same here, pretty happy with my old rf 70-200 2.8 but.... I'm QUITE interested in the new one it's basically for the teleconverters, with 2X TC I can get 400mm @ F5.6, and that's not bad seriously, it can help with sports, aviation and mild wildlife, all the while having only 1 lens. It's pretty tempting for me at least 😅
💥 Good to see that Canon's 2nd gen. RF 70-200... 1. Reverses the positions of the zoom ring + focus ring 2. Zooms internally 3. Works with TCs (both 1.4x + 2x) 4. Keeps the weight virtually the same (2.4 lbs black, 2.5 lbs white) as the 1st gen. RF 70-200 (2.35 lbs) For travel though, the 1st gen. can fit in a lot of bags vertically, which can be huge for saving space. The newer 2nd gen. will likely need to lay horizontally, taking up the space that could otherwise fit 2 smaller lenses.
I'm just going to keep my external zooming 70-200 because I really like it. The slightly longer throw doesn't bother me at all for some reason, its image quality is fantastic, and the more compact form factor is very much appreciated.
The mention of zooming against glass is exactly why I opted for the EF 70-200 2.8 L IS III over the RF version when I got the R6 Mark II. For hockey, you need to keep the lens pressed against glass and the RF version would make that REALLY difficult. Also, the EF version was $1000 cheaper and just as sharp. Also it never misses focus. The R6 Mark II and that lens get around 98% hit rate for hockey, even nailing eye and face AF on players with visors!
I am happy to with my RF 70 - 200 F2.8, it is perfect lens. It is not difficult to zoom in, once you get use to it... I love my lens, I love design and all in it ...
Been using my old EF version II for years and still using it on my R6 and R5 and it works great for basketball and volleyball. I did not go to the first RF version because I saw how Jared struggled with the throw on it in his reviews years ago The new Z version resolves this so in another year or two when prices come down or I can pick up a used version of this new Z lens I will finally make the switch.
Been using EF 70-200 2.8 L IS III with 2x extender for almost 9 months of this year as a beginner photographer. It's fantastic! Highly recommend it for any new photographers who wants a 70-200 lens. I've been using it for music festivals and club events for the last 9 months. I've gotten a nickname already, called telescope since it looks like one walking around with it haha. Photography isn't my full time job yet, would love to make it in the future. By watching your review Jared Polin (huge fan, also inspired me to become a photographer) on those lenses, I'm really tempted to buy the Z now. Looks amazing and I couldn't imagine holding it. I'm stuck of either selling my older version for the new or just save up to buy it.
I just got the “old” RF 70-200 f2.8 yesterday. I was able to get for a decent price and love it. I also compared it in store with the Z version and while a beautiful lens, the compact version fits my needs a lot better. Very very happy with my purchase. The throw also doesn’t affect or bothers me ! Great review as always
Love the fact there's an optional black finish version. Had no idea that was coming. I'm all for the white color on the big telephotos that bake in the sun on monopods on the sidelines, but as a former newspaper staff photographer covering street/spot news, community events, etc., I found that a white 70-200 was just too conspicuous.
I spent a week with the New RF 70-200 2.8 Z... It's quite good... But IMHO, it is NOT $2500 better than my 70-200 2.8 L iii. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk
Thank you for the video. For now I’m sticking with the original RF 70-200mm f/2.8 since I’ve got a space in my bag for the smaller lens. I’ve bought a second copy of RF 50/1.2 L hood that fit it fine to also get a smaller size. Since I’m rarely shooting sports I don’t think I will update but will see. Nice comparison. Appreciate your teams effort to give us the comparison. Take care.
Месяц назад+2
Thank you for uploading this video. I've been waiting for you to review this.. I'll get the new one..
After being forced years ago into begrudgingly accepting the external zoom version, this was the fastest pre-order I’ve ever submitted when Canon announced it. Glad I could get one in the first wave and have been shooting with it for a few weeks now. Just like the obvious conclusions in the video: it really is so insanely ergonomically superior to the old one. Absolutely the most no brainer $3k I have dropped on gear in a long time.
Exactly! I am glad Canon did realize the external zooming, wrongly placed zoom ring and bad design disqualifying TCs were all mistakes. Happy to see 24-105/2.8 follows the same approach. Well done, Canon.
I have the old EF version 2, and it looks good, too. Even adapted to my R7 shooting at my daughter's dance gala or my kid's karate belt gradings. I have no need to upgrade. I do, however, want to grab an R6ii to stick this lens on.
I appreciate the discussion on the build and housing of the lens, Jared. Comparing it to the 24- 105 2.8 was nice to see. It's also a cool thing that I noticed when I first purchased my 24-105 f 4 and my 70-200 F4. Those two lenses also have an extremely similar build quality and housing. So much so that they fit almost perfectly in my camera bag, give or take a few millimeters because of the lens cap.
Fantastic and unbiased review! I love my old RF 70-200, but a day of photographing dog agility really strains my zoom arm and wrist. The new Z version is just too expensive for me to justify, especially since it's almost twice the price of a well-maintained used RF.
I use the EF 70-200 “one” with R6M2 and no problems with indoor track photography. I love the short thumb throw from 70-200 instantly as sprinters and jumpers approach.
Wait, the choice is ours, thanks Fro 👍😋 I have the EF Version 1 and the RF, both great lenses, bought the RF because it takes up less room in my backpack when traveling.
I chose to trade in my “Old” RF 70-200 and put it towards my RF 100-300 2.8. Shooting sports with that along with the 28-105 2.8 makes things easier. The new body looks nice tho. Especially being in the same casing as the 28-105
When I started with Canon digital Cameras ca. 15/16 years ago, i decided to choose primes and not Zoom-Lenses. So i purchased a 85mm and a 200mm Prime. Still use the EF 200/2.8L USM II. It is a great lens: fast, sharp, small, cheap (700€).
Love the old. My second favorite lens. Love its compact size. Unlike any other RF L. Which are all mammoth. The growth doesn’t bug me at all. It’s the carrying around size that makes more difference to me. Plus it’s simply an incredible piece of glass. IQ is without peer.
Canon says they’ll keep selling the small RF lens, it’s not being discontinued. I bought mine almost a year ago. The zoom ring takes some practice getting used to, but so far I’ve been able to deal with it by thinking more about my compositions, like when using a prime lens. It’s hard to go from 70200mm at once, but I can do it in two steps, or at once with some extra wrist movement (and then I readjust my hand to a comfortable position). I ended-up learning that I rarely need to do it at once, as long as I plan my compositions properly. The way this goes on my shoulder bag and backpacks is just amazing for running and gunning, I can fit extra stuff thanks to this lens. If 200mm is enough for someone, this is a special one. I do photojournalism (reportage), some music photography, a few weddings and events. 200mm has been enough to me for the past 5+ years, so I never saw the incompatibility with teleconverters as an issue - I never used them on my EF lens either.
I am 24/7 full time professional, I do as much video as I do photos... and the longer throw on the 70-200 actually is quite nice for smooth zoom-ins and zoom-outs while filming. It's never been an issue for portrait and wedding photography for me.
I still have the EF II. I had not seen a reason to upgrade to the EF III since the optics did not change. Even though the original RF was lighter, I did not think there was any real world IQ lift and stayed with the EF II. With the EF II I do use 1.4x tc when I need to extend the reach. I put the money when I moved to R system into a lens that extended my kit. This year I have gotten more into video. When this new RF Z came out, I ordered it on day 1. It was lighter than the EF II, although heavier than the original RF. It has video features I will take advantage of now that I am a hybrid shooter. And since it accept tcs, it was an easy decision for me. I already have both the RF 1.4x and 2x that I use with a couple other RF lenses. My absolute first reaction when I mounted the RF Z lens on my R5 was how balanced the lens felt. It feels much lighter than it really is. I assume they moved some of the heavier optics closer to the camera mount to get this incredible balance. In my mind I wondered if I was thinking that just to justify the purchase. I was so happy to see Jared make the exact same comment. Canon, job well done!
An important thing that did not come up as a requirement for upgrading to the new version of the vav 70-200 is whether the lens is to be used for extensive video production. As I see it, it is up to the photographer's qualities that determine how good a photo can be, not the technology that comes second. Can understand that version 1 of the 70-200 RF can stutter a bit if you move the lens sideways quickly and need to readjust the zoom. But otherwise it shouldn't be a problem. If you use R5, you can Crop afterwards. Finally, regarding sports, you must have experience from the sport you are photographing, without that knowledge you will never capture the image.
I still use the version 1 with IS which came out around 10 years ago? It’s great!! Lenses are great for many many years especially when we are talking about expensive glass 🎉
I might sell one of my 70-200 f/2.8 RF lenses for the Z version, like you say, the external zoom is a pain with the long throw and I just prefer the internal zoom of the older version. I only ever use one as a back-up so wouldn't mind falling back to the old RF version if the new one broke/got damaged in the field.
Now RF 70-200mm F2.8 comes down on price on the used market...almost half the $3100 price of the new RF 70-200 USM Z. From my perspective, the most significant improvement is Canon teleconverter can be used with the new RF 70-200 USM Z and there were no teleconverter with the older RF 70-200mm F2.8. Because the older RF 70-200 F2.8 is an external zoom lens, it packs shorter. Both lenses have excellent image quality!
Appreciate the details and work as always, Jared. One Q: what's a Z lens review, if it doesn't test the video capabilities? This lens wasn't made just to fix the zoom throw and extension. It was made for video use. You should use the zoom rocker and show comparisons of that vs. manual zooming on the old lenses. I dont remember seeing any video clips except viewfinder recording in photo mode. Totally ok that you were using it on photo bodies, but I can imagine canon's ideal users for this lens might fall closer to R5C, C70/80/400 shooters who exclusively shoot video. IMO, the original RF 70-200 is photo first, video second. The new one is video first, photo second.
The new one has better dust seal and the teleconverters but it is so handy to be able to pack the original RF in a sling back and have room for a second lens. Ultimately tho, I’m aiming for the f2.8 24-105 because that range can live on my camera
I still use my EF with my R5, and have been saving to upgrade to the RF 70-200. For me the older RF makes more sense. It is cheaper, and the smaller size works better for me.
I’m still rocking my EF70-200 III adapted to RF. The external zoom is pretty much a no go for me. In the harsh, muddy and dusty environments I often shoot (military and motor sports) it’s just not a good idea. I’ve already have a (older, cheaper) lens which now has a permanent scratching sound when zooming. And it almost happened again last time when I got sprayed with mud. And this basically "locks" the lens to the longest focal length because I can’t really clean it well in the field. But no problem with the EF70-200. The new 70-200 Z looks great and I would really appreciate the lower weight and faster focus but for 3600€ it’s just to much.
Yeah 3600€ is waay too much to spend for basically putting lens at risk every time.. better option may be the 100- 500 keep you farther, but then again that's also external zoom.
I personally do a lot of photography that requires a lot of travel, so the compactness of the chode edition is actually great for me. It means I can fit an additional lens in my bag or perhaps even a tripod or additional clothes. I have both the EF and RF chode versions (shared between me and my brother), and because I don’t do sports, the throw really doesn’t bug me whatsoever. I am, however, glad Canon decided to build both. The 70-200 is such an important lens that pretty much every photographer needs, so having 3 excellent options available (cheap but clunky, compact but harder to zoom, and expensive with all the bells and whistles) is great. I do hope the chode edition eventually gets a Version ii and Canon continues it.
The compact version. Will definitely. Get a ii v. Canon made sure of that option by putting "apparently" better optics in the z that they can next put in the compact ii if the make a ii.
I took the "old" RF 70-200 to airshow recently and I never have problem with the zooming, yes it needed a bit of twisting but it is fine for me and I didn't "miss a lots of shoots" compare to my 100-400 anyways, and the compactness is perfect for me, same goes for the RF 24-70 2.8, I tried the 24-105 2.8 and while it is good I don't feels like its size is a good lens for walkaround travel lens. The only thing I think that matters is the ability to put TCX2 on it, then again the TC will most likely be weld onto the 100-400 most of the time anyways.
I never had issues with the extending old lense and i actually love the compactness so i can take it more easily on hikes in my backpack. But i agree that the zoom is requiring deliberate zoomthrowing .... however.... doesnt matter really for me. And now we have the beautiful situation that one can choose! You want the perma boner version? get the new one, you prefer compact chode? get the old one! Choice > no choice
Love the current RF 70-200 2.8 It should be called compact rather old. It fits well in the camera bag, sharp, fast and really nice photos. People having EF can buy the Z version while I dont see any major reason for people having the current RF to go for Z version.
I have no choice buying the compact RF 70-200mm when I switch to RF system. I only have two benefits of buying the new version. Architecture of internal zoom and filter diameter (same as my two other lenses). The cost of buying the compact version, reselling it and upgrading to the new version is clearly the worst in my opinion.
Do the electrical contacts on the lens body compromise its weather sealing? I would compare the lens' lengths without the hoods. The two RF lenses look virtually identical when the older one is zoomed out.
How do you carry an RF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM(the older and lighter one) when attached to a lighter camera like r8? Do you attach it to a strap and let it dangle all the time, or do you have to hold it by the lens the whole time you're using the camera? Thank you
I love this new design so much, it looks more professional and serious than the first edition. Today I decided to buy a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 E-mount that looks exactly like the black canon lens and it is amazing, after seeing so many reviews about its caveats I found none of them and feels like cheating compared to the adapted minolta 80-200 G HS APO. It's extremely sharp, has no OSS tredpidation and grips on focus while zooming harder than a gamedog onto a boar's nose. I'm sure this canon lens will be miles ahead!
I think they got the first one perfect I prefer the control ring close to camera, so good there is a choice though, well done Canon. zooming if you're in a hurry simply push or pull the lens.
You didn't explain the biggest difference between the new Z Version and all of the previous 70-200 f/2.8 L's... it is actually par focal, meaning the focus doesn't change while you are zooming... that's why it's so much more suitable for video
Serious question Jared. Is your pom pom hair just a barrier to block the view to anyone behind you in order to prevent others from taking the same frames as you?
I like the decision, now canon users have the choice if they want internal or external zooming sony was better for having internal zoom from my perspective but i don't have a issue with people that like compact
Jared, I'm with you on the throw of the chod lens. I currently have the R6 and was looking at that lens but you make a great point about the throw. Would you recommend staying with that lens or getting the old 70-200mm with the adapter? I can afford the chod or EF lens.
EF I II III: for those still on the fence. 1st gen RF: for compactness. 2nd gen RF: for internal zooming + 1.4X & 2X. 2nd gen RF(black): for other brand shooters against white paint. God damn, Canon has everything covered!
The materials used are top notch. The leather feels soft and luxurious, exactly like the real thing. The stitching is impeccable, with no loose or uneven lines. The hardware (including the iconic CC twist lock clasp) is durable, well made, and adds to the overall elegance of the bag kislux . I thought everyone who owned an LV monogram bag knew that it was obviously coated canvas? When people spend a fortune on an expensive bag, they might as well buy a replica
I shoot sports video with the “old 70-200” with rf adapter.. Wish the focus was quicker and more accurate. Would I be happy upgrading? (Shooting on R5)
Seems like my main complaint about the rf 70-200 is the zoom extending out while I’m walking with it. I keep it locked when walking but that adds a step that can make you miss a shot in a hurry. No interest in upgrading though since I don’t shoot sports.
Hi Jared, I’m in the market for a versatile portrait lens and I have seen reviews that the RF 70-200 is the best lens to get. I’d love to hear your thoughts. Thanks
Love the video as always. Is there a way to just get pack 1 or even better just skittles? I normally make my own presets but would like to see the results from skittles. Thanks for all you do for the photo community.
You can buy each pack separately at their respective URLS froknowsphoto.com/fropack1 (/fropack2, etc). The original individual packs are back at normal price though since we lift the sale once a new pack is released. Check out Kaleidoscope from FroPack4 also if you really dig Skittles, it's another excellent alternative.
I wished you showed how it perform on Nikon cameras too.. On the other hand it is great that they are making cross compatible lenses with Z mount.. massive win for Canon!
Wait, what?!? The same lens he featured can be mounted on Nikon mirrorless bodies too? Are you sure? I mean, I know it's called a "Z" version but I didn't think it referred to the Nikon Z system.
@@anthonyc1883yes I really did appreciate that. I am just very visual and would’ve loved a comparison to the RF vs Z RF. That being said I gave the 24-105Z RF and its IQ is just insanely superb for a zoom. So I would assume it’s sister lens is to. No reason to doubt the Fro!!!!!!
Hi Jared, I hope you are well! Please activate the translator so I can see it since I don't speak English and I always watch your videos with subtitles, thanks Jared, long life
Yeah I have the choad edition, but did buy the new 24-105 f/2.8 coz I shoot a lot of video and wanted canons as my fullframe option. I use m4/3 primarily. So going to decide if sell the choad edition to get the hybrid version. I'm just not crazy about how much electronic wizardry is needed to correct the new lenses, but I guess all of em need it across all brands.
Mr Polin, I must admit, I am very bummed out about this new Z ver. I bought the original rf. Ver. About 3 months ago.. Listen I don't make my living with photography, but I can't avoid beating my self up about this. I guess just a personal flaw. But it wouldn't bothering at all IF the only differences were. That it's a non extender, hybrid lens and that you can use tc's.. but what bothers me is that it's actually optically better... I don't have the z to actually compare but I hear it's sharper... that's actually what bothers me.. Anyway nice video.
You've got to get past that kind of thinking. I definitely understand but just go out and take lots of pictures. The Next Greatest Thing is always just around the corner. It's never ending. Yes, there are jumps in performance that occur between certain models but many new models like this lens are not that big of a difference. Know that many, many people would love to have the lens you already have and would use it to the max with a lot of happiness.
I have the EF version adapted to my R3. There is not a compelling reason to update to either the RF version or the Z version based on image quality alone. If I needed to replace the EF version then of course I would get the Z version, but that is the only reason. I also have the RF 24-105 f/2.8 Z lens. That is well worth the price of entry. It is amazing in every respect and I would imagine the 70-200 version is just as amazing, just not amazing enough to ditch the adapted EF 70-200 for the new Z version. I would like to know more about the tele-converters. The RF 1.4 converter could be handy on the 24-105 f/2.8 from time to time. Please review them.
I can’t believe the price difference between the US and the UK. Our equivalent for B&H in the UK is Wex or Park Cameras. Going from WEX prices and converting to USD as of Dec 2024; Canon 70-200mm f2.8 Z pre order = $4,387 USD Sony 70-200mm f2.8 vii = $3,155 USD Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 Z = $2,289 USD Nikon 70-180mm f2.8 Z = $1,271 USD (no VR) When I work on live events, I see many Pros in the UK who shoot Canon sticking with EF glass, the younger guys all seem to shoot Sony and the Nikon Pros I see going for the 70-180mm because it’s cheap, light weight and “performs well enough”. You couple the lens with the R5mkii vs A1 vs A1mkii vs Z8 and it’s; $10,238 USD for the Canon setup $10,163 USD for the A1 Sony setup $11,182 USD for the A1 mkii setup $6,420 USD for the Nikon with the S-line lens $5,328 USD for the Nikon setup with the 70-180mm After looking at the prices in the UK, does the decision as to which system to choose as a new starter becomes one of cost? Are Sony and Canon at twice the price twice as good?
I recently put the foot back on my 70-200 because I use it with my Black Rapid dual camera sling. I know Jared thinks the tripod mount is only for tripods and, therefore, dumb, but wedding and event photographers everywhere know otherwise.
I would probably go with the old EF lens. It's not just a budget thing but with the Ef to RF adapter I have I can drop in filters very quickly and I don't need to buy a brand new set of filters just for one lens and it drops in so it saves time... I don't need super fast auto-focus for what I am currently doing so the ability to have that drop in filter is the best thing ever. That and I still want the 24-105mm f2.8 which I would think would be great for 99% of everything I do. The person who owns that probably wouldn't want a 70-200mm... Maybe a 100-300mm would have been a better match.
Sticking with EF until I can start to generate consisant money. If I was full time pro, I would be bumping to the new RF, for me Id rather have the internal zoom. I feel much more confinement in the longevity
I'd love to see this new z lens compared with the Nikon Z 70-200 f2.8 S lens on a Z9 or Z8. I have the Nikon lens and I warn people that they can cut themselves with it, it's so sharp. It's also blazing fast autofocusing.
I’m still happy with my “old” RF 70-200. Love the small size and weight for my needs
Same here :-) My camera backpack just fits the chode edition much better.
Nice! yeah that lens is amazing. This new lens is as well. but so were the old EF 70-200mm lenses.
same here, pretty happy with my old rf 70-200 2.8 but.... I'm QUITE interested in the new one
it's basically for the teleconverters, with 2X TC I can get 400mm @ F5.6, and that's not bad seriously, it can help with sports, aviation and mild wildlife, all the while having only 1 lens. It's pretty tempting for me at least 😅
@ yeah that’s the only thing I wish the old RF 70-200 had
Saying old to an rf lens is crazy. Dang
I stay with my old RF 70 - 200 because i love the compactness in my Camerabag.
Same here, plus it‘s really sharp and the AF works well
agreed, my bag already feels like 200 pound rock!
💥 Good to see that Canon's 2nd gen. RF 70-200...
1. Reverses the positions of the zoom ring + focus ring
2. Zooms internally
3. Works with TCs (both 1.4x + 2x)
4. Keeps the weight virtually the same (2.4 lbs black, 2.5 lbs white) as the 1st gen. RF 70-200 (2.35 lbs)
For travel though, the 1st gen. can fit in a lot of bags vertically, which can be huge for saving space. The newer 2nd gen. will likely need to lay horizontally, taking up the space that could otherwise fit 2 smaller lenses.
I'm just going to keep my external zooming 70-200 because I really like it. The slightly longer throw doesn't bother me at all for some reason, its image quality is fantastic, and the more compact form factor is very much appreciated.
At 0:35 why is the F-stop f1.2 when you are reviewing a f2.8 lens? Someone messed up clips... Dan!
Great observation, also it says 85mm ... He might be checking RF 85mm f1.2 here as well
ah yes, I shot with the 85 1.2 that day too, must've slipped that clip in there by accident. Everything else is from the 70-200s
I'm a full time professional photographer, and love my "old" RF70-200! Have no issues with throw.
The mention of zooming against glass is exactly why I opted for the EF 70-200 2.8 L IS III over the RF version when I got the R6 Mark II. For hockey, you need to keep the lens pressed against glass and the RF version would make that REALLY difficult. Also, the EF version was $1000 cheaper and just as sharp. Also it never misses focus. The R6 Mark II and that lens get around 98% hit rate for hockey, even nailing eye and face AF on players with visors!
What do u mean zooming against glass ?
@@creativegreatsvisuals when you are standing right up against a fence or window. If you were to zoom in with the old one, you'd bump into it
I am happy to with my RF 70 - 200 F2.8, it is perfect lens. It is not difficult to zoom in, once you get use to it... I love my lens, I love design and all in it ...
agreed, the old RF lens is a great lens.
Been using my old EF version II for years and still using it on my R6 and R5 and it works great for basketball and volleyball. I did not go to the first RF version because I saw how Jared struggled with the throw on it in his reviews years ago The new Z version resolves this so in another year or two when prices come down or I can pick up a used version of this new Z lens I will finally make the switch.
I have the EF version iii and I’ll just adapt it whenever I move up to the RF mount…freaking LOVE that lens! 😅
I like the older RF for more compact, the internal zoom is not that big of a deal for me to pay an extra 1k.
Been using EF 70-200 2.8 L IS III with 2x extender for almost 9 months of this year as a beginner photographer. It's fantastic! Highly recommend it for any new photographers who wants a 70-200 lens. I've been using it for music festivals and club events for the last 9 months.
I've gotten a nickname already, called telescope since it looks like one walking around with it haha.
Photography isn't my full time job yet, would love to make it in the future. By watching your review Jared Polin (huge fan, also inspired me to become a photographer) on those lenses, I'm really tempted to buy the Z now.
Looks amazing and I couldn't imagine holding it.
I'm stuck of either selling my older version for the new or just save up to buy it.
I just got the “old” RF 70-200 f2.8 yesterday. I was able to get for a decent price and love it. I also compared it in store with the Z version and while a beautiful lens, the compact version fits my needs a lot better. Very very happy with my purchase. The throw also doesn’t affect or bothers me !
Great review as always
Love the fact there's an optional black finish version. Had no idea that was coming. I'm all for the white color on the big telephotos that bake in the sun on monopods on the sidelines, but as a former newspaper staff photographer covering street/spot news, community events, etc., I found that a white 70-200 was just too conspicuous.
I spent a week with the New RF 70-200 2.8 Z... It's quite good... But IMHO, it is NOT $2500 better than my 70-200 2.8 L iii. Thanks for coming to my TED Talk
I just want to buy this lens, how abt the vid?
Thank you for the video. For now I’m sticking with the original RF 70-200mm f/2.8 since I’ve got a space in my bag for the smaller lens. I’ve bought a second copy of RF 50/1.2 L hood that fit it fine to also get a smaller size. Since I’m rarely shooting sports I don’t think I will update but will see. Nice comparison. Appreciate your teams effort to give us the comparison. Take care.
Thank you for uploading this video. I've been waiting for you to review this.. I'll get the new one..
After being forced years ago into begrudgingly accepting the external zoom version, this was the fastest pre-order I’ve ever submitted when Canon announced it. Glad I could get one in the first wave and have been shooting with it for a few weeks now. Just like the obvious conclusions in the video: it really is so insanely ergonomically superior to the old one. Absolutely the most no brainer $3k I have dropped on gear in a long time.
Exactly! I am glad Canon did realize the external zooming, wrongly placed zoom ring and bad design disqualifying TCs were all mistakes.
Happy to see 24-105/2.8 follows the same approach.
Well done, Canon.
The "I know thats what she said" always kills me 😂
Still using my EF 70-200 f/2.8 II from 2010 on my R3. Works fine.
happy with my original RF 70-200 love the compact size for travelling which is the most important thing for me
I have the old EF version 2, and it looks good, too. Even adapted to my R7 shooting at my daughter's dance gala or my kid's karate belt gradings. I have no need to upgrade. I do, however, want to grab an R6ii to stick this lens on.
I appreciate the discussion on the build and housing of the lens, Jared.
Comparing it to the 24- 105 2.8 was nice to see. It's also a cool thing that I noticed when I first purchased my 24-105 f 4 and my 70-200 F4.
Those two lenses also have an extremely similar build quality and housing. So much so that they fit almost perfectly in my camera bag, give or take a few millimeters because of the lens cap.
Fantastic and unbiased review! I love my old RF 70-200, but a day of photographing dog agility really strains my zoom arm and wrist. The new Z version is just too expensive for me to justify, especially since it's almost twice the price of a well-maintained used RF.
I use the EF 70-200 “one” with R6M2 and no problems with indoor track photography. I love the short thumb throw from 70-200 instantly as sprinters and jumpers approach.
Wait, the choice is ours, thanks Fro 👍😋 I have the EF Version 1 and the RF, both great lenses, bought the RF because it takes up less room in my backpack when traveling.
Sold my EF 70-200 v3 and got the RF z model. Best move I ever made!
Why the best move ?
Not for your wallet...
@@Mightymoose02 what do u mean?
I chose to trade in my “Old” RF 70-200 and put it towards my RF 100-300 2.8. Shooting sports with that along with the 28-105 2.8 makes things easier. The new body looks nice tho. Especially being in the same casing as the 28-105
That baby shot might be the best one you've taken!!! Sidenote im good with the Sigma Sports 70-200. Its a tank but it does what its suppose to do.
When I started with Canon digital Cameras ca. 15/16 years ago, i decided to choose primes and not Zoom-Lenses. So i purchased a 85mm and a 200mm Prime. Still use the EF 200/2.8L USM II. It is a great lens: fast, sharp, small, cheap (700€).
Love the old. My second favorite lens. Love its compact size. Unlike any other RF L. Which are all mammoth. The growth doesn’t bug me at all. It’s the carrying around size that makes more difference to me. Plus it’s simply an incredible piece of glass. IQ is without peer.
Just listed my old RF 70-200 up for sale. Superb lens but the the zoom throw a major reason why I want to upgrade.
Canon says they’ll keep selling the small RF lens, it’s not being discontinued.
I bought mine almost a year ago.
The zoom ring takes some practice getting used to, but so far I’ve been able to deal with it by thinking more about my compositions, like when using a prime lens. It’s hard to go from 70200mm at once, but I can do it in two steps, or at once with some extra wrist movement (and then I readjust my hand to a comfortable position). I ended-up learning that I rarely need to do it at once, as long as I plan my compositions properly.
The way this goes on my shoulder bag and backpacks is just amazing for running and gunning, I can fit extra stuff thanks to this lens.
If 200mm is enough for someone, this is a special one.
I do photojournalism (reportage), some music photography, a few weddings and events. 200mm has been enough to me for the past 5+ years, so I never saw the incompatibility with teleconverters as an issue - I never used them on my EF lens either.
I am 24/7 full time professional, I do as much video as I do photos... and the longer throw on the 70-200 actually is quite nice for smooth zoom-ins and zoom-outs while filming. It's never been an issue for portrait and wedding photography for me.
I still have the EF II. I had not seen a reason to upgrade to the EF III since the optics did not change. Even though the original RF was lighter, I did not think there was any real world IQ lift and stayed with the EF II. With the EF II I do use 1.4x tc when I need to extend the reach. I put the money when I moved to R system into a lens that extended my kit. This year I have gotten more into video. When this new RF Z came out, I ordered it on day 1. It was lighter than the EF II, although heavier than the original RF. It has video features I will take advantage of now that I am a hybrid shooter. And since it accept tcs, it was an easy decision for me. I already have both the RF 1.4x and 2x that I use with a couple other RF lenses. My absolute first reaction when I mounted the RF Z lens on my R5 was how balanced the lens felt. It feels much lighter than it really is. I assume they moved some of the heavier optics closer to the camera mount to get this incredible balance. In my mind I wondered if I was thinking that just to justify the purchase. I was so happy to see Jared make the exact same comment. Canon, job well done!
An important thing that did not come up as a requirement for upgrading to the new version of the vav 70-200 is whether the lens is to be used for extensive video production.
As I see it, it is up to the photographer's qualities that determine how good a photo can be, not the technology that comes second. Can understand that version 1 of the 70-200 RF can stutter a bit if you move the lens sideways quickly and need to readjust the zoom. But otherwise it shouldn't be a problem. If you use R5, you can Crop afterwards. Finally, regarding sports, you must have experience from the sport you are photographing, without that knowledge you will never capture the image.
I still use the version 1 with IS which came out around 10 years ago? It’s great!! Lenses are great for many many years especially when we are talking about expensive glass 🎉
I might sell one of my 70-200 f/2.8 RF lenses for the Z version, like you say, the external zoom is a pain with the long throw and I just prefer the internal zoom of the older version. I only ever use one as a back-up so wouldn't mind falling back to the old RF version if the new one broke/got damaged in the field.
I like travel photography, so keeping everything compact is important to me. being able to fit a nifty 50 with the RF70-200 is important to me.
Wonder if you can use a 1.4x or 2x on the 24-105 f2.8 🧐🧐🧐🧐
Thanks Jared. I Was waiting for this❤
Now RF 70-200mm F2.8 comes down on price on the used market...almost half the $3100 price of the new RF 70-200 USM Z. From my perspective, the most significant improvement is Canon teleconverter can be used with the new RF 70-200 USM Z and there were no teleconverter with the older RF 70-200mm F2.8. Because the older RF 70-200 F2.8 is an external zoom lens, it packs shorter. Both lenses have excellent image quality!
Great review dude. Super helpful.
Appreciate the details and work as always, Jared. One Q: what's a Z lens review, if it doesn't test the video capabilities? This lens wasn't made just to fix the zoom throw and extension. It was made for video use. You should use the zoom rocker and show comparisons of that vs. manual zooming on the old lenses. I dont remember seeing any video clips except viewfinder recording in photo mode. Totally ok that you were using it on photo bodies, but I can imagine canon's ideal users for this lens might fall closer to R5C, C70/80/400 shooters who exclusively shoot video. IMO, the original RF 70-200 is photo first, video second. The new one is video first, photo second.
Does it come in black? - Bruce Wayne 😂
Yes - Barry White
The new one has better dust seal and the teleconverters but it is so handy to be able to pack the original RF in a sling back and have room for a second lens.
Ultimately tho, I’m aiming for the f2.8 24-105 because that range can live on my camera
This is a great lens! the 24-105mm f/2.8 and this 70-200mm f/2.8 are really the only lenses I need! the 85mm is just a bonus lol.
I still use my EF with my R5, and have been saving to upgrade to the RF 70-200. For me the older RF makes more sense. It is cheaper, and the smaller size works better for me.
Great review! Thank you. Loving those presets too.
I’m still rocking my EF70-200 III adapted to RF.
The external zoom is pretty much a no go for me. In the harsh, muddy and dusty environments I often shoot (military and motor sports) it’s just not a good idea.
I’ve already have a (older, cheaper) lens which now has a permanent scratching sound when zooming. And it almost happened again last time when I got sprayed with mud. And this basically "locks" the lens to the longest focal length because I can’t really clean it well in the field.
But no problem with the EF70-200.
The new 70-200 Z looks great and I would really appreciate the lower weight and faster focus but for 3600€ it’s just to much.
Yeah 3600€ is waay too much to spend for basically putting lens at risk every time.. better option may be the 100- 500 keep you farther, but then again that's also external zoom.
I personally do a lot of photography that requires a lot of travel, so the compactness of the chode edition is actually great for me. It means I can fit an additional lens in my bag or perhaps even a tripod or additional clothes. I have both the EF and RF chode versions (shared between me and my brother), and because I don’t do sports, the throw really doesn’t bug me whatsoever. I am, however, glad Canon decided to build both. The 70-200 is such an important lens that pretty much every photographer needs, so having 3 excellent options available (cheap but clunky, compact but harder to zoom, and expensive with all the bells and whistles) is great. I do hope the chode edition eventually gets a Version ii and Canon continues it.
The compact version. Will definitely. Get a ii v. Canon made sure of that option by putting "apparently" better optics in the z that they can next put in the compact ii if the make a ii.
The original RF lens works well for me due to my travelling. I value it being compact. yes would love internal zoom but size matters 😉
Excellent review
I took the "old" RF 70-200 to airshow recently and I never have problem with the zooming, yes it needed a bit of twisting but it is fine for me and I didn't "miss a lots of shoots" compare to my 100-400 anyways, and the compactness is perfect for me, same goes for the RF 24-70 2.8, I tried the 24-105 2.8 and while it is good I don't feels like its size is a good lens for walkaround travel lens. The only thing I think that matters is the ability to put TCX2 on it, then again the TC will most likely be weld onto the 100-400 most of the time anyways.
Thanks for the review
I suppose it may be time to update from the original EF MRK1.
I never had issues with the extending old lense and i actually love the compactness so i can take it more easily on hikes in my backpack. But i agree that the zoom is requiring deliberate zoomthrowing .... however.... doesnt matter really for me. And now we have the beautiful situation that one can choose! You want the perma boner version? get the new one, you prefer compact chode? get the old one!
Choice > no choice
Cool video and both lenses are fantastic in my opinion !🙂
Love the current RF 70-200 2.8 It should be called compact rather old. It fits well in the camera bag, sharp, fast and really nice photos. People having EF can buy the Z version while I dont see any major reason for people having the current RF to go for Z version.
I have no choice buying the compact RF 70-200mm when I switch to RF system. I only have two benefits of buying the new version.
Architecture of internal zoom and filter diameter (same as my two other lenses). The cost of buying the compact version, reselling it and upgrading to the new version is clearly the worst in my opinion.
Do the electrical contacts on the lens body compromise its weather sealing?
I would compare the lens' lengths without the hoods. The two RF lenses look virtually identical when the older one is zoomed out.
Canon says they do not
How do you carry an RF 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM(the older and lighter one) when attached to a lighter camera like r8? Do you attach it to a strap and let it dangle all the time, or do you have to hold it by the lens the whole time you're using the camera? Thank you
Where is your review of the Canon R1?
I love this new design so much, it looks more professional and serious than the first edition. Today I decided to buy a Sigma 70-200 F2.8 E-mount that looks exactly like the black canon lens and it is amazing, after seeing so many reviews about its caveats I found none of them and feels like cheating compared to the adapted minolta 80-200 G HS APO. It's extremely sharp, has no OSS tredpidation and grips on focus while zooming harder than a gamedog onto a boar's nose. I'm sure this canon lens will be miles ahead!
I just ordered a "Z" and the power zoom attachment. It is going to be a merru CHristmas this year.
I think they got the first one perfect I prefer the control ring close to camera, so good there is a choice though, well done Canon. zooming if you're in a hurry simply push or pull the lens.
You didn't explain the biggest difference between the new Z Version and all of the previous 70-200 f/2.8 L's... it is actually par focal, meaning the focus doesn't change while you are zooming... that's why it's so much more suitable for video
Currently using the 70-200 f4 but looking to upgrade…. What’s your opinion on the original RF 2.8 or the new Z 2.8 ???
I use Sony and I LOVE the easy zoom throw in that bad boy, but the powerzoom option is something I'd like.
Serious question Jared. Is your pom pom hair just a barrier to block the view to anyone behind you in order to prevent others from taking the same frames as you?
Dude, you need to wear goggles on the squash court, and I’ve never seen a white squash ball! I must be old.
I like the decision, now canon users have the choice
if they want internal or external zooming
sony was better for having internal zoom from my perspective
but i don't have a issue with people that like compact
I stay with my v II but I love the small one, the Z is just for sport.
Jared, I'm with you on the throw of the chod lens. I currently have the R6 and was looking at that lens but you make a great point about the throw. Would you recommend staying with that lens or getting the old 70-200mm with the adapter? I can afford the chod or EF lens.
EF I II III: for those still on the fence.
1st gen RF: for compactness.
2nd gen RF: for internal zooming + 1.4X & 2X.
2nd gen RF(black): for other brand shooters against white paint.
God damn, Canon has everything covered!
The materials used are top notch. The leather feels soft and luxurious, exactly like the real thing. The stitching is impeccable, with no loose or uneven lines. The hardware (including the iconic CC twist lock clasp) is durable, well made, and adds to the overall elegance of the bag kislux . I thought everyone who owned an LV monogram bag knew that it was obviously coated canvas? When people spend a fortune on an expensive bag, they might as well buy a replica
I didn’t realize you can go to f1.2 on the 2.8 Z lens.. 0:35
Hahaha.. I saw that too..
I shoot sports video with the “old 70-200” with rf adapter.. Wish the focus was quicker and more accurate. Would I be happy upgrading? (Shooting on R5)
Steven pumping out the content while Fro is in Kenya?
Seems like my main complaint about the rf 70-200 is the zoom extending out while I’m walking with it. I keep it locked when walking but that adds a step that can make you miss a shot in a hurry.
No interest in upgrading though since I don’t shoot sports.
Hi Jared,
I’m in the market for a versatile portrait lens and I have seen reviews that the RF 70-200 is the best lens to get. I’d love to hear your thoughts. Thanks
Love the video as always.
Is there a way to just get pack 1 or even better just skittles? I normally make my own presets but would like to see the results from skittles.
Thanks for all you do for the photo community.
You can buy each pack separately at their respective URLS froknowsphoto.com/fropack1 (/fropack2, etc). The original individual packs are back at normal price though since we lift the sale once a new pack is released. Check out Kaleidoscope from FroPack4 also if you really dig Skittles, it's another excellent alternative.
I wished you showed how it perform on Nikon cameras too.. On the other hand it is great that they are making cross compatible lenses with Z mount.. massive win for Canon!
Wait, what?!? The same lens he featured can be mounted on Nikon mirrorless bodies too? Are you sure? I mean, I know it's called a "Z" version but I didn't think it referred to the Nikon Z system.
there is NO VIDEO comparing the sharpness of 24 105 Z with a 24-70 2.8 could you do it?
The EF is slightly softer at pixel peep levels.
Can you tell any difference in Picture quality from the RF to the Z?
Same ?
Fro doesn't pixel peep in this video but he states several times how excellent and comparable the RF and Z are, performance-wise.
@@anthonyc1883yes I really did appreciate that. I am just very visual and would’ve loved a comparison to the RF vs Z RF.
That being said I gave the 24-105Z RF and its IQ is just insanely superb for a zoom. So I would assume it’s sister lens is to. No reason to doubt the Fro!!!!!!
Hi Jared, I hope you are well! Please activate the translator so I can see it since I don't speak English and I always watch your videos with subtitles, thanks Jared, long life
What is the quality of the photos of the new RF "Z" with 1.4x and 2x teleconverters?
How do you record a video with all the photo settings overly?
I’ll keep my EF 70-200/2.8L IS III USM
Yeah I have the choad edition, but did buy the new 24-105 f/2.8 coz I shoot a lot of video and wanted canons as my fullframe option. I use m4/3 primarily. So going to decide if sell the choad edition to get the hybrid version. I'm just not crazy about how much electronic wizardry is needed to correct the new lenses, but I guess all of em need it across all brands.
Can you put the new RF hood with the window on the old EF?
If I am going on a big city vacation do I take a 28-70 f2 or 70 to 200mm ? Downtown Boston
I don't use this focal range enough to buy any of them, but the original RF looks the best to me. Nice and compact for travel or hiking.
Mr Polin,
I must admit, I am very bummed out about this new Z ver. I bought the original rf. Ver. About 3 months ago..
Listen I don't make my living with photography, but I can't avoid beating my self up about this. I guess just a personal flaw. But it wouldn't bothering at all IF the only differences were. That it's a non extender, hybrid lens and that you can use tc's.. but what bothers me is that it's actually optically better... I don't have the z to actually compare but I hear it's sharper... that's actually what bothers me.. Anyway nice video.
You've got to get past that kind of thinking. I definitely understand but just go out and take lots of pictures. The Next Greatest Thing is always just around the corner. It's never ending. Yes, there are jumps in performance that occur between certain models but many new models like this lens are not that big of a difference. Know that many, many people would love to have the lens you already have and would use it to the max with a lot of happiness.
@anthonyc1883 thank you for your response.
Your right about everything you said. Gotta get rid of that way of thinking.. 100%. Thank you again.
I have the EF version adapted to my R3. There is not a compelling reason to update to either the RF version or the Z version based on image quality alone. If I needed to replace the EF version then of course I would get the Z version, but that is the only reason. I also have the RF 24-105 f/2.8 Z lens. That is well worth the price of entry. It is amazing in every respect and I would imagine the 70-200 version is just as amazing, just not amazing enough to ditch the adapted EF 70-200 for the new Z version. I would like to know more about the tele-converters. The RF 1.4 converter could be handy on the 24-105 f/2.8 from time to time. Please review them.
Now do a video comparing the compact 70-200rf on an R7 against the EF 70-200 iii with a speed booster on an r7
I love the, "thats what she said"... Good one :)
I can’t believe the price difference between the US and the UK.
Our equivalent for B&H in the UK is Wex or Park Cameras. Going from WEX prices and converting to USD as of Dec 2024;
Canon 70-200mm f2.8 Z pre order = $4,387 USD
Sony 70-200mm f2.8 vii = $3,155 USD
Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 Z = $2,289 USD
Nikon 70-180mm f2.8 Z = $1,271 USD (no VR)
When I work on live events, I see many Pros in the UK who shoot Canon sticking with EF glass, the younger guys all seem to shoot Sony and the Nikon Pros I see going for the 70-180mm because it’s cheap, light weight and “performs well enough”.
You couple the lens with the R5mkii vs A1 vs A1mkii vs Z8 and it’s;
$10,238 USD for the Canon setup
$10,163 USD for the A1 Sony setup
$11,182 USD for the A1 mkii setup
$6,420 USD for the Nikon with the S-line lens
$5,328 USD for the Nikon setup with the 70-180mm
After looking at the prices in the UK, does the decision as to which system to choose as a new starter becomes one of cost? Are Sony and Canon at twice the price twice as good?
I recently put the foot back on my 70-200 because I use it with my Black Rapid dual camera sling. I know Jared thinks the tripod mount is only for tripods and, therefore, dumb, but wedding and event photographers everywhere know otherwise.
yeah I prefer holding the foot when taking photos with my 70-200 gmII ngl
I would probably go with the old EF lens. It's not just a budget thing but with the Ef to RF adapter I have I can drop in filters very quickly and I don't need to buy a brand new set of filters just for one lens and it drops in so it saves time...
I don't need super fast auto-focus for what I am currently doing so the ability to have that drop in filter is the best thing ever.
That and I still want the 24-105mm f2.8 which I would think would be great for 99% of everything I do. The person who owns that probably wouldn't want a 70-200mm... Maybe a 100-300mm would have been a better match.
Sticking with EF until I can start to generate consisant money. If I was full time pro, I would be bumping to the new RF, for me Id rather have the internal zoom. I feel much more confinement in the longevity
I'd love to see this new z lens compared with the Nikon Z 70-200 f2.8 S lens on a Z9 or Z8. I have the Nikon lens and I warn people that they can cut themselves with it, it's so sharp. It's also blazing fast autofocusing.