in the past. I've found I just never need that amount of reach. It's also intimidating to your subjects when you are shooting them with a giant white lens. 85 1.2 is the best lens I've ever used and suits my needs.
Have you ever thought about getting a second body, so yo can use both primes quickly? I also own the same lenses but also a 24mm 1.4. Was thinking to sell the Zoom to finance a second body.
Primes are more for my personal gratification of knowing I get just a little bit more background separation, a little bit cleaner image in low light situations and a little bit sharper image. But when it comes down to it, a Zoom lens is super great for wedding and other types of event photography where you need to deliver a variety of pictures and you can't stop the action from happening. Even having 2 cameras with 2 Primes is slower than having 1 camera with a Zoom. By far I use my Primes more. And all the pictures both of you took in this video are gorgeous.
@@steven4217 I believe you will only notice the difference when you zoom in on your picture or if you crop your picture more than just a little bit. Modern day zoom vs modern day prime. Primes also usually have smoothet bokeh, less chromatic abberations and more as they can be simpler designs. But it's doubtful anyone besides photographers will notice this.
I've actually never owned a 24-70mm. I have a 24-105mm for casual photography but most of the time for professional work I'm using my 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, RF 70-200mm f2.8 or occasionally a wide angle f4 zoom (the wide angle moreso for real-estate work). The 35mm and 85mm primes are by far my favourite focal lengths and I love the results you can get. I recently helped second-shoot a wedding video and shot at 85mm f1.4 for the photos etc between ceremony and reception and the results were absolutely incredible. So dreamy!
Through my 30 year career I used to switch between the two. A few years with Zooms and then felt I need to be more creative with dreamy backgrounds and beautiful rendering with better low light performance. Then I would go to prime for a few years but was yearning convenience. Primes are way better so long as you are not lazy.
I love the look of the prime lenses, but the convenience of the ZOOM. That is why by go to lens for most of my client work is the RF 28-70mm, but I always bring along my RF 85 1.2 for the end of the shoot to get some of those incredible prime lens shots when I have a little extra time at the end of a shoot.
Every photo in the vid is great! I use the RF35 1.8 and RF85 2.0 mainly cause the stabilization and I can cover all grounds at a wedding. In my opinion having primes has helped me keep a consistent look in my photos!
An interesting feature of the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom, specifically, is the 20cm minimum focus distance. The EF 24-70 f2.8 II and RF 28-70 f/2 are both around 40cm and the typical 85mm prime is around 80-85cm.
I find it better to use primes not only for their shallower depth of field, but on how they force you to get more creative with each shot. A zoom for me personally is very versatile. Something I’d have in my bag if I’m traveling somewhere new across the world. For portraits tho. I find this lens to be a bit lazy at times for portraits or weddings.
There are many other factors. The Canon RF35 1.8 & RF85 2.0 both only have a slow STM motor and no weather protection. I had both lenses and both were really good for the money. I would still prefer the RF24-70 2.8 L precisely because it has a Nano USM and weather protection. Since I don't need the best bokeh for my style, f/2.8 or even f/4 would not be a problem. I only use my RF24-105 4.0 L / RF70-200 4.0 L / RF100 2.8 L and am very happy with it.
Another video from the dream team! The 24-70 is a beast with a price tag to suit and it really comes down to the type of photography you shoot. for events or weddings the zoom is a no brainer but the primes are a great way for a hobbyist (like me) to get shallow depth of field on a budget.
to me it's more of a debate between two questions: shallow depth of field of a prime or the convenience/creativity of a zoom? compactness of a single prime or compactness of a single zoom compared to multiple primes? the ISO difference is negligible to me since even on my Fujifilm, ISO12800 is more than usable for uncropped images on social media.
honest answer, for portraits I do prefer the Prime, for anything else I will take a zoom. However on the couple of shots you gave us as comparisons, the zoom shots were nicer, only because your shots had better angles, the prime shots had angles that kept placing the horizon directly behind the model's head or somewhere that it did not look all that great as you have a very dark foreground and light sky. So the nod goes to you more than the lens...... just my 2cents...
Actually both. Always a luminous prime in my bag, at best on a spare gear, eg Fuji 33mm f1.4 (50mm eq), plus 2 zooms, wide 10-24 & tele 70-300 (x1.4TC). All WR. The prime is crucial to shoot handheld photos of other photographers or street, to compose before tripod, and for low light (morning, evening, night).
Interested in your take as a the subject of the shoot. Did working with the Zoom lense lead to more flow for you as the photographer had to do less technical work moving around? Curious.
@@evolve2k Honestly there wasn't too much difference between the two but I will admit is did feel a lot more free flowing when posing with the Zoom :)
Coming from a m43 perspective and world I will add that f2.8 zooms are equal to what we needed on m43 at f1.4. I know thats not saying much compared to FF primes but just something to put into perspective about f2.8 and DOF. It's as good as budget primes on APSC or really good primes on m43. We uses to be stuck with primes on m43 because of this reason. It was the only way we could get an equal look to FF f2.8. Now that I moved to Canon RF FF I can get roughly that same look with a f2.8 zoom and I can get the same look of f2.8 m43 zooms as f5.6 on FF. Kind of gives a higher value to zooms on FF when you come from that world. I guess thats why I love the RF 100-400 f5.6 - f8 so much. Sure its dark but in m43 terms its actually not a bad lens at all and because the ISO is much better it really is a sweet lens for me. I have a Tamron 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8. Both G2 models adapted to the R5 and R6. Great lenses but I finds myself never using the 24-70. Not because of DOF or brightness either but because of size and weight. I'm using the more affordable RF 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses which even at f1.8 or f2 are amazing options for me and equal to f1.0 on m43 so they are insanely capable from my perspective. The lower size/weight/cost make them real gems for me. I find in the wider focal lengths a zoom to be much less important. My feet can move faster than a zoom ring for the limited range the lens covers. I have two bodies as well and typically use the 35mm on one and the 85mm on the other. Longer focal lengths is a whole other story and typically for things we just cannot get closer to. Still love the 70-200 f2.8 but I'm even finding that not long enough. A APSC crop helps some on the R5 but I do wish we could get longer and fast options. Thats one of the downsides to FF compared to m43. Lenses capable of a longer reach tend to be massive beasts and cost a ton. I was considering selling my Tamron 24-70 but after watching this video I may give it another chance. I shoot video as well and sometimes it is nice to change up the FOV a bit while recording to not miss anything. It's just I enjoy shooting with the primes so much more. If it was up to me I would only ever use the primes and plan out what I shoot.
For me it comes down to the look. The primes are really really sharp but not in a great way. They are too sharp and with the zoom you get a softer look that looks more “filmic”.
Great photos from both of you. I prefer the look from the primes, but the actual shots (composition) was great all round. You're both very talented guys and the model is lovely and very natural in her posing. Has Carlo added an R6 to his arsenal now, or is that a borrowed R6?
@@CARLO.OBRIEN LOL that's great news and I'm very happy for you. I'm just waiting to see if Canon announces new cameras soon. If they haven't by July, I'm buying an R6 too. I'll keep my RP, as you have done.
I shoot with both and all I can say is that both really work well in that situation as long as you can work with the environment that you're in! Great video Mitch! Makes me wanna go out and shoot too 😅
I like the look of the prime a bit more. It was interesting to see though how much easier or maybe more spontaneous it was for you to shoot with zoom over the prime. I personally use only prime lenses, haven’t learn yet how to frame with zoom and end up overthinking every time and missing the shot 😅
There are actually millimeter markers on a zoom lens. Let's take the Tamron 28-75 mm for example. You have markers at 28, 35, 50 and 75 mm. I use this lens for TV news report video shoots (no time to switch lenses) and just put the zoom onto the markers to get a specific kind of look. If I have to react to the situation immediately (like something unexpected is happening) I just zoom in without looking at the markers though. It's not that hard using zoom lenses. The only downside is the aperture of 2.8. Other than that zoom lenses are good for situations where you dont have time to switch lenses.
@@janeeightfive7331 For me It's not about not knowing how to use the zoom lens, but about having too many options and ending up thinking for too long instead of taking the shot.
I mean for portraits it really don't matter to use prime but try this test out again with some street photography and I'm sure the zoom will shine much more.
@@MitchLally Hmmm, I only got the eye tracking working with single shot mode... I have an A7III. Is there a different setting I could use you think in order to have eye tracking in continuous mode?
90 percent of people do not care about zoom or prime. 95 percent people dont care about bokeh actually have no clue what it is .. 100 percent of people care about feeling and how do they look at picture.
I was part of the 95% until I was shown the difference. It was a eureka moment. Having boka or not in some situations changes the whole perspective of a photograph.
The primes are certainly better for portrait photography where the photographer can adjust position, but zooms are better in situations where there is not that control to record a changing scene.
as for me,24- 70 is more affordable in some conditions but it cannot win primes in sharpness and details . So, My choice is zoom lens as I cannot move on 16mm range.
You sold me. I've only got the 50mm 1.4 as a beginner in photography. And my next lense will for sure be the 35mm 1.4 with the 85mm being on my wishlist. The 24-70mm does delivery, but there is just something about primes that are just magical.
Shooting without a strap is a bit dangerous, I did that before with confidence, but still when my palms got sweaty, I dropped my camera once, and till that day until now i never ever shoot without a strap! that cost me alot to pay for the repairs..great shots guys btw,
I have a nikon z5 and have yet to see someone as good as you put them to excellent use. it is my starter camera and would REALLY love to see you do a photoshoot (maybe as an extra side camera) to see the full potential of them from someone as great as you 🤗
I just wish to know how the colours straight out of camera looks like from primes vs expensive zoom with better glass and elements. I know you are losing aperture with rf 24-70 but what about overal colour and quality of the pictures? Is it worth it to pay more for a zoom ?
Good timing for this great video. I have the R6 and RF24-105 f/4 plus RF 85 f/2. Was considering to change them for RF 24-70 f/2.8 but now think to leave it as is. Would love it if you let me have your thoughts on it.
I just sold my 85 F2 because it is slow as hell and even though it is sharp, it has a pretty busy bokeh and gets beaten by the cheap viltrox 85 1.8 or Yongnuo 85 1.8 and especially the Samyang 85 1.4 in that department. They might not be as sharp corner to corner but for portraits they are the better choice imo.
Did you trade your entire Sony kit for that 24-70? Lol. I've accepted that if I am going to stick with Canon, it's either primes or EF glass for me. It's unreal the cost of RF mount zooms
The primes distortion for film is different then Photography. I would love true side by side comparison of prime vs zoom. See the shortcomings of zoom.
Actually the RF 24-70 is one of the best choices for filming - it is parfocal and has 0 focus breathing (except if you are at the closest focus distance at 24mm) but after 40-50cm it is parfocal and has 0 focus breathing. The distortion is also quite low, at 35mm it even has close to 0. At 70 and 24 it has some low distortion though, but really low. Not low for a zoom, just low.
L Series is Great Here the Quality the Clean contrast excellent... but if we compare with that great lens like L Series... i can can that Prime lens is Still Unbeatable.. Viltrox.. and 35mm Not bad but when u comparing to L lens you can see the big difference..
she is so cute and pretty but in my opinion she looks better with a soft low contrast development. not so contrasted . In my opinion zoom allow for much more different poses and extemporaneity but primes are unbeatable if you use the most luminous lenses: 50 f/1.4 or f/1.2 . a 85 1.8 is not that comparable as it features a higher local length than zoom can. it's complementary. It makes sense compare zoom with 24 35 and 50 in case.
I've noticed if you can tell a background is beautiful but you blur it, people notice the spoiled view. You want separation, but keep the beauty. Otherwise make the background just colors, no mountains or sky etc. Like against solid plants or mountains or clouds. If you can actually make out all the parts just blur it just some. Otherwise its like rubbing dirty motor oil on a famous landscape painting. It's distracting, leaves people wondering, Why?
Because it’s a portrait photoshoot, the background shouldn’t be the focus of the photo. But if I’m shooting wide I do care about what colours and shapes that are in the background, as well as the contrast between subject and background regardless of how focused it is. This is precisely why so many photos I see online lack impact - they try to show too much rather than attract the viewers eye to a certain point in the frame.
@@MitchLally Videos and movies seem to get away with a portrait look, but a not too blurred nice landscape background. Maybe because of movement. It’s still tricky not to make a messy background. And it’s not always evident using a small screen outdoors. Some people use high nit monitors or or regular in shade, nearby and tethered. For the shoot in the video was it all just natural ambient light?
![FNAF vs TF2 - Episode 2 [SFM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z5b3V2-VLb0/mqdefault.jpg)
This is why I own all three lenses (24-70, 35 and 85) and they're the only lenses I own. I use 24-70 when I need to get the shot and when I need to get through a shoot quickly. I use the 35 and 85 combo when I have time to move around and get creative and pose my subjects.
@@FMJP I've owned a 70-200 in the past. I've found I just never need that amount of reach. It's also intimidating to your subjects when you are shooting them with a giant white lens. 85 1.2 is the best lens I've ever used and suits my needs.
Have you ever thought about getting a second body, so yo can use both primes quickly? I also own the same lenses but also a 24mm 1.4. Was thinking to sell the Zoom to finance a second body.
@@JohnCarryOn - For the cost of the 28-70 (2600ish) you could get an R8 body, RF 35mm/1.8 and 85mm/2! I've definitely thought about doing this.
Primes are more for my personal gratification of knowing I get just a little bit more background separation, a little bit cleaner image in low light situations and a little bit sharper image.
But when it comes down to it, a Zoom lens is super great for wedding and other types of event photography where you need to deliver a variety of pictures and you can't stop the action from happening.
Even having 2 cameras with 2 Primes is slower than having 1 camera with a Zoom.
By far I use my Primes more. And all the pictures both of you took in this video are gorgeous.
Agreed! Thanks for the comment!! ❤️
is there a prime lens that i don’t have to stand so far away to get a full body shot ?
What is the difference in sharpness when comparing prime to a telephoto? Would most people even notice a change in quality
@@steven4217 I believe you will only notice the difference when you zoom in on your picture or if you crop your picture more than just a little bit.
Modern day zoom vs modern day prime.
Primes also usually have smoothet bokeh, less chromatic abberations and more as they can be simpler designs.
But it's doubtful anyone besides photographers will notice this.
I've actually never owned a 24-70mm. I have a 24-105mm for casual photography but most of the time for professional work I'm using my 35mm f1.4, 85mm f1.4, RF 70-200mm f2.8 or occasionally a wide angle f4 zoom (the wide angle moreso for real-estate work).
The 35mm and 85mm primes are by far my favourite focal lengths and I love the results you can get. I recently helped second-shoot a wedding video and shot at 85mm f1.4 for the photos etc between ceremony and reception and the results were absolutely incredible. So dreamy!
Through my 30 year career I used to switch between the two. A few years with Zooms and then felt I need to be more creative with dreamy backgrounds and beautiful rendering with better low light performance. Then I would go to prime for a few years but was yearning convenience. Primes are way better so long as you are not lazy.
I love the look of the prime lenses, but the convenience of the ZOOM. That is why by go to lens for most of my client work is the RF 28-70mm, but I always bring along my RF 85 1.2 for the end of the shoot to get some of those incredible prime lens shots when I have a little extra time at the end of a shoot.
28-70 is awesome!!
Every photo in the vid is great! I use the RF35 1.8 and RF85 2.0 mainly cause the stabilization and I can cover all grounds at a wedding. In my opinion having primes has helped me keep a consistent look in my photos!
An interesting feature of the Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom, specifically, is the 20cm minimum focus distance. The EF 24-70 f2.8 II and RF 28-70 f/2 are both around 40cm and the typical 85mm prime is around 80-85cm.
I like both. It's still up to the photographer for the creative aspect.
I find it better to use primes not only for their shallower depth of field, but on how they force you to get more creative with each shot. A zoom for me personally is very versatile. Something I’d have in my bag if I’m traveling somewhere new across the world. For portraits tho. I find this lens to be a bit lazy at times for portraits or weddings.
There are many other factors. The Canon RF35 1.8 & RF85 2.0 both only have a slow STM motor and no weather protection. I had both lenses and both were really good for the money. I would still prefer the RF24-70 2.8 L precisely because it has a Nano USM and weather protection. Since I don't need the best bokeh for my style, f/2.8 or even f/4 would not be a problem. I only use my RF24-105 4.0 L / RF70-200 4.0 L / RF100 2.8 L and am very happy with it.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
Too bad Canon didn’t weather seal those primes and bump the price 50 or 100 bucks!!!
Another video from the dream team! The 24-70 is a beast with a price tag to suit and it really comes down to the type of photography you shoot. for events or weddings the zoom is a no brainer but the primes are a great way for a hobbyist (like me) to get shallow depth of field on a budget.
Thanks Tom!
to me it's more of a debate between two questions: shallow depth of field of a prime or the convenience/creativity of a zoom? compactness of a single prime or compactness of a single zoom compared to multiple primes? the ISO difference is negligible to me since even on my Fujifilm, ISO12800 is more than usable for uncropped images on social media.
Just got that 24-70. Best purchase I’ve made in a while. Gonna review it soon too!
honest answer, for portraits I do prefer the Prime, for anything else I will take a zoom. However on the couple of shots you gave us as comparisons, the zoom shots were nicer, only because your shots had better angles, the prime shots had angles that kept placing the horizon directly behind the model's head or somewhere that it did not look all that great as you have a very dark foreground and light sky. So the nod goes to you more than the lens...... just my 2cents...
Actually both. Always a luminous prime in my bag, at best on a spare gear, eg Fuji 33mm f1.4 (50mm eq), plus 2 zooms, wide 10-24 & tele 70-300 (x1.4TC). All WR.
The prime is crucial to shoot handheld photos of other photographers or street, to compose before tripod, and for low light (morning, evening, night).
This comparison depends on what type of photography, event photographers will choose 24-70mm in other to get fast shots even in tight angles
Such a fun shoot ! thank you for having me :) lessgoooo
Interested in your take as a the subject of the shoot. Did working with the Zoom lense lead to more flow for you as the photographer had to do less technical work moving around? Curious.
@@evolve2k Honestly there wasn't too much difference between the two but I will admit is did feel a lot more free flowing when posing with the Zoom :)
Coming from a m43 perspective and world I will add that f2.8 zooms are equal to what we needed on m43 at f1.4. I know thats not saying much compared to FF primes but just something to put into perspective about f2.8 and DOF. It's as good as budget primes on APSC or really good primes on m43. We uses to be stuck with primes on m43 because of this reason. It was the only way we could get an equal look to FF f2.8.
Now that I moved to Canon RF FF I can get roughly that same look with a f2.8 zoom and I can get the same look of f2.8 m43 zooms as f5.6 on FF. Kind of gives a higher value to zooms on FF when you come from that world. I guess thats why I love the RF 100-400 f5.6 - f8 so much. Sure its dark but in m43 terms its actually not a bad lens at all and because the ISO is much better it really is a sweet lens for me.
I have a Tamron 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8. Both G2 models adapted to the R5 and R6. Great lenses but I finds myself never using the 24-70. Not because of DOF or brightness either but because of size and weight. I'm using the more affordable RF 24mm, 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses which even at f1.8 or f2 are amazing options for me and equal to f1.0 on m43 so they are insanely capable from my perspective. The lower size/weight/cost make them real gems for me. I find in the wider focal lengths a zoom to be much less important. My feet can move faster than a zoom ring for the limited range the lens covers. I have two bodies as well and typically use the 35mm on one and the 85mm on the other.
Longer focal lengths is a whole other story and typically for things we just cannot get closer to. Still love the 70-200 f2.8 but I'm even finding that not long enough. A APSC crop helps some on the R5 but I do wish we could get longer and fast options. Thats one of the downsides to FF compared to m43. Lenses capable of a longer reach tend to be massive beasts and cost a ton.
I was considering selling my Tamron 24-70 but after watching this video I may give it another chance. I shoot video as well and sometimes it is nice to change up the FOV a bit while recording to not miss anything. It's just I enjoy shooting with the primes so much more. If it was up to me I would only ever use the primes and plan out what I shoot.
For me it comes down to the look. The primes are really really sharp but not in a great way. They are too sharp and with the zoom you get a softer look that looks more “filmic”.
This comparison really help me decide what is best for me. Thank you guys!
I really enjoy your video Mitch! Instead of watching Netflix, I watch Mitch's video as binge show 👍🏼😇
Thanks Muhammad! 🙏🏼 legend
Great photos from both of you. I prefer the look from the primes, but the actual shots (composition) was great all round. You're both very talented guys and the model is lovely and very natural in her posing.
Has Carlo added an R6 to his arsenal now, or is that a borrowed R6?
He got an R6!!
The R6 has been added the wallet has lost weight.
@@CARLO.OBRIEN LOL that's great news and I'm very happy for you. I'm just waiting to see if Canon announces new cameras soon. If they haven't by July, I'm buying an R6 too. I'll keep my RP, as you have done.
@@cooloox the RP is still great!!!
I shoot with both and all I can say is that both really work well in that situation as long as you can work with the environment that you're in! Great video Mitch! Makes me wanna go out and shoot too 😅
Love your content brother. Question which 85mm f1.8 is Carlo using ? Thanks
I like the look of the prime a bit more. It was interesting to see though how much easier or maybe more spontaneous it was for you to shoot with zoom over the prime.
I personally use only prime lenses, haven’t learn yet how to frame with zoom and end up overthinking every time and missing the shot 😅
There are actually millimeter markers on a zoom lens. Let's take the Tamron 28-75 mm for example. You have markers at 28, 35, 50 and 75 mm. I use this lens for TV news report video shoots (no time to switch lenses) and just put the zoom onto the markers to get a specific kind of look. If I have to react to the situation immediately (like something unexpected is happening) I just zoom in without looking at the markers though. It's not that hard using zoom lenses. The only downside is the aperture of 2.8. Other than that zoom lenses are good for situations where you dont have time to switch lenses.
@@janeeightfive7331 For me It's not about not knowing how to use the zoom lens, but about having too many options and ending up thinking for too long instead of taking the shot.
I mean for portraits it really don't matter to use prime but try this test out again with some street photography and I'm sure the zoom will shine much more.
Awesome photos guys! Do you feel the difference between 1.8 and 2.8 in your images when using the zoom lens Mitch?
Yeah I honestly do. 2.8 doesnt have the same dreamy feel as 1.4 or 1.8 jah feel
the music of your videos is very relaxing .. it is a great satisfaction to listen and see your videos.
There’s something really magical about prime photos
I prefer the look of primes but it seems like if I want to get into weddings, a zoom is a must. Would you recommend buying used?
Nice. I use and prefer primes but some of those fast RF zooms are excellent. They just cost a small fortune.
Nice video! Appreciate the comparison. Mitch, did you shoot in single shot mode or continuous mode?
Continuous with eye tracking :)
@@MitchLally Hmmm, I only got the eye tracking working with single shot mode... I have an A7III. Is there a different setting I could use you think in order to have eye tracking in continuous mode?
I prefer the primes!!! Got 30mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8 usm and 22mm f2.0 for my ef-m
90 percent of people do not care about zoom or prime. 95 percent people dont care about bokeh actually have no clue what it is .. 100 percent of people care about feeling and how do they look at picture.
Amen! Haha i still use 2 primes during the weddings day but 90% of the time, 24-70 🤣
So might as well just go for more convenient option
I was part of the 95% until I was shown the difference. It was a eureka moment. Having boka or not in some situations changes the whole perspective of a photograph.
The primes are certainly better for portrait photography where the photographer can adjust position, but zooms are better in situations where there is not that control to record a changing scene.
as for me,24- 70 is more affordable in some conditions but it cannot win primes in sharpness and details . So, My choice is zoom lens as I cannot move on 16mm range.
You sold me. I've only got the 50mm 1.4 as a beginner in photography. And my next lense will for sure be the 35mm 1.4 with the 85mm being on my wishlist. The 24-70mm does delivery, but there is just something about primes that are just magical.
The price? 😏
love to see yall back shooting vids again! The photos look super clean. Also what bag is carlo using??
I have no clue haha
Shooting without a strap is a bit dangerous, I did that before with confidence, but still when my palms got sweaty, I dropped my camera once, and till that day until now i never ever shoot without a strap! that cost me alot to pay for the repairs..great shots guys btw,
Do you still have your Sony A7iv for some ready I have more fun using the canon r6 great work.
Can vouch for the Viltrox 85mm Carlo is using. Have the mk2 variant and it's a beast, for the money they're unreal
All lenses !!!! Good job guys and thanks a lot
are you using 1 AF method or your changing them as well, noob question.
Both r amazing depends on photographers but i love prime work
Really good comparison between prime and zoom lenses.
Thanks Chester!
I have a nikon z5 and have yet to see someone as good as you put them to excellent use. it is my starter camera and would REALLY love to see you do a photoshoot (maybe as an extra side camera) to see the full potential of them from someone as great as you 🤗
Just bought a cheap Canon RP next to my Sony A7IV - love the weight and small size to travel.
2:36 are you shooting HDR? Camera shoots more than one exposition automatically
I just wish to know how the colours straight out of camera looks like from primes vs expensive zoom with better glass and elements. I know you are losing aperture with rf 24-70 but what about overal colour and quality of the pictures? Is it worth it to pay more for a zoom ?
Sounds like you’re getting into the weeds a bit mate. Just worry about what’s in front of the camera.
@@MitchLally thanks for help …
Thanks for having us my bro! 85mm hits!!!!
Thanks for making it with me mate 🙌🏼
Hi Mitch, what filter is this one? I can't seem to get the colors when I'm using your preset packs. Thank you! Using Fuji Raw images.
This video was great; gave a lot of good insights to what lens I should purchase next.
@MitchLally I’ve received your personal award winning message in my inbox but cannot find a way to personally text you. Please reply !
Good timing for this great video. I have the R6 and RF24-105 f/4 plus RF 85 f/2. Was considering to change them for RF 24-70 f/2.8 but now think to leave it as is. Would love it if you let me have your thoughts on it.
I just sold my 85 F2 because it is slow as hell and even though it is sharp, it has a pretty busy bokeh and gets beaten by the cheap viltrox 85 1.8 or Yongnuo 85 1.8 and especially the Samyang 85 1.4 in that department. They might not be as sharp corner to corner but for portraits they are the better choice imo.
Three of the best
Ayyy! Miss ya bro! Link soon
Did you trade your entire Sony kit for that 24-70? Lol. I've accepted that if I am going to stick with Canon, it's either primes or EF glass for me. It's unreal the cost of RF mount zooms
Nope - I borrowed it from a friend :)
Which of your presets were these photos edited with? Thanks!
For this reason i use 28-70 f2 (4primes in one body)
Good choice you must have big biceps
I'm soon to switch over to the zoom lenses with lower apertures.
The primes distortion for film is different then Photography. I would love true side by side comparison of prime vs zoom. See the shortcomings of zoom.
Actually the RF 24-70 is one of the best choices for filming - it is parfocal and has 0 focus breathing (except if you are at the closest focus distance at 24mm) but after 40-50cm it is parfocal and has 0 focus breathing. The distortion is also quite low, at 35mm it even has close to 0. At 70 and 24 it has some low distortion though, but really low. Not low for a zoom, just low.
didnt you sell the 24-70 ? :)
This is just a loan lens :)
Prime for indoor or low light and bokeh.
L Series is Great Here the Quality the Clean contrast excellent... but if we compare with that great lens like L Series... i can can that Prime lens is Still Unbeatable.. Viltrox.. and 35mm Not bad but when u comparing to L lens you can see the big difference..
I prefer the look of prime lenses any day of the week.
2470 has it’s advantages but primes are primes, that’s the only way i can say it 😂
There is nothing like an 85mm prime, but having said that my new 24-70 is Amazing!!!!!
Great vid mate! 🤙
Thanks moite!
Is the 85mm f2? Cus I don’t see an 1.8 for sale for rf
This one was discontinued some time ago as Canon sent them a cease and desist letter
Both lenses work well
Thank you for an interesting video.
The biggest problem with zooms is they make you lazy and may actually downgrade your photography
Lesson learnt from this video: Use f2.8 to shoot first before using prime when dusk.
she is so cute and pretty but in my opinion she looks better with a soft low contrast development. not so contrasted . In my opinion zoom allow for much more different poses and extemporaneity but primes are unbeatable if you use the most luminous lenses: 50 f/1.4 or f/1.2 . a 85 1.8 is not that comparable as it features a higher local length than zoom can. it's complementary.
It makes sense compare zoom with 24 35 and 50 in case.
the pictures of both cameras should be taken at same timeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee. You had 2 cameras broooo
Am I deaf or did I just hear Carlo say that the 85 is his favorite right now (I’m in the same boat)
Nah bro you heard it! Haha 85 baby
primes win it for me , always.
🥰
Of course to each their own, but the primes are just better. 🤷🏼♂️
I liked the prime lens better.
Love em both!
Primes, but I preferred Carlo's vision. Sorry!
Keep the stats up a little bit longer my guy.
honestly I would prefer walking some extra steps rather than spending 3x on a lens
I bought the xf16-55, xf351.4, xf561.2, and an XT3 for less than the price of the rf24-70. Canon is a crime😂
Can I email you some portrait shots and see what you like and dont like in terms of a professional standpoint? Thanks!
Join the discord
@@MitchLally do you mind sending me an invite link? The one in the community post expired:/
all i heard just some burst of the camera🤣
35 NEVER FAILS
Primes all the way. 24-70 is not even closer.
RP GANG!
As a beginner it's like everyone is talking gibberish in the comments OMG
We’ve all been there 😂🙏🏼
I own a 24-70and always prefer two cam primes. The 24-70 is so boring lens.
Mitch uses a zoom lens and ends up shooting everything within 4 mm of 28 mm🤪
Primes for sure but only marginally. Both photographs rocked it, great pics all round!
24 -70 2.8 to 24 1.8 and 85 1.8 lol lol lol if u wanna compare to prime compare to1.4 or 1.2 the same level like 2.8 . 24-70 4 it's compare to 1.8
👌👍
I have a set of primes and a set of zooms.
The end.
(Of my bank balance)
This guy would go broke if shoots film lmao
Ur keeping raw pics are not 😅
One Big Factor is shooting by night where you have high advantage of a Prime. keep going nice video
I've noticed if you can tell a background is beautiful but you blur it, people notice the spoiled view. You want separation, but keep the beauty. Otherwise make the background just colors, no mountains or sky etc. Like against solid plants or mountains or clouds. If you can actually make out all the parts just blur it just some. Otherwise its like rubbing dirty motor oil on a famous landscape painting. It's distracting, leaves people wondering, Why?
Because it’s a portrait photoshoot, the background shouldn’t be the focus of the photo. But if I’m shooting wide I do care about what colours and shapes that are in the background, as well as the contrast between subject and background regardless of how focused it is. This is precisely why so many photos I see online lack impact - they try to show too much rather than attract the viewers eye to a certain point in the frame.
@@MitchLally Videos and movies seem to get away with a portrait look, but a not too blurred nice landscape background. Maybe because of movement. It’s still tricky not to make a messy background. And it’s not always evident using a small screen outdoors. Some people use high nit monitors or or regular in shade, nearby and tethered. For the shoot in the video was it all just natural ambient light?
prime is a marketing term, please use real name of the lenses. comparing without naming is confusing
No it isn’t lol - it’s what you call a fixed focal length lens. Nothing to do with marketing mate.
@@MitchLally okay np
Какая же плохая у вас обработка фотографий. В России так даже новички не работают. Кому нравится такой цвет кожи?
Where is russia? In hell ?
@@Tomek1Oko man, if you think that everything is so bad with us, then you watch too much TV
Reuplaud ???
Nop