Once you've used the 2.8 and have experience with it, using the f4 will be noticable! I tried going from the EF 2.8 model to the RF f4 model and I missed the look and capability of the 2.8. I eventually sold the RF f4 to get into the RF 2.8. I Like how the f4 is smaller and you can definitely get away with most case scenarios but for happy with the decsion. If you're a working prfessional you'll want the 2.8 inventually but starting with this f4 is a great choice especially if your'e a hobbyist. Hope this helps the algorithm! lol
You’re contradicting yourself a bit mate. First you say you like the compact size but at the same time complain about the extending barrel. The only reason canon’s able to make this lens so compact is because of the extending barrel. Just look at the rest of the 70-200mm on the market, the ones that all zoom internally, they are twice the size of this thing when retracted at 70mm. You can’t have it both ways, even though in the perfect world we would love for it to happen. I am going to get this lens within this year and the only reason I’m getting this 70-200 is because of the size when retracted, otherwise I would never consider it.
I should’ve explained better in the video but in my mind when I said that I was comparing it to the Sony equivalent. The sony 70-200 f4 v1 is nearly the same width but 2ish inches longer. Has all the things I like: compact, tripod foot, and internal zoom. While you are correct that the only way they can make it this compact is the external zoom I find it hard to believe that canon can’t figure some way to make something similar to that Sony lens especially considering how old that lens is. I’m assuming they will make an internal zooming one after their recent 24-105 launch and with the 24 Olympics on the horizon. However, I’ve actually moved on from Canon and this lens but I hope it treats you well.
Once you've used the 2.8 and have experience with it, using the f4 will be noticable! I tried going from the EF 2.8 model to the RF f4 model and I missed the look and capability of the 2.8. I eventually sold the RF f4 to get into the RF 2.8. I Like how the f4 is smaller and you can definitely get away with most case scenarios but for happy with the decsion. If you're a working prfessional you'll want the 2.8 inventually but starting with this f4 is a great choice especially if your'e a hobbyist. Hope this helps the algorithm! lol
this is excellent lens work with my r62 very good
absolutely correct conclusions
If you shoot any low light sports the 2.8 is an absolute must. The f4 will not get the job done.
You’re contradicting yourself a bit mate. First you say you like the compact size but at the same time complain about the extending barrel. The only reason canon’s able to make this lens so compact is because of the extending barrel. Just look at the rest of the 70-200mm on the market, the ones that all zoom internally, they are twice the size of this thing when retracted at 70mm. You can’t have it both ways, even though in the perfect world we would love for it to happen. I am going to get this lens within this year and the only reason I’m getting this 70-200 is because of the size when retracted, otherwise I would never consider it.
I should’ve explained better in the video but in my mind when I said that I was comparing it to the Sony equivalent. The sony 70-200 f4 v1 is nearly the same width but 2ish inches longer. Has all the things I like: compact, tripod foot, and internal zoom. While you are correct that the only way they can make it this compact is the external zoom I find it hard to believe that canon can’t figure some way to make something similar to that Sony lens especially considering how old that lens is. I’m assuming they will make an internal zooming one after their recent 24-105 launch and with the 24 Olympics on the horizon. However, I’ve actually moved on from Canon and this lens but I hope it treats you well.
@@clandvisualsthat was fast. This video is only 3 months old.
I want all of my groceries in one bag, but I don't want the bag to be heavy.