Definitely worth it and it's my most used rf lens that i own. The IQ and the verstaility is unmatched. I'm glad that i don't have to carry 4 prime lenses in my bacpack anymore.
@@vaskoobscura_ I find it to work fine at weddings. It's when you get that camera in a cage and start attaching things to it that it gets too heavy for me. Without the cage, it's just light enough.
Do you guys that have this lens, use the battery grip also? I have 70-200 and 85 and thinking I can swap out the 85 for the 28-70 maybe and let the 70-200 fill the 85’s shoes
@@capture_the_stoke9646 I personally don't use a battery grip. Things are heavy enough. If I were an even photographer, I'd maybe reconsider, but batteries fit in pockets and take five seconds to change out. If you don't find yourself shooting wide open on your 85. the 70-200 could replace it. I find the bokeh on it at 85 looks closer to the f2 model of the RF85. Of the three lenses you mention, the 70-200 is the one I don't own, but I also am not an event photographer.
Use this lens for nearly everything. Definitely get some looks when doing street photography, there is NO candid, you are seen. 100% worth the weight even on multi day hikes since I can still shoot good portraits without wanting a prime. No issues with it on a gimbal, gimbal definitely feels heavy after a few hours though, focus breathing isn't great. This lens even comes rock & ice climbing, had to custom build something wide enough to hold it secure though. Wife can hold it for about 30 seconds before complaints start, and I can't tell her what my stack of filters cost 😂.
I am a video guy. I bought and R5 not for the camera but because I knew RF glass was an investment that could take me faaaaaaar into the future. The 28-70 2.0 is awesome. It’s heavy but I use a monopod so weight is never an issue. I did buy the 16mm prime for ultra wide. By the way, magnetic ND filters and CPLs is the way to go with the lens.
best review on this lens - thank you! summary: pros: - it is good for event photographers with strong arms - it slightly compromises quality for convenience of not switching lens - it will provide acceptable bokeh quality (unlike 24-70) - it is good enough for studio (so again a convenient choice) cons: - it is not as sharp as RF primes - the bokeh is not going to be as appealing as on RF and EF primes - lacks IS and due to heavy weight makes it hard to use for video (without tripod) - it's too expensive and heavy for travelling (I disagree here - cause i'm fine travelling with EF 70-200 2.8)
Thanks for watching and thanks for the kind words. You pretty much summed it up. Taking the 28-70 on vacation is definitely a personal choice. The images will definitely turn out amazing.
@@Tomek1Oko If you absolutely want the best image quality and don't mind the weight, the 28-70 will be better for vacation. But it's enormous and may attract the eyes of those who want to steal it in tourist traps. The 24-105 does just fine in most situations, is lighter and doesn't scream "Look at my $3000 lens" to possible thieves the same way the 28-70 does. To me, the 24-105 would make more sense for vacation. Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the video. I've had this lens on my buy list for a while and it looks fantastic. I use the 85 1.2 for portraits and a 35 1.4 when I need to go wide but this 28-70 would fit nicely in my wedding photography kit. I should probably rent it and see if I enjoy the weight.
@@KevinDeal No worries i'll come back and watch more. Keeping my fingers crossed and hoping that Canon comes out with a cool lend like a 35mm f1.2 or something like that.
I would love to see them come out with a 35 BADLY. Just an FYI, I am dropping a video in about 20 minutes that shows me working with the 28-70 for a fashion editorial. Not a wedding but it still shows you real world use with the 28-70.
Yellow Sign Blue buildings…!!! I too go there….Best Buy has a professional camera set up in some stores…On Long Island their Patchogue store has all brands ..Bodies and lenses..And ..They price match the big camera stores ….Great review..Real respect the honesty…😎
One thing I would mention about image stabilization is that studios have been seemingly moving to cameras that have that ‘Office’ or ‘Succession’ look to them. Using unstabilized or minimally stabilized handheld feel to trick the audience into thinking it’s more realistic. For zoomed in windy days maybe it’s distracting but consumers are being pushed into this by studios whether they notice it or not. And most people honestly don’t notice on a much longer format. The get desensitized to it and the brain forgets it. Something to keep in mind.
I was fortunate to get this lens in Ontario, Canada - last one in the province Nov 2020 for a project, and then COVID came and its main use now is my R5 webcam combo haha
Thank you for your insights. I share your opinion in most cases, just one correction: The RF 28-70 lens is rated for 8 stops of IS, not 5. And it works because the image circle of that giant lens is big enough for the IBIS to move all the way, same for the rf 85 1.2. Other lenses create smaller image circles that - combined with lens IS - are also able to get 8 stops of IS. (dpreview also had a good writeup on canons IBIS with different lenses) I can get handheld shots of up to a sec at night at 28mm, nearly the same as with my rf 24-70 2.8. The 24-70 2.8 slightly longer, but mostly due to the difference in the 24mm focal length I guess. And here is where I want to share my experience with the 24-70 2.8: Despite being lighter, I leave it at home more often. Why? Well first, with 2 pounds it is not exactly a light lens. And secondly, because the f 2.8 is not satisfying enough for many pictures I take. Compared to a 50mm F 1.2 or 1.4 the difference is kinda huge - But F2 rarely leaves me wanting for more. I mean the difference between a 50mm 1.2 is still there, but it is just a lot smaller than between 2.8 and 1.2. And if I need that extra subject isolation, I can take a step back and take it at 70mm f2 instead. Need to go wide? 28 is still plenty wide. And the RF 50mm 1.2 is still a big 2 pound lens as well - with a fixed focal length. Great lens nonetheless. For me, the "weight to performance ratio" on the 28-70 f2 is better. The RF 24-70 was rarely ever used by me, mostly for filming, because it is nearly parfocal (just not the first few centimeters) and has very little to no focus breathing. But in the end, I traded it in for an RF 70-200 2.8, which was the best decision for me at least. Much lighter and smaller than my EF 70-200 2.8 II while still being optically superior.
You're right. Another viewer caught that back when I released it and I put that in the edited part of my Description. Love your insights and I definitely agree. Thanks for watching!
Rumor has it that Canon is coming out with a Version II of this Lens with a faster Aperture and I.S. I think I'll snag the Version I at a discount, when everyone is lusting after the New model next year.
I heard about that. Being faster than f2 would be insane. And yes, definitely get that discount. Rumor is that a new R5 MKII is being announced as well. We shall see.
As long as you don’t require a macro capability I do recommend it for food photography. It will look fantastic. It does well for video as long as you don’t mind the weight.
Can anyone tell me if any of the photographs shown here in this video couldn’t be realized with a 24-70 f2.8? If so, which ones? If you can find a single picture, I will mortgage my house to go get one ASAP.
All of the shots that were shot at f2 can't be recreated with the f/2.8 exactly because the depth of field is different. The sharpness of both lenses and the way they render certain elements of an image vary. As to whether you think one is better than the other, that's entirely up to your subjective opinion. But the lenses are objectively and scientifically different when used in a certain way. Personally, I think it's silly to compare the two lenses because, while there is some overlap, they really aren't market toward the same photographer. I don't recommend you mortgage your house, but there's a reason why a lot of people love this lens. Have you tried it? If so, what did you think about it? How did it compare to your other lenses?
I grew up there in the 80's. Definitely some amazing spots to shoot street out there. The 28-70 without a doubt produces amazing images for street photography. For a lot of people, it's just not that practical. I tried it on the streets of Vegas last week and got some excellent results. At the end of the day though, I actually preferred my RF35 1.8 for street. Different strokes for different folks. Thanks for watching!
@@KevinDeal Yeah I understand what your saying. I’m kind of an anomaly lol I have some POV on my channel. You can see the city. Wild shit be happening lol
Umm, better yet, take the lens on vacation with you and just don't let it get stolen. And you don't have to be a pro photographer to be able to afford that lens (like me). IJS
Thanks for watching. I didn’t say you had to be a pro to own the lens. I said it may not be worth it to you if you’re not a pro. It’s not just about it getting stolen. It’s really large, takes up a lot of space and only goes to 70. My videos are about what works for me. You found what works for you and that’s great. With the high ISO handling of my R5 the 24-105 f4 works great for me on vacation. Thank you for watching!
@@KevinDeal I get what you're saying and wasn't trying to be negative. I just figure if you pay $3K or $1K for a lens, you're gonna take care of it and keep an eye on it, vacation or not. And for me, if I lose a $1K lens, I"m gonna cry just as much. LOL Just my 2 cents.
I disagree with your take on the street photography aspect - I'll use my 70-200 2.8 for street photography all day. As for traveling, this is probably one of the best travel lenses as opposed to taking multiple primes with. Great video otherwise
For shooting great pictures, it’s awesome for street. For being discrete and not looking like you’re carrying around a $3000 lens, I can’t argue that it is great for street at all. I guess it depends on the type of street photography you do. I just got done using it for a vacation, as I was testing it for travel. Great pictures no doubt. But my 24-105 took a lot of the same pictures in the same ballpark of quality when stopped down. I’m likely going to leave the 28-70 at home next time I travel. But, if the 28-70 makes you happy on vacation, that’s all that matters.
@@Max-wg6iu definitely. I am starting to edit my episode where I put the 28-70 vs the 24-105 for travel. There will be arguments for both lenses, depending on what you are doing. Thanks for the watch!
I love to have one, but too many drawbacks... first too expensive, I don't make a living in photography any more ,its heavy, I can use my primes, I still use my ef lens with converter snf the work great ! i put so much money into cameras and lens over the years and now these lens are pretty much low value, so cameras and lens are not a good investment like they use to be !!! Its all about taking you money and putting into their pockets !!! its a racket anymore...I have a couple of rf lens but I will not buy anymore, too high a rip off !!!
@@KevinDeal People trying to rob me makes me unhappy, I ll invest my money in Gold and ?silver,I can get a hefty return on it ,cameras and lens are a bottomless pit...Sure I made money with them but how many people do ??? Be smart we are on the edge of war, remember you cant eat a camera when food get scarce...Money can buy food it ...
What are your thoughts on the RF28-70 f/2? Is it worth it to you or is it just a bunch of hype? Tell me below.
Definitely worth it and it's my most used rf lens that i own. The IQ and the verstaility is unmatched. I'm glad that i don't have to carry 4 prime lenses in my bacpack anymore.
I haven't used one yet. I know it's a good lens only concern for me is the weight. I have to get one in my hands to know how it feels.
@@vaskoobscura_ I find it to work fine at weddings. It's when you get that camera in a cage and start attaching things to it that it gets too heavy for me. Without the cage, it's just light enough.
Do you guys that have this lens, use the battery grip also? I have 70-200 and 85 and thinking I can swap out the 85 for the 28-70 maybe and let the 70-200 fill the 85’s shoes
@@capture_the_stoke9646 I personally don't use a battery grip. Things are heavy enough. If I were an even photographer, I'd maybe reconsider, but batteries fit in pockets and take five seconds to change out.
If you don't find yourself shooting wide open on your 85. the 70-200 could replace it. I find the bokeh on it at 85 looks closer to the f2 model of the RF85.
Of the three lenses you mention, the 70-200 is the one I don't own, but I also am not an event photographer.
Awesome. 16 years later, still teaching me beyond what I’d ever think I’d know, thank you!
Thanks for the watch! Thanks for letting me film! Thanks for the music!
This is such a practical review. Thank you!
Thanks for watching!
Use this lens for nearly everything. Definitely get some looks when doing street photography, there is NO candid, you are seen. 100% worth the weight even on multi day hikes since I can still shoot good portraits without wanting a prime. No issues with it on a gimbal, gimbal definitely feels heavy after a few hours though, focus breathing isn't great. This lens even comes rock & ice climbing, had to custom build something wide enough to hold it secure though. Wife can hold it for about 30 seconds before complaints start, and I can't tell her what my stack of filters cost 😂.
It’s a beast. And yeah. It gets looks, for sure.
From an image quality standpoint it looks good on pretty much everything.
Thank for the watch!
What gimbal do you use with it?
Overall my favorite lens, second are my 85mm 1.4 and 135L EF lenses!
That’s an excellent trio of lenses right there.
Tried this on an R5 today, you're right about that autofocus, truly does make a great combo! Excellent lens, absolutely great depth of field at F2.0.
I certainly can’t complain about it. Love my 28-70 on my R5.
The fire shot at 11:32…😮😮😮😮
Wowwwwww…So well lit ..What a great capture…Well done Sir…
Thank you. I appreciate it
I am a video guy. I bought and R5 not for the camera but because I knew RF glass was an investment that could take me faaaaaaar into the future. The 28-70 2.0 is awesome. It’s heavy but I use a monopod so weight is never an issue. I did buy the 16mm prime for ultra wide. By the way, magnetic ND filters and CPLs is the way to go with the lens.
I own the 16 as well. Fun little lens. I need to look into those magnetic filters. Thanks for that watch!
Thanks for the review. The RF 28-70 F2 sells at $2200 at my home town. It seems a new version is coming soon.
I’ve seen the rumor of a new version but we will see.
Where do you see it for 2200? Do they mail order?
WHERE IN THE WORLD (literally) did you find it for $2,200?!
Please do share! I'm looking to buy it in another couple of months.
Once I step up to the mirrorless world, this will be the only lens I will buy! I'll just use the adapter with the rest but I MUST HAVE IT!!!
For many, this is the only lens they need. It's definitely one of the top gems of the RF lineup. Thank you for watching!
Yes this was my first buy when i got the r5 together with rf 15-35 f 2.8l lens. Then i got the rf 70-200 f2.8l which is the 2nd most used lens.
best review on this lens - thank you!
summary:
pros:
- it is good for event photographers with strong arms
- it slightly compromises quality for convenience of not switching lens
- it will provide acceptable bokeh quality (unlike 24-70)
- it is good enough for studio (so again a convenient choice)
cons:
- it is not as sharp as RF primes
- the bokeh is not going to be as appealing as on RF and EF primes
- lacks IS and due to heavy weight makes it hard to use for video (without tripod)
- it's too expensive and heavy for travelling (I disagree here - cause i'm fine travelling with EF 70-200 2.8)
Thanks for watching and thanks for the kind words.
You pretty much summed it up. Taking the 28-70 on vacation is definitely a personal choice. The images will definitely turn out amazing.
@@KevinDeal which one will you recommend for vacation then? Don’t mind the cost …
@@Tomek1Oko If you absolutely want the best image quality and don't mind the weight, the 28-70 will be better for vacation. But it's enormous and may attract the eyes of those who want to steal it in tourist traps. The 24-105 does just fine in most situations, is lighter and doesn't scream "Look at my $3000 lens" to possible thieves the same way the 28-70 does.
To me, the 24-105 would make more sense for vacation.
Thanks for watching!
@@KevinDeal thank you, by saving on 24-105 I will get R5 instead of R6 😁 then buy more lenses down the road
@@Tomek1Oko Enjoy the R5!
Your sample image are gorgeous 😍😍😍
Thank you for watching and the kind compliments Gianni!
Thanks for the video. I've had this lens on my buy list for a while and it looks fantastic. I use the 85 1.2 for portraits and a 35 1.4 when I need to go wide but this 28-70 would fit nicely in my wedding photography kit. I should probably rent it and see if I enjoy the weight.
It’s fantastic for weddings.
The weight can be a bit for some.
Thanks for watching!
@@KevinDeal No worries i'll come back and watch more. Keeping my fingers crossed and hoping that Canon comes out with a cool lend like a 35mm f1.2 or something like that.
I would love to see them come out with a 35 BADLY. Just an FYI, I am dropping a video in about 20 minutes that shows me working with the 28-70 for a fashion editorial. Not a wedding but it still shows you real world use with the 28-70.
Subscribed based on this great review
Yellow Sign Blue buildings…!!! I too go there….Best Buy has a professional camera set up in some stores…On Long Island their Patchogue store has all brands ..Bodies and lenses..And ..They price match the big camera stores ….Great review..Real respect the honesty…😎
Thanks. I try to be as honest as I can. I appreciate the watch.
love the shots!!
thank you. And I love your username, because carnitas are amazing.
One thing I would mention about image stabilization is that studios have been seemingly moving to cameras that have that ‘Office’ or ‘Succession’ look to them. Using unstabilized or minimally stabilized handheld feel to trick the audience into thinking it’s more realistic. For zoomed in windy days maybe it’s distracting but consumers are being pushed into this by studios whether they notice it or not. And most people honestly don’t notice on a much longer format. The get desensitized to it and the brain forgets it. Something to keep in mind.
Great points. Thanks for the sub!
Great video! Which lens would you purchase (hybrid professional) the RF28-70mm L f/2 or the RF24-105mm L f/2.8 if you were to buy now?
As a portrait photographer I’d still go with the 28-70. That extra stop helps a lot.
Got this on sale with an additional Amazon discount for $2957. I’m looking forward to using this lens.
Congrats on the new lens! You're going to love it.
I was fortunate to get this lens in Ontario, Canada - last one in the province Nov 2020 for a project, and then COVID came and its main use now is my R5 webcam combo haha
That's a serious web cam setup. Thanks for watching!
Thank you for your insights. I share your opinion in most cases, just one correction: The RF 28-70 lens is rated for 8 stops of IS, not 5. And it works because the image circle of that giant lens is big enough for the IBIS to move all the way, same for the rf 85 1.2. Other lenses create smaller image circles that - combined with lens IS - are also able to get 8 stops of IS. (dpreview also had a good writeup on canons IBIS with different lenses) I can get handheld shots of up to a sec at night at 28mm, nearly the same as with my rf 24-70 2.8. The 24-70 2.8 slightly longer, but mostly due to the difference in the 24mm focal length I guess.
And here is where I want to share my experience with the 24-70 2.8: Despite being lighter, I leave it at home more often. Why? Well first, with 2 pounds it is not exactly a light lens. And secondly, because the f 2.8 is not satisfying enough for many pictures I take. Compared to a 50mm F 1.2 or 1.4 the difference is kinda huge - But F2 rarely leaves me wanting for more. I mean the difference between a 50mm 1.2 is still there, but it is just a lot smaller than between 2.8 and 1.2. And if I need that extra subject isolation, I can take a step back and take it at 70mm f2 instead. Need to go wide? 28 is still plenty wide. And the RF 50mm 1.2 is still a big 2 pound lens as well - with a fixed focal length. Great lens nonetheless. For me, the "weight to performance ratio" on the 28-70 f2 is better. The RF 24-70 was rarely ever used by me, mostly for filming, because it is nearly parfocal (just not the first few centimeters) and has very little to no focus breathing. But in the end, I traded it in for an RF 70-200 2.8, which was the best decision for me at least. Much lighter and smaller than my EF 70-200 2.8 II while still being optically superior.
You're right. Another viewer caught that back when I released it and I put that in the edited part of my Description.
Love your insights and I definitely agree.
Thanks for watching!
Rumor has it that Canon is coming out with a Version II of this Lens with a faster Aperture and I.S. I think I'll snag the Version I at a discount, when everyone is lusting after the New model next year.
I heard about that. Being faster than f2 would be insane. And yes, definitely get that discount. Rumor is that a new R5 MKII is being announced as well. We shall see.
Great video! Thank you!
Glad you liked it!
Very nice video ! Thumbs up for killa D&B soundtrack 😂
Thanks for the kind words and the watch.
Please share how you use the focus ring for auto focus, please!
Are you wanting to have me show you the different focusing modes or are you asking how to assign it?
Hi Kevin, would you recommend this lens for food/product photography with about 70% photo and 30% video uses?
As long as you don’t require a macro capability I do recommend it for food photography. It will look fantastic. It does well for video as long as you don’t mind the weight.
GILBERT!! Great vid man!
Kicking it old school!
Beast of a lens. I absolutely love it. Produces amazing images. Downside is the weight but I can cancel my gym membership and save money there😂.
Absolutely. I have strong arms from it.
Do it!
I’m in Detroit too
It's an awesome lens. Have to be gangsta to use it, not for the weak.
Facts
Can anyone tell me if any of the photographs shown here in this video couldn’t be realized with a 24-70 f2.8? If so, which ones? If you can find a single picture, I will mortgage my house to go get one ASAP.
All of the shots that were shot at f2 can't be recreated with the f/2.8 exactly because the depth of field is different. The sharpness of both lenses and the way they render certain elements of an image vary. As to whether you think one is better than the other, that's entirely up to your subjective opinion. But the lenses are objectively and scientifically different when used in a certain way.
Personally, I think it's silly to compare the two lenses because, while there is some overlap, they really aren't market toward the same photographer.
I don't recommend you mortgage your house, but there's a reason why a lot of people love this lens. Have you tried it? If so, what did you think about it? How did it compare to your other lenses?
I use it for street photography
I grew up there in the 80's. Definitely some amazing spots to shoot street out there. The 28-70 without a doubt produces amazing images for street photography. For a lot of people, it's just not that practical. I tried it on the streets of Vegas last week and got some excellent results. At the end of the day though, I actually preferred my RF35 1.8 for street. Different strokes for different folks. Thanks for watching!
@@KevinDeal Yeah I understand what your saying. I’m kind of an anomaly lol I have some POV on my channel. You can see the city. Wild shit be happening lol
I am selling mine ! Almost new
They have good resale value.
Umm, better yet, take the lens on vacation with you and just don't let it get stolen. And you don't have to be a pro photographer to be able to afford that lens (like me). IJS
Thanks for watching. I didn’t say you had to be a pro to own the lens. I said it may not be worth it to you if you’re not a pro.
It’s not just about it getting stolen. It’s really large, takes up a lot of space and only goes to 70. My videos are about what works for me. You found what works for you and that’s great. With the high ISO handling of my R5 the 24-105 f4 works great for me on vacation.
Thank you for watching!
@@KevinDeal I get what you're saying and wasn't trying to be negative. I just figure if you pay $3K or $1K for a lens, you're gonna take care of it and keep an eye on it, vacation or not. And for me, if I lose a $1K lens, I"m gonna cry just as much. LOL Just my 2 cents.
Fair enough. Thanks for watching. The 28-70 will certainly take great vacation shots.
I disagree with your take on the street photography aspect - I'll use my 70-200 2.8 for street photography all day. As for traveling, this is probably one of the best travel lenses as opposed to taking multiple primes with. Great video otherwise
For shooting great pictures, it’s awesome for street. For being discrete and not looking like you’re carrying around a $3000 lens, I can’t argue that it is great for street at all. I guess it depends on the type of street photography you do.
I just got done using it for a vacation, as I was testing it for travel. Great pictures no doubt. But my 24-105 took a lot of the same pictures in the same ballpark of quality when stopped down. I’m likely going to leave the 28-70 at home next time I travel.
But, if the 28-70 makes you happy on vacation, that’s all that matters.
@@KevinDeal All good points. I guess it just boils down to how you shoot and what works for you
@@Max-wg6iu definitely. I am starting to edit my episode where I put the 28-70 vs the 24-105 for travel. There will be arguments for both lenses, depending on what you are doing.
Thanks for the watch!
I guess some Photographers Conceal & Carry. And don't care what the lens screams. 😂
I love to have one, but too many drawbacks... first too expensive, I don't make a living in photography any more ,its heavy, I can use my primes, I still use my ef lens with converter snf the work great ! i put so much money into cameras and lens over the years and now these lens are pretty much low value, so cameras and lens are not a good investment like they use to be !!! Its all about taking you money and putting into their pockets !!! its a racket anymore...I have a couple of rf lens but I will not buy anymore, too high a rip off !!!
Whatever works for you and makes you happy is all that matters. Thanks for the watch!
@@KevinDeal People trying to rob me makes me unhappy, I ll invest my money in Gold and ?silver,I can get a hefty return on it ,cameras and lens are a bottomless pit...Sure I made money with them but how many people do ??? Be smart we are on the edge of war, remember you cant eat a camera when food get scarce...Money can buy food it
...