I find your rating system very odd. You shoot a specific genre of photography. So any lens that doesn’t fit in your workflow or isn’t a focal length you prefer you give it a lower rating.
Using the focus limiter switch on the 85F2 greatly increases the autofocus speed. Because it’s a macro lens also, having it set to ‘Full’ causes it to focus much slower as it goes through the entire range. I keep it in the middle for weddings/portraits/etc and switch it if I need to do something extremely close up.
I would also add I spent six weeks with an RF 70-200mm f2.8L and RF 70-200mm f4L and frankly unless your pixel peeping the two lenses are virtually identical in picture quality. Yes for wedding photographers, events & sports the extra stop is super important but for landscape, portraits, animals etc the f4L lens weight saving and size make it a winner.
Yes I would go or for the 70-200mm f4 in combination with a fast prime or skip the 70-200 & would get the stellar 100-500mm!… also the 70-200 f4 is so tiny & light weight that it is a nobrainer for travel shooting
I really struggled with your lens ratings and in fact totally disagree with some of the choices. Let’s start with the RF 24-70mm f2.8L “B” I think is truly doing this lens a disservice. Yes it’s not as good as the RF 28-70mm f2L but then it’s a £ 1,000 cheaper. For me this is a solid workhorse and I would rate it “A”. The RF 100-400mm is one fifth of the price of the RF 100-500mm whilst I think the “B’ rating is fair I think your comments on its build quality are unfair. You also didn’t mention this lens has a nano USM motor and a control ring which makes the price it’s sells for the best bargain in the RF lineup. I have the RF 50mm f1.8 and would agree it deserves the “D” rating. I also have the RF 50mm f1.2L and for portraits it’s a killer lens and one I would advise any portrait photographer to buy. I tested the RF 85mm f2.0 macro and it’s an awful lens, a real loud STM motor, poor focus lock on the R6 & R6 MKII. The RF 85mm f1.2L I extensively tested against the EF 85mm f1.4L IS USM. No question the RF 85mm f1.2L is a stellar lens with great bokeh but the differences to the EF 85mm f1.4L were so tiny I could not justify dropping nearly £ 3K. I’ve not used the RF 35mm f1.8 lens Im hoping in 2024 Canon release the RF 35mm f1.4 / f1.2L lens but placing the RF 35mm f1.8 above the RF 24-70mm f2.8L based on what I’ve seen of the RF 35mm f1.8 results is a nuts decision. For 45 years I worked in the motion picture and professional still camera & lighting rental market and have tested hundreds of lenses. That sometimes included non professional level equipment that was regularly requested mainly lenses. I rarely saw lenses that didn’t hold up well such is the build quality we see today and their past metal counter-parts. Drop a RF 100-500 from just waist height and it’s the luck of the draw whether it’s damaged or not and the same applies to a RF 100-400. Once on Dartmoor I slipped and fell on wet ground catching an EF 100-400mm f4-5.6L MKII on a piece of granite. It damaged the hood but the lens was fine. In Snowdonia the same lens glanced against a boulder climbing down a path and cracked the focus barrel. My point being all equipment will break if subjected to the right forces those buying a RF 100-400mm should not worry about its longevity.
100% agree. 100-500 L is a little bit sharper but you still get "professional quality" images with 100-400 without doubt. Lighter build is often regarded as "cheaper feeling" but for long days and hiking with camera it's much nicer than heavier "premium feel". Only problem with the lens is it doesn't have weather sealing. I have never dared to try how does it handle the rain, but if you have lens hood and a rain cover you can still use it at almost any weather, provided you don't shoot directly upwards. It's a lens that can be used professionally (just as any lens CAN be used professionally) and since you can buy multiple of them with the price of L series lens, tears are a bit smaller if you happen to drop it from mountain instead of the 100-500 L 😅
Definitely going to be one of my next lens reviews, I think it's an incredibly underrated lens, probably one of the best all in one lenses you can buy. Just need to review it first before I can give my full opinion
You're right, the 100mm for a Portrait is very underrated, I've used it a few times before and the images are just so sharp. Still on the fence about upgrading to the RF 100mm version as the EF version is just so good value for money. Definitely want to get my hands on both the 50 and 85mm lenses this year, especially the 85mm 1.2 and 85 1.2 DS.
The old EF100 f2 is an amazing lens for portraits if you have the room. It is so sharp. If you are setting up lighting it is beautiful and the price is so low now. My fave now is the RF28-70 f2. I have a lot of primes but this lens has relegated them to the cabinet. For events you can’t go wrong. It could only be better if it was 28-85!
Also the 24-105 f4 is missing! I think it is also super underrated at its Price Point! My go to Combination of lenses as a full time professional is 24-105mm f4, 50mm f1.2 & 85mm f1.2 DS! My father who is also a photographer has the 24-70mm f2.8 sometime I borrow it for certain Jobs, but in regard of Focus, Contrast & Sharpness the 24-105 f4 is performing so well, adding 35mm of reach at the long end paying with one stop of light in exchange… it also really Compact and light weigthed compared to the newer 24-105 f2.8…
I honestly used to shoot on 24-70mm 2.8 all the time and while it’s great it just keeps me lazy/boring in a way. I just pick up a 15-35mm 2.8mm and it’s just different! In a creative way. The 50mm 1.2 or 85mm 1.2 is next🤟🏾
I agree with you, 24-70mm 2.8 is a great lens but can definitely make me more of a lazy photographer. Which is why I always gravitate towards prime lenses. I can't wait to review the 85mm 1.2. Need to get my hands on it soon!
Thanks for the video, I still use the ef18-55 Kitt lens because I us it not that often and hope for a cheeper sigma lens, I have the 35 and 85 f2 what I love and hope for a cheeper sigma 50 1.4 as the canon 50 1.2 what is for sure a great lens but expensive. I have also the new 200-800 would like to hear what you say about this lens, and I have also the 24-105 f4 is a workhorse but I like it, and the old er 70-300 I think it’s doing the job most of the time
Thanks for this video rating. I start in Canon Rf. And I own the 35mm. Very good lens as you explained. Now I'm waiting for Sigma lenses.😂 Cross fingers! If not I would certainly go for the 70-200 f4, and the 24-105 f4. Wait and see.
I can't wait for canon to finally release their Mount to third-party brands, I currently own a lot of EF Sigma lenses, and think they are great. I would definitely pre-order RF Sigma 35mm 1.4 straightaway, what lens you would buy first if canon release their Mount to third-party brands?
@@PhotoFeaver if dream comes true, I would buy first Sigma 24 70 f2.8 for travel and versatility. Rumors are saying that Sigma will go out RF lenses on february... but there are only rumors and hope too.
@@stephanecalleri4692that was wishful thinking Im afraid :( Now it rather seems like Sigma is staying away from RF due to how Canon deals with external partners. Im actually planning to go all Sony even though I like Canon more but the limitations of lenses due to Canons greed is just ridiculous
I’m confused : your personal bias vs. your EF glass you have and use has nothing to do with how good the lens is. Example: you gave the RF 100 macro 2.8 a glowing individual review but dumped it in the ratings in this video because you have the EF version and like it. Who really cares ? People just want to know how good the lens is. That’s a pretty weird personal filter you inserted there. I do like your videos, and I’m glad you like your EF lens. But who cares ?😊
Funny you said this! I recently purchased the RF100mm based in part on his review (with many others) and then I see this video. I fully expected him to rank the 100mm in S tier but no! To be fair, maybe that EF 100mm was such a superb lens it makes it hard to rate the RF at the top. But for someone like me who never owned the EF version, I couldn’t care less how good it was. You might as well tell me the RF rates low because the 1980 FD version was amazing.
Hello. I agree with you on the 50mm. I’ve been shooting for over 40 years and the 50mm is one that i almost never carry with me. It’s just not my focal length. I’m curious to know why you rated the 28-70 as an S if it has such a similar focal length as the 24-70 and as you said is not wide enough or long enough. Is it because the f2.8? I owned the 100-400 which I later upgraded to the superb 100-500. I agree with your rating of the 100-400 and yes, for someone starting in wildlife, it would be the ideal lens. Since I’m shooting now with R5, I’m still waiting for that 35mm f1.4 (I’m sure it will be an L series) or for canon to open the flood gates and let sigma start producing some Art series primes, hopefully a 35mm. Thank you for an awesome video a rating.
Thanks for your comments, I found when shooting with the 28-70, it felt like I was shooting on a prime lens. The look and quality is so exceptional for a zoom lens. Genuinely changed my mind on zoom lenses in general. I'm not a fan of Standard zoom lenses like the 24-70, but this lens was just something special. its like a zoomable prime, if that makes sense LOL
It's a great for many people, I've just never really enjoyed photographing or filming with a 24-70mm. I might need some convincing to chance from B tier
its 24-105mm but yes totally agree! me as a fulltime professional am using the 24-105mm f4 in combination of my 85mm 1.2 DS and its fire! 🔥 the 24-105 f4 is super cheap for what it is delivering, it is compact, light weight and razor-sharp!
Like you I don't really like the 50mm rather have a 35 or 85, have the 100-500 great lens but just tried the new 200-800 and way better you lose the macro on the other one but gain 200mm more and at 600mm you are at 6.3 not 7.1, did borrow an 85 1.2 and wow the bokeh is insane (droll).
![Noob To Max With DRAGON REWORK In Blox Fruits [FULL MOVIE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LnBMOinoOvA/mqdefault.jpg)
I find your rating system very odd. You shoot a specific genre of photography. So any lens that doesn’t fit in your workflow or isn’t a focal length you prefer you give it a lower rating.
Using the focus limiter switch on the 85F2 greatly increases the autofocus speed. Because it’s a macro lens also, having it set to ‘Full’ causes it to focus much slower as it goes through the entire range. I keep it in the middle for weddings/portraits/etc and switch it if I need to do something extremely close up.
I would also add I spent six weeks with an RF 70-200mm f2.8L and RF 70-200mm f4L and frankly unless your pixel peeping the two lenses are virtually identical in picture quality.
Yes for wedding photographers, events & sports the extra stop is super important but for landscape, portraits, animals etc the f4L lens weight saving and size make it a winner.
Yes I would go or for the 70-200mm f4 in combination with a fast prime or skip the 70-200 & would get the stellar 100-500mm!… also the 70-200 f4 is so tiny & light weight that it is a nobrainer for travel shooting
I really struggled with your lens ratings and in fact totally disagree with some of the choices.
Let’s start with the RF 24-70mm f2.8L “B” I think is truly doing this lens a disservice. Yes it’s not as good as the RF 28-70mm f2L but then it’s a £ 1,000 cheaper. For me this is a solid workhorse and I would rate it “A”.
The RF 100-400mm is one fifth of the price of the RF 100-500mm whilst I think the “B’ rating is fair I think your comments on its build quality are unfair. You also didn’t mention this lens has a nano USM motor and a control ring which makes the price it’s sells for the best bargain in the RF lineup.
I have the RF 50mm f1.8 and would agree it deserves the “D” rating. I also have the RF 50mm f1.2L and for portraits it’s a killer lens and one I would advise any portrait photographer to buy.
I tested the RF 85mm f2.0 macro and it’s an awful lens, a real loud STM motor, poor focus lock on the R6 & R6 MKII. The RF 85mm f1.2L I extensively tested against the EF 85mm f1.4L IS USM. No question the RF 85mm f1.2L is a stellar lens with great bokeh but the differences to the EF 85mm f1.4L were so tiny I could not justify dropping nearly £ 3K.
I’ve not used the RF 35mm f1.8 lens Im hoping in 2024 Canon release the RF 35mm f1.4 / f1.2L lens but placing the RF 35mm f1.8 above the RF 24-70mm f2.8L based on what I’ve seen of the RF 35mm f1.8 results is a nuts decision.
For 45 years I worked in the motion picture and professional still camera & lighting rental market and have tested hundreds of lenses. That sometimes included non professional level equipment that was regularly requested mainly lenses. I rarely saw lenses that didn’t hold up well such is the build quality we see today and their past metal counter-parts. Drop a RF 100-500 from just waist height and it’s the luck of the draw whether it’s damaged or not and the same applies to a RF 100-400. Once on Dartmoor I slipped and fell on wet ground catching an EF 100-400mm f4-5.6L MKII on a piece of granite. It damaged the hood but the lens was fine. In Snowdonia the same lens glanced against a boulder climbing down a path and cracked the focus barrel. My point being all equipment will break if subjected to the right forces those buying a RF 100-400mm should not worry about its longevity.
100% agree. 100-500 L is a little bit sharper but you still get "professional quality" images with 100-400 without doubt.
Lighter build is often regarded as "cheaper feeling" but for long days and hiking with camera it's much nicer than heavier "premium feel".
Only problem with the lens is it doesn't have weather sealing. I have never dared to try how does it handle the rain, but if you have lens hood and a rain cover you can still use it at almost any weather, provided you don't shoot directly upwards.
It's a lens that can be used professionally (just as any lens CAN be used professionally) and since you can buy multiple of them with the price of L series lens, tears are a bit smaller if you happen to drop it from mountain instead of the 100-500 L 😅
Great vid!! Would you recommend paring the 35mm on a R50? mainly for portraits and group photos? TIA
How woukd you rank the 24-104 f4, im considering that lens
Definitely going to be one of my next lens reviews, I think it's an incredibly underrated lens, probably one of the best all in one lenses you can buy. Just need to review it first before I can give my full opinion
No RF lens list is complete without the 85mm 1.2 and 50mm 1.2 . I believe to 100mm 3.8 as portrait lens is underrated
You're right, the 100mm for a Portrait is very underrated, I've used it a few times before and the images are just so sharp. Still on the fence about upgrading to the RF 100mm version as the EF version is just so good value for money. Definitely want to get my hands on both the 50 and 85mm lenses this year, especially the 85mm 1.2 and 85 1.2 DS.
He has no money for rf 85 1.2
The old EF100 f2 is an amazing lens for portraits if you have the room. It is so sharp. If you are setting up lighting it is beautiful and the price is so low now. My fave now is the RF28-70 f2. I have a lot of primes but this lens has relegated them to the cabinet. For events you can’t go wrong. It could only be better if it was 28-85!
Also the 24-105 f4 is missing! I think it is also super underrated at its Price Point! My go to Combination of lenses as a full time professional is 24-105mm f4, 50mm f1.2 & 85mm f1.2 DS! My father who is also a photographer has the 24-70mm f2.8 sometime I borrow it for certain Jobs, but in regard of Focus, Contrast & Sharpness the 24-105 f4 is performing so well, adding 35mm of reach at the long end paying with one stop of light in exchange… it also really Compact and light weigthed compared to the newer 24-105 f2.8…
Waiting on the RF 70-200 F2 L IS USM Z with internal zoom.
I honestly used to shoot on 24-70mm 2.8 all the time and while it’s great it just keeps me lazy/boring in a way. I just pick up a 15-35mm 2.8mm and it’s just different! In a creative way. The 50mm 1.2 or 85mm 1.2 is next🤟🏾
I agree with you, 24-70mm 2.8 is a great lens but can definitely make me more of a lazy photographer. Which is why I always gravitate towards prime lenses. I can't wait to review the 85mm 1.2. Need to get my hands on it soon!
Hi! I would love to see your review of canon rf 200-800mm
Coming soon!
How scharp is the rf35 f1.8 on a scale 1 to 10?
And what about the sigma 35mm art?
Thx!
Thanks for the video, I still use the ef18-55 Kitt lens because I us it not that often and hope for a cheeper sigma lens, I have the 35 and 85 f2 what I love and hope for a cheeper sigma 50 1.4 as the canon 50 1.2 what is for sure a great lens but expensive. I have also the new 200-800 would like to hear what you say about this lens, and I have also the 24-105 f4 is a workhorse but I like it, and the old er 70-300 I think it’s doing the job most of the time
Thanks for this video rating. I start in Canon Rf. And I own the 35mm. Very good lens as you explained. Now I'm waiting for Sigma lenses.😂 Cross fingers! If not I would certainly go for the 70-200 f4, and the 24-105 f4. Wait and see.
I can't wait for canon to finally release their Mount to third-party brands, I currently own a lot of EF Sigma lenses, and think they are great. I would definitely pre-order RF Sigma 35mm 1.4 straightaway, what lens you would buy first if canon release their Mount to third-party brands?
@@PhotoFeaver if dream comes true, I would buy first Sigma 24 70 f2.8 for travel and versatility. Rumors are saying that Sigma will go out RF lenses on february... but there are only rumors and hope too.
@@stephanecalleri4692that was wishful thinking Im afraid :( Now it rather seems like Sigma is staying away from RF due to how Canon deals with external partners. Im actually planning to go all Sony even though I like Canon more but the limitations of lenses due to Canons greed is just ridiculous
I’m confused : your personal bias vs. your EF glass you have and use has nothing to do with how good the lens is. Example: you gave the RF 100 macro 2.8 a glowing individual review but dumped it in the ratings in this video because you have the EF version and like it. Who really cares ? People just want to know how good the lens is. That’s a pretty weird personal filter you inserted there. I do like your videos, and I’m glad you like your EF lens. But who cares ?😊
Funny you said this! I recently purchased the RF100mm based in part on his review (with many others) and then I see this video. I fully expected him to rank the 100mm in S tier but no! To be fair, maybe that EF 100mm was such a superb lens it makes it hard to rate the RF at the top. But for someone like me who never owned the EF version, I couldn’t care less how good it was. You might as well tell me the RF rates low because the 1980 FD version was amazing.
Hello. I agree with you on the 50mm. I’ve been shooting for over 40 years and the 50mm is one that i almost never carry with me. It’s just not my focal length. I’m curious to know why you rated the 28-70 as an S if it has such a similar focal length as the 24-70 and as you said is not wide enough or long enough. Is it because the f2.8? I owned the 100-400 which I later upgraded to the superb 100-500. I agree with your rating of the 100-400 and yes, for someone starting in wildlife, it would be the ideal lens. Since I’m shooting now with R5, I’m still waiting for that 35mm f1.4 (I’m sure it will be an L series) or for canon to open the flood gates and let sigma start producing some Art series primes, hopefully a 35mm. Thank you for an awesome video a rating.
Thanks for your comments, I found when shooting with the 28-70, it felt like I was shooting on a prime lens. The look and quality is so exceptional for a zoom lens. Genuinely changed my mind on zoom lenses in general. I'm not a fan of Standard zoom lenses like the 24-70, but this lens was just something special. its like a zoomable prime, if that makes sense LOL
The 50mm 1.8 has terrible chromatic aberration issues that aren’t present in the 1.2 and the focus is a little strange how it behaves.
For saying you’re a prime shooter, odd you didn’t have the 50 1.2 and 85 1.2.
24-70, b tier! we'll be having words 😂
It's a great for many people, I've just never really enjoyed photographing or filming with a 24-70mm. I might need some convincing to chance from B tier
Totally agree with the 50mm 1.8 comment in general. Its a workhorse, versatile but not madly fussed by the photos it takes
So it’s just list of your preferences but not quality of lenses. I see. So it’s senseless video in this case.
You should add 85mm 1.2L and 135mm f1.8L and 24 -135f2.8 , 24 -135 f4 to the list and also 50mm f1.2
its 24-105mm but yes totally agree! me as a fulltime professional am using the 24-105mm f4 in combination of my 85mm 1.2 DS and its fire! 🔥 the 24-105 f4 is super cheap for what it is delivering, it is compact, light weight and razor-sharp!
Regarding the thumb of the 28-70 “f2.8” S-tier - Computer says no!
Like you I don't really like the 50mm rather have a 35 or 85, have the 100-500 great lens but just tried the new 200-800 and way better you lose the macro on the other one but gain 200mm more and at 600mm you are at 6.3 not 7.1, did borrow an 85 1.2 and wow the bokeh is insane (droll).
The best would be to attach a 2X extender to the 100-500 and then compare it to the 200-800
Il manque le 24-105 f2.8
Talks up a 2.8 aperture then proceeds to share a ton of photos which were stopped way down for sun stars 🙄 get the f4 and save
the first person who says rf 100 2.8 is good.
To be honest if this tier-list would be image quality wise 100 RF would be in S-tier..
I think the only lens anyone needs is the 150-600mm sigma sport.
way too heavy and doesn't work well with the RF system it constantly hunting just like the Tameron rather have the 200-800.
List was doodoo 😂