I’m a portrait photographer and I have an 85 rf f2 and 35 rf 1.8, in looking to purchase a 14-35mm rf f/4 because I train jiu jitsu everydya and I do a lot of indoor photos and videos so a wide lens would be great for my everyday use however when it comes to portrait I probably wouldn’t use it as much and that’s where I make my money lol so the 24-70 is probably what I’ll be getting next. Thanks for the video anthony!
Dude... I just stumbled on this video after following you for a while... It's absolutely amazing how much you've improved your skills as videographer, editor and colorist in a year! Keep at it!
RF28-70 f2 is a great lens. Since you have the 15-35 it is a perfect compliment. Prime look w/zoom convenience. Fast 2.0 it gives nice bokeh and more control in low light. My favorite RF lens.
Amazing Video. I have a different thought about where all photographers should start. I think that for learning (not needing all of this expensive equipment) you should start with a prime lenses such as the 50mm 1.8 or the 35mm, because you will learn to move, having a flow while shooting, not being in the same place missing opportunities (not having the zoom, obligates you to move and make your subject fit better in your composition). After you learn how to use a prime lenses and you can move very well, thats when you should by a zoom lenses, and trust me, you will move as well! because you are already used to do that, and its very good.
Versatility is for when you're starting out on a budget or are new to photography. Once you know what you like, it's all about the focal lengths that you like. Like i started with the nifty fifty bc everyone told me to. But i was never excited about any of the pics. It was when i went wide at the 15-35 range and beautiful at the 85 and up did i get the passion for photography.
My line is: 28-70 f/2, RF 35mm f/1. STM, RF 24mm f/1.8, EF 135L f/2, Sigma 85mm f/1.4, RF 50mm f/1.8 and a few other EF lenses but to be honest alot of the Canon lenses are redundant. I use my 35mm and 24mm for videos ONLY though.
I run dual R6's and I keep on my RF 70-200 and the other is the AMAZING RF 28-70 f/2. These two lenses handle 99% of everything that I need for weddings, portraits or whatever I encounter.
hi there mate i am just starting to get into weddings and events from motorsports just curious about the 28-70 i dont care about the weight just if its really that good for weddings events and low light situations i have an r6 aswell
Thanks for this. Its nice to hear people explain how they make these decisions. I've gradually assembled the RF 15-35 2.8 L, 24-70 2.8 L, 70-200 2.8 L, 100-500 L, 50 1.2 L, 85 1.2 L, and the Laowa 90 2.8 2:1 macro. I have one body - R5.
The set up I ended up with is the 15-35 2.8, 50 1.2, and 70-200 2.8. I thought about getting the 28-70 f2 but I have never owned a system and not have a 50mm prime so that's my middle length. More lens changes depending on whats going on but the 50mm 1.2 might be the best 50 I've ever used. Thing is absolutely nuts with the quality it produces.
I have an rp that I pair with a 24-105 f4, and 70-200 f4. Love the combo as an enthusiast not able to justify the cost of f2.8. I also have an ef 50 1.8 adapted, as well as a 85 1.4. Nice little kit for the likes of me.
With the EF 70-200 you would normally have to lay it on it's side in your camera bag, taking up a ton of space. I have the same RF 70-200 as you now and it can fit into my back standing up, which saves a ton of space. It's also a beautiful lens.
Which ones? Whatever you think fits your budget and needs. I think the price on the 50mm needs to go WAY down. I mean, it's a nifty fifty, not a specialist lens. Yes, it's an 'L', but it's not a justifiable price. The 100-500 'L' is one a lot of people complain about price wise, but to me, it's the best price for such a razor sharp zoom lens with such fast AF. The sharpness is almost on par with the EF 500mm prime. Heck, maybe it is on par.
I just got myself a Canon R7 and now I'm actually thinking of kitting myself with shooting niche in mind. I cone off thr M50 and I just would take random photos all over using whatever lens I could get on the cheap. I picked up 2 Sigma lenses off a local auction house, 17-50 F2.8 and 18-300 F3.5-6.3. I took random street pics while on walks, it was my travel vacation kit, and family photos. Now I'm actually thinking of selling off the 18-300 for the Sigma 150-600mm contemporary for wildlife and birding, keep the 17-50mm for my street walks and portraits plus vlogging if I ever really get into it.
You nailed my concern about which RF to get. I currently have an old 17-85, which is perfect. I find I use the wide angle more often than the 85mm. So, my first thought is to upgrade and get the 15-35. Then I am stuck, but I like your sequence of going big with the 70-200 next. I don’t like the idea of switching lenses too often, or carrying around all that glass. For everyday use, I think the 28-70 is “ok” but, for family gatherings inside, the wide angle is what I use a lot, it’s, also good for wide angle landscapes. I’ll have to start with the 15-35mm.
I have the R6 with the 24-105mm f4, nifty fifty and 100-400mm~ which basically covers most of my needs for now. While I do dream of lenses like the 28-70mm f2 or the 85mm f1.2~ I am quite happy with what I have right now, and will wait untill i have more room in my budget, to upgrade any further :3
I went from five EF primes and two EF Zooms to 2 RF zooms and two EF primes. Couldn't be happier. RF24-105 f/4L + RF 70-200 f/4L + RF 35 1.8 + EF 100L. If it came down to ONE (I hate those choices which are no choices...it would be the RF 70-200 f/4L. (As 135 is my favorite focal length)
I have the R6, and have found it an enormous upgrade on my 80D, although my main love is wildlife photography, so for me the best feature is the improved autofocus. I own the EF 70-200 2.8 and it's a wonderful lens, but from a brief play around with the RF version, that lens seems even better. For me the lens I really want is the 600mm F4, but need to work out how I can afford to buy one without selling my house to pay for it.
Ah this is super helpful! I have an 80D and an thinking about upgrading to the R6. I use it almost exclusively for video b-roll and interviews (I'm a journalist) - would you say from a video perspective you still consider this an upgrade from 80D?
@@NathalieTravelMuse the 80d has a great look to its footage, especially shooting in ALL-i. I’ve used it a few times as a b-cam to my r6. The footage still looks great, but the r6 is in another world entirely. Unbelievable autofocus, 10bit 4:2:2 color, 4k, LOG, it is an excellent camera. The r7 would be a good upgrade too if you don’t want to shell out r6 money. All of your EF glass will adapt extremely well.
Interesting, I made the same two choices like you: In January 2022 I bought the R6 with the RF 24-105 f/4L (which hasn't arrived yet) and I also got the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM. My roadmap of lenses though is a little different. I'm only a hobbyist and I'm more interested in tele zooms then in wide angles. Therefore my thinking was, let's take a kit (24-105) and combine it with a tele zoom (100-500mm - very expensive) and you'll get this 24-500mm covered with only two lenses. Later I saw some comparision videos (mostly in German) where wide angle lenses were compared (especially the EF 16-35mm f/4L and the RF 14-35mm f/4L). Most of these comparisons said that getting the EF version is the better choice considering the price. That's all I wanted to contribute to your excellent video. Thanks.
EF lenses get a whole new life on an RF mount. To be honest, RF lenses are sweet, an adapter „unsexy“. There is literally no other reason to skip on EF lenses. They are way more affordable, optically supreme and often build very well. E.g. the 70-200 f/4 (but even more the f/2.8). They are as good as the RF versions, just not as compact. Biggest difference is the f/2.8 here which is significantly less heavy and thus you will take it with you more often. However, internal zoom and sharpness over the whole image is better with the old version. What I want to say is, you can grab one up for 1100-1200€ which is in mint condition and save the additional 1400€ for the compactness.
Based on my personal experience, the latest generation of EF range lenses outperforms the very first generation of RF lenses. I'm curious to see what Canon will offer with the second generation. So far, I see no reason to buy equipment that offers little to no advantage, just for the sake of owning something labeled as RF.
I think if you can't do the trifecta, I think the 15-35 and 70-200 2.8s with a nifty fifty in between is the perfect compromise. If you really need a 50, it's great. Don't think you ever really need the 15mm and 20mm in between those 3 lenses...
Other considerations: Both 70-200 lenses, the 24-105 f/4, and the 14-35 f/4 all use the same filter size whereas the 24-70 f/2.8 and 15-35 f/2.8 both use the larger 82mm filter. That may be a consideration for those who don't want to buy a second set of filters and f/2.8 isn't a necessity at those wider focal lengths.
You should always buy the largest filters you can, and then a set of step up rings to fit the filters to smaller lenses. Step up rings are super cheap. That way you don’t need to buy several of the same filter. I always buy 82mm filters and I have step up rings from 49mm all the way to 82mm.
OK, so I sold my RP and should be getting my R6 this week. When I got my RP, it came with the 24-240 kit lens. Since then I bought, in order, a RF 35 1.8 and RF 14mm 2.8 Samyang MF. About 2 weeks after I got those, I bought a used RF 15-35 2.8, which I also love. The Samyang sits, for sale. Then I bought an EF Sigma 150-600 5-6.3 Contemporary. Then came the RF nifty fifty. I already have an EF 85mm 1.8. When I sold the RP, the 24-240 went with it. Right now, I have in my cart on Amazon an RF 24-105 f4. You can buy it and make payments over 5 months, but receive the lens now. I'm watching this video thinking about pulling the trigger. I want the flexibility it gives and I want an EF 135mm f2 until an RF version comes out. That should basically give me about every focal length I could want, for now. Ideally, I'd run the 2.8/2.0 trifecta and maybe an RF 100-500. But I'm poor. Even poorer now, LOL...
@@AnthonyGugliotta Honestly? Right now if I could only choose 1, it's probably the EF 85mm 1.8. i just love that distance and aperture. When I was in Alaska in Sept, the Sigma 150-600 was incredible. That was my walk-around lens, lol.
@@AnthonyGugliotta I liked the versatility of the 24-240, obviously. But none of my pictures ever looked amazing out of camera, they always needed editing to make me go wow.
I got the 14-35 F4 and 50mm 1.2 and 70-700mm F4 as my "trinity" for a beginner setup to my first every full frame R6 M2 :) Hope I made a good choice w these 3..
My EF Zeiss lenses work great adapted on my R8. The CPL adapter is fantastic. You can get top-quality EF glass now for a bargain. RF lenses that are worth using are insanely expensive.
I'm a bit blown away that 70+ comments and no one has mentioned the RF 24-240mm non-L lens. I have the RF 24-105mm (non-L), RF 15-25mm, the RF 50mm f/1.8, the RF 100-500mm and the RF 24-240mm. I get it's not the fastest/sharpest lens, however, I do mostly landscape and if I had to pick a single lens you can't beat the versatility of the 24-240.
@@AnthonyGugliotta At 24-25mm you cannot miss the fairly heavy vignetting. If you shoot in JPG, the camera will correct. I shoot in RAW and the lens profiles in Adobe Camera Raw do a reasonable job of fixing. Whatever they don't, I can easily address in Photoshop. The lens definitely has some barrel distortion as well though, again, ACR fixes. As a beginner, who bought my first ILEC camera in January 2021, the technical performance of the lens does not matter to me as much as the range of focal lengths and the possibilities it allows in a single lens. I hike/bike with a sling bag so optimized primarily for weight while still requiring full frame/mirrorless. I also have the luxury that the camera does not have to pay for itself. Cheers and thank you for your work.
I use the 24-240 RF for any outdoor daytime events. The results are excellent for this use case and versatility is incredible. While I also have 28-70 RF L and use it indoors and outdoors in low light, I find myself selecting the 24-240 much more often during the middle of the day outdoors.
Okay Dude here is our comment to help your channel grow. First let me say thank you for the review. I am an amateur travel photographer and your review was helpful in helping me understand this new world of Canon Mirrorless photography. My world in photography started a long time ago, in a land far away called silver Halide photography. I was a forensic photographer back in the late 1980s, early 1990s and most of my work was macro, micro or copy photography with view cameras. I was always a big Nikon fan boy, but went with Canon for mirrorless because it seemed to offer a little more flexibility and in Googling seemed to be better than Nikon and on par with Sony, which I know nothing about. I bought a Canon R6, RF 24-105 f4 and the RF 100-500 f4-7.1 and so far, everything I have seen including your video is confirming for me that I made the right choice especially given that it will be used for both still and video work.
My Friend, you are the reason i bought my first camera, i bought the R6 mark ii with the 50mm f1.8 Keep posting videos! i really like them. ps: when i manage to sell my kidney ill go for the 28-70 f2 :)
In the EF world I had the 5D2 with a 17-40 F4, 50 F1.4, and 100 F2.8 Macro and was super happy. When I switched to the R6 I got the 15-35, 50 1.8, and kept the EF 100 Macro. However, as a hobbyist wo likes to take mainly pictures of friends and vacations, the 15-35 was rather annoying. Now I switched to the RF 24-105 L for vacations, I use the 50 1.8 if I go to parties or meet outside with friends and I am looking for an ultra wide prime lens if I have the time for landscape. Because that was the issue with the 15-35, I either used it at 15mm for landscape or switched to an other lens. So I guess I can just have a prime for these rare occasions. I do like 35mm in general, but then F2.8 is normally not enough for an image with 3D-pop. Also, since the lens is very big and you need to get close, it kind of makes people uncomfortable. This is also why I prefer the 50 1.8 over the 1.2 at the moment. For the future a small, ultrasharp RF 50 1.4L USM would be perfect. Long story short - I understand why people go for the F2.8 zooms as professionals. But as a hobbyist, even though money isn't the issue, I do not really see the point in carrying the big zoom lenses.
I got the Rokinon 14mm for Milky Way shots and the RF 70-200mm F4 so far for my R6. There's a certain price point on lenses where I back off since I'm not a pro. So the 70-200 F4 being considerably less $$$ than the F2.8 was the primary factor in my decision. I would say go with the F2.8 if you actually make any money off of your photography. I'm debating on getting the nifty 50 or a dedicated macro lens next. I like macro shots but I don't know how often I would take them myself and I would like something to bridge the gap between the 14mm and 70-200mm. I'm just a hiker/tourist. While I'd love to have a 600mm and sit around bird watching, am I actually going to get to do that? Maybe. Food/rent > dreams.
I have what you have, except I got a 35mm and 50mm and 85mm too considering you go on hikes more often I recommend getting a 35! When I travel I carry around 35mm and if I "need" that extra length moments, I switch my lens to 70200F4 these two lenses are the best combos in my opinion (versatile and light weight)
I’d love to get your take on the Canon RF 24-240 f4-6.3. I bought that first with my R62 and a 50 f1.8 for low light. I think a longer telephoto is my next purchase( or borrow). I love telephoto’s reach.
The only RF lens I own is the RF 35mm f1.8. I primarily have EF lenses which include: - Rokinon EF 14mm f1.8 - Tamron EF 24-70mm f2.8 g2 - Canon EF 50mm f1.8 - Canon EF 85mm f1.8 - Tamron EF 70-200mm f2.8 g2 - Tamron EF 150-600mm f5-6.3 g2 Tamron is easy to say the route I went. Affordable yet still super high quality. I'm missing that 14-35/15-35/16-35 lens tho.
I am buying a R7 and rf 24 to 100 f4 lens only because of my tight budget, what will be your suggestion, I do sport, nature and travel photography all the time, love your content ❤️
I have the 16-35 F4 EF and the 100 mm 2.8 EF that I use on my EOS R with the adaptor which is fantastic! My wife has the 15-35 2.8 RF which is amazing ! We also have the 24-70 2.8 , 100-500 F4.5- 7.1 ,70-200 F4. we also have the 35 RF F4 macro.
The EFS17-55 f2.8 on canon’s apsc sensor would actually have the same depth of field as a F4 on a full frame sensor, so you wouldn’t really be missing out on bokeh.
I went with the 24-105 (because I could kit it with my camera for 200 less than it would be to buy them separate), 14-35 f/4 because I do a lot of real estate and I'm using a tripod for that and I'm not shooting wide open anyhow, then nifty fifty, 85 f/2 macro, and I'm saving for the 70-200 2.8 next. After that it's either saving for the 1.2 or 2.8 versions of the ones I've got or going all the way for a 400 f/2.8, because it'll be about the same cost, but either way there's a lot of kitchens and bedrooms to photograph between me and that.
Here's a personal story, but still relevant. I'm a professional photographer at Shamrock Space Studio. Recently, I sold my old EF 16-35 f2.8 III USM and bought an RF 15-35 f2.8 IS. Guess what? I sent it back yesterday and ordered a new "old" EF 16-35 f2.8 III USM. Simply put, I achieve much better results with the old EF, particularly when using this lens on my Canon R5 & Canon R5C. But stay with me, that's not the end of the story. I conducted some research and discovered that I'm not alone. Many professionals and amateurs around the globe have done pretty much the same or at least arrived at the same conclusion: the EF 16-35 f2.8 III USM is better than the RF 15-35 f2.8 IS. I forgot to mention that the EF is 20-25% cheaper...
I have the R6 and the RF100 - 400. My plan was to purchase the RF 14 - 35 and RF100 - 500. Since I have the RF100 - 400, I am going to wait on the 100 - 500, but my next RF lens will be the 14 - 35. If I went with just 1 lens, it would be the RF24 - 105 L lens.
Very good video. I have the same lenses for my R5. You do know on the 24 to 105 you have to update the firmware. It fixed a lot of problems. When you use it as movie mode or for that matter stills. Set the correction to on for all three options. It basically sets the profile in the camera without using Lightroom. Good luck your a good instructor. Fraser Schwalley
Thanks Fraser! I don't think I've updated the lens firmware. I'll have to check that out. I've also been shooting with some new lenses lately so it might be time to reshoot my lens review! :)
I got a RF 70-200mm F2.8L which replaced my Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 A009. I already have a Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 G2, EF 24-105mm F4L and EF 17-40mm F4L. 😂 I'm thinking of adding an RF 15-35 F2.8L for the IS and I do not want to get rid of the 17-40mm yet.
Great video! I'm coming at it from a very different angle than you return my R6, started out with the 50 mm, then the 35 mm working my way up! My EF 'L' collection of lens are still amazing adapted.
I know this video is little bit old, but I'm hoping to get an answer here since you seems like you totally know what you're talking about. So my situation at the moment is, I can get a USED 15-35L f2.8 for ard $1,480 or get a NEW 14-35L f4 for ard $1,250. I've been waiting and searching for the used market for 14-35f4 for months but none are available. So for that little difference in $, which do you think I should go for? My used case is, travel, kids, and family events (mostly indoor). My other lenses are RF70-200f4L, EF17-40L(gonna get sold since I hate adapters), and RF35mm f1.8 (also gonna get sold and replaced with rf50mm). Lastly, my camera is Canon r8. Thank you very much in advance. Liked and subbed
For shooting people, RF 28-70/2 that is the one single lens that is the most amazing and without alternative. I scaled back to the RF 24-105/4 for video and it is very far away in terms of look.
I bought Canon RP less than a year ago mainly for astrophotography, but to be able to shoot other things too. It came with the Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM kit lens. It is Ok for some situations, but I have missed many shots, because the lens is just too slow. I also tried to shoot some A-roll for RUclips at 24mm, but it had way too much barrell distortion to be usable. I did get Sigma EF 14mm f/1.8 Art + rf/ef adapter with a filter for Milky way shooting, but now I’ve been planning what do I need the most next. I would like to replace my 24-105mm to something faster, but maybe it would be wiser to get more reach first and I have been comparing many options like Canon rf 70-200 in both f/2.8 and f/4. F/2.8 might be an overkill for RP, but I dream of upgrading it to probably R6 at some point. The biggest reason is IBIS what I would like to have. In lenses, there are so many expensive options, it is a pain to choose. My mind keeps jumping from one option to another. This is just a hobby, so I try to keep that in mind. I would also like to get a fast 85mm for portraits. Like ef 85mm f/1.4. Sigh. And then there are squirrels and birds and zoos where 200mm isn’t enough…
I have the EF 50mm because that's not my only lens I have to adapt. Buying the adapter anyway and replacing the 50mm didn't make sense. Maybe eventually, but it's still my sharpest and fastest lens.
Tbh I have a 24-105 and a 50mm f1.8 which is a great focal length combination especially if ur on a budget but getting the 24-70 and a 70-200 mm lenses will be a better but more expensive combination because they both have a lower aperture which can be better for low light situations and can separate the subject from the background better but that’s if ur going for a more expensive route
Hmmm, your f2.8 lens on aps-c is going to give the equivalent bokeh to your f4 on full frame. The 2.8 will capture more light but the full frame ISO performance should put the lenses on very similar ground.
I just added an 85mm 1.2 DS to my wishlist for Xmas. Just in case 😅 I really like all the images you showed in this video. Beautiful work. If I had to choose ONE lens, it would be the RF 28-70.
I have: 28mm 2.8 50mm 1.4 70-200mm 2.8 II 10-18mm 4.5-5.6\ (and a couple of other starter kit lenses not worth mentioning). I'm looking for my next lens. I take Portraits, Macro, and pictures of my family mostly. With this lineup, which one would you choose next?
I can't afford RF lenses so I got all EF lenses and there's a couple of benefits. 1) Since they're all EF lenses, the RF adapter stays on all the time so changing lenses is no issue than if I had mixed RF and EF lenses. 2) The RF adapter with built-in ND filter saves the hassle of changing different ND filters for different lenses. It's so convenient to have the same one ND filter in the back for all your lenses. 3) Bought third party lenses that had 95% of performance compared to Canon 50% of the cost. Saved thou$ands. 4) The weight and size usually ends up being almost the same as with RF lenses since those lenses are so big.
Rileally liked this video! I bricked my 60D and was considering the R6 or R6... In the end i went with the R7 but I am planning on buying full frame lenses bit by bit and then finally switch to full frame!
I already own for my EOS R: Samyang RF 14mm F2.8 for Landscape and Night Canon RF 24 - 105mm F4 for everything :D Canon RF 800mm F11 for animals and far away things (I got a shot of the Saturn with this thing. Its amazing) Now the only thing i need is something for macro. So i think about the Rf 100mm F2.8
Excellent videos!! I think they might rival Think Media, Jared Polin, Tim Shields, & Peter McKinnon. I also have a Canon R6 with the following lenses : Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 Lens for Canon RF Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens Canon RF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Lens Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens
I don't agree that having both wide angles 15-35 & mid-range 24-70 makes any sense. Of course, unless you feel comfortable with your budget and want to accommodate all possible scenarios, then fill that range out! However, if you start with 24-70, that's great because you get a relatively wide angle at 24mm, versatile 35mm, and portraiture/street 50 & 70mm, but you don't want to pay an additional thousand boxes to extend just 9mm down from 24 to 15mm. In this case, getting a prime lens of 16mm makes your bag much lighter and your wallet happy. On the contrary, if you have started with a wide angle 15-35, and have your roadmap of getting 70-200, then purchase a nitty fifty or 50mm f1.2 because that's almost the only focal length you'll use in that 36-69 range.
This is really good video. Kind of something I was looking for. I think I will opt for f4 versions because it's good enough, when I start making some serious money as a photographer I can always sell and upgrade for 'not that big' of difference in price. Right now RF nifty fifty make me some decent amount but still feeling scared going into a job with one and only prime, I ofcourse manage to deliver but the stress is not worth it and because of it I have to charge less. RF24-105 f4 first then we will see.
The RF 24-70 tends to show bokeh fringing at apertures below f/5.6 when shooting at 70mm at close range. Flowers in out of focus areas will have a blue or red fringe.
You NEED to redo this with the 28-70 F2.0 and 24-105 F2.8 launched. Please I can´t decide. I dont have IBIS so the IS of the 24-105 would be very favorable but I don´t know how much bokeh I am missing with "just" 2.8.
I guess no one really wants to adapt lenses but at least the EF lenses adapt flawlessly and in most cases with no downside other than the adapter,, I think I'm probably in the minority of not loving the 70-200, I had one once and sold it. As a bit for a prime monster, there are still no 24 and 35mm options, so adapting is still the only way, and I'm going to stick with the EF 85mm f1.4 IS, for now.
Кто бы что не говорил, но фиксированные линзы с диафрагмой 1.2-1.4 на голову выше, всех объективов 28-70 2.0. И наподобие. Для фотографа очень важна картинка, 3-d эффектом. Они дают вау-эфект. Сейчас продаю комплект sony. Собираюсь купить, Canon r6 II, Canon r, Canon ef 24 1.4, Canon ef 35 1.4 ll, Canon rf 85 1.2 . Думаю они дадут максимальный эффект, чтоб клиент был доволен.))
My first lens choice has also kept me awake at night for over a year now. Finally decided to buy the Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM on Black Friday.. off of Amazon when it was on sale but not in stock... but I'm still awake at night wondering when it will be shipped 🙄 I did receive the Canon EOS R6, which I also bought on amazon on sale.. so meanwhile I'm biding my time by reading the manual and checking out the menus... first world problems..
Hey great vid, I am a amateur photographer, I have canon R6 & RF85 1.2. I previously had RF50 1.8 RF35 1.8 all sold. What lens do you think is best all rounder, I mainly take picture of my family, indoor outdoor & in low light. Which RF lens do you think is the best for this?
Thanks Anthony for your useful video , I’m about to upgrade from canon 90D to R6 II and would love to know if sigma 24-105mm f4 that I own is good to be adapted on the r6 mark ii or should I buy RF 24-105mm f/4. Thanks again.
I have canon R5 , lenses rf 24mm-105mm f4L , 100-500mmL i also order the 200-800mm I’m considering either getting 70-200 f2.8 , 85mm or 24-70mm What do you all think?
What RF Lenses are on your list? If you could only have ONE lens, what would you go with?
Canon RF 50mm F1.2
Canon RF 85mm F1.2
Canon RF 28-70mm F2
Canon RF 100-500 F4.5-7.1
@@njrivetelite That would be an amazing set.
Only one lens? 100-500!
This biest is great!
I’m a portrait photographer and I have an 85 rf f2 and 35 rf 1.8, in looking to purchase a 14-35mm rf f/4 because I train jiu jitsu everydya and I do a lot of indoor photos and videos so a wide lens would be great for my everyday use however when it comes to portrait I probably wouldn’t use it as much and that’s where I make my money lol so the 24-70 is probably what I’ll be getting next. Thanks for the video anthony!
That's easy. RF 28-70 F2.0 Its an all in one. Prime lens quality in a zoom.
Dude... I just stumbled on this video after following you for a while... It's absolutely amazing how much you've improved your skills as videographer, editor and colorist in a year! Keep at it!
RF28-70 f2 is a great lens. Since you have the 15-35 it is a perfect compliment. Prime look w/zoom convenience. Fast 2.0 it gives nice bokeh and more control in low light. My favorite RF lens.
Also, it is the sharpest zoom lens that I have ever used. Absolutely a beast but so worth it.
Amazing Video.
I have a different thought about where all photographers should start. I think that for learning (not needing all of this expensive equipment) you should start with a prime lenses such as the 50mm 1.8 or the 35mm, because you will learn to move, having a flow while shooting, not being in the same place missing opportunities (not having the zoom, obligates you to move and make your subject fit better in your composition). After you learn how to use a prime lenses and you can move very well, thats when you should by a zoom lenses, and trust me, you will move as well! because you are already used to do that, and its very good.
Out of all the videos I've watched for a beginner getting into photography, your comment is the most helpful comment ever!!! ❤❤❤❤ THANK YOU😊
Versatility is for when you're starting out on a budget or are new to photography. Once you know what you like, it's all about the focal lengths that you like. Like i started with the nifty fifty bc everyone told me to. But i was never excited about any of the pics. It was when i went wide at the 15-35 range and beautiful at the 85 and up did i get the passion for photography.
My line is: 28-70 f/2, RF 35mm f/1. STM, RF 24mm f/1.8, EF 135L f/2, Sigma 85mm f/1.4, RF 50mm f/1.8 and a few other EF lenses but to be honest alot of the Canon lenses are redundant. I use my 35mm and 24mm for videos ONLY though.
I run dual R6's and I keep on my RF 70-200 and the other is the AMAZING RF 28-70 f/2. These two lenses handle 99% of everything that I need for weddings, portraits or whatever I encounter.
This is a dream setup!
hi there mate i am just starting to get into weddings and events from motorsports just curious about the 28-70 i dont care about the weight just if its really that good for weddings events and low light situations i have an r6 aswell
Thanks for this. Its nice to hear people explain how they make these decisions. I've gradually assembled the RF 15-35 2.8 L, 24-70 2.8 L, 70-200 2.8 L, 100-500 L, 50 1.2 L, 85 1.2 L, and the Laowa 90 2.8 2:1 macro. I have one body - R5.
We get it. You have a lot of money.
The 100-500 is my most used RF lens, but i also have the 100 mm f2.8 macro, the 35 f1.8, the 16mm f2.8, and the 24-105 f4. And a bunch of EF lenses.
The 100-500 is a beast! Going to be borrowing one soon!
The set up I ended up with is the 15-35 2.8, 50 1.2, and 70-200 2.8. I thought about getting the 28-70 f2 but I have never owned a system and not have a 50mm prime so that's my middle length. More lens changes depending on whats going on but the 50mm 1.2 might be the best 50 I've ever used. Thing is absolutely nuts with the quality it produces.
Its beautiful, how is the af?
I have an rp that I pair with a 24-105 f4, and 70-200 f4. Love the combo as an enthusiast not able to justify the cost of f2.8.
I also have an ef 50 1.8 adapted, as well as a 85 1.4.
Nice little kit for the likes of me.
Exact same for me. Even my 24-105 is the ef version.
With the EF 70-200 you would normally have to lay it on it's side in your camera bag, taking up a ton of space. I have the same RF 70-200 as you now and it can fit into my back standing up, which saves a ton of space. It's also a beautiful lens.
It makes me so happy. The 15-35 and 70-200 take up almost the same space!
Which ones? Whatever you think fits your budget and needs. I think the price on the 50mm needs to go WAY down. I mean, it's a nifty fifty, not a specialist lens. Yes, it's an 'L', but it's not a justifiable price. The 100-500 'L' is one a lot of people complain about price wise, but to me, it's the best price for such a razor sharp zoom lens with such fast AF. The sharpness is almost on par with the EF 500mm prime. Heck, maybe it is on par.
I just got myself a Canon R7 and now I'm actually thinking of kitting myself with shooting niche in mind. I cone off thr M50 and I just would take random photos all over using whatever lens I could get on the cheap. I picked up 2 Sigma lenses off a local auction house, 17-50 F2.8 and 18-300 F3.5-6.3. I took random street pics while on walks, it was my travel vacation kit, and family photos. Now I'm actually thinking of selling off the 18-300 for the Sigma 150-600mm contemporary for wildlife and birding, keep the 17-50mm for my street walks and portraits plus vlogging if I ever really get into it.
You nailed my concern about which RF to get. I currently have an old 17-85, which is perfect. I find I use the wide angle more often than the 85mm. So, my first thought is to upgrade and get the 15-35. Then I am stuck, but I like your sequence of going big with the 70-200 next. I don’t like the idea of switching lenses too often, or carrying around all that glass. For everyday use, I think the 28-70 is “ok” but, for family gatherings inside, the wide angle is what I use a lot, it’s, also good for wide angle landscapes. I’ll have to start with the 15-35mm.
Got rid of all my EF lenses and got all RF 24-105, 50, 70-200 and 100-500. Couldn’t be happier
Great video. My combo is the 35 1.8 and the 70-200 f4. Nice, compact, and portable and amazing image quality.
yeah 35mm and 70-200 combos are the best
Nice mate i just added an rf 85 f2 to the same collection because am doings weddings as well
I have the R6 with the 24-105mm f4, nifty fifty and 100-400mm~ which basically covers most of my needs for now.
While I do dream of lenses like the 28-70mm f2 or the 85mm f1.2~ I am quite happy with what I have right now, and will wait untill i have more room in my budget, to upgrade any further :3
one of the best vids ive seen to help my RF lens plan!
Yup changed from 70D to RP and then R6II upgraded from EFS lineup to EF Holy Trinity+. RF is still crazily priced.
i have an R5 and an R8. for lenses i have RF 70-200mm f2.8, RF 50mm, and RF 50mm f1.8. i love the new Canon ecosystem!
I went from five EF primes and two EF Zooms to 2 RF zooms and two EF primes. Couldn't be happier. RF24-105 f/4L + RF 70-200 f/4L + RF 35 1.8 + EF 100L. If it came down to ONE (I hate those choices which are no choices...it would be the RF 70-200 f/4L. (As 135 is my favorite focal length)
Solid setup. Good coverage of focal lengths!
I have the R6, and have found it an enormous upgrade on my 80D, although my main love is wildlife photography, so for me the best feature is the improved autofocus. I own the EF 70-200 2.8 and it's a wonderful lens, but from a brief play around with the RF version, that lens seems even better. For me the lens I really want is the 600mm F4, but need to work out how I can afford to buy one without selling my house to pay for it.
Dream on pal 👍✌🏻
Ah this is super helpful! I have an 80D and an thinking about upgrading to the R6. I use it almost exclusively for video b-roll and interviews (I'm a journalist) - would you say from a video perspective you still consider this an upgrade from 80D?
@@NathalieTravelMuse Sorry, I'm not the right person to ask about video. I tend to use both the R6 and 80D exclusively for stills.
@@NathalieTravelMuse the 80d has a great look to its footage, especially shooting in ALL-i. I’ve used it a few times as a b-cam to my r6. The footage still looks great, but the r6 is in another world entirely. Unbelievable autofocus, 10bit 4:2:2 color, 4k, LOG, it is an excellent camera. The r7 would be a good upgrade too if you don’t want to shell out r6 money. All of your EF glass will adapt extremely well.
600mm will transform your photography. Maybe look at used EF 600mm? The quality is actually better in Mark 2
Interesting, I made the same two choices like you: In January 2022 I bought the R6 with the RF 24-105 f/4L (which hasn't arrived yet) and I also got the RF 50mm f/1.8 STM.
My roadmap of lenses though is a little different. I'm only a hobbyist and I'm more interested in tele zooms then in wide angles. Therefore my thinking was, let's take a kit (24-105) and combine it with a tele zoom (100-500mm - very expensive) and you'll get this 24-500mm covered with only two lenses.
Later I saw some comparision videos (mostly in German) where wide angle lenses were compared (especially the EF 16-35mm f/4L and the RF 14-35mm f/4L). Most of these comparisons said that getting the EF version is the better choice considering the price. That's all I wanted to contribute to your excellent video. Thanks.
EF lenses get a whole new life on an RF mount. To be honest, RF lenses are sweet, an adapter „unsexy“. There is literally no other reason to skip on EF lenses. They are way more affordable, optically supreme and often build very well. E.g. the 70-200 f/4 (but even more the f/2.8). They are as good as the RF versions, just not as compact. Biggest difference is the f/2.8 here which is significantly less heavy and thus you will take it with you more often. However, internal zoom and sharpness over the whole image is better with the old version. What I want to say is, you can grab one up for 1100-1200€ which is in mint condition and save the additional 1400€ for the compactness.
Based on my personal experience, the latest generation of EF range lenses outperforms the very first generation of RF lenses. I'm curious to see what Canon will offer with the second generation. So far, I see no reason to buy equipment that offers little to no advantage, just for the sake of owning something labeled as RF.
Agreed. EF L lenses work brilliantly on R bodies at a fraction of the cost.
I think if you can't do the trifecta, I think the 15-35 and 70-200 2.8s with a nifty fifty in between is the perfect compromise. If you really need a 50, it's great. Don't think you ever really need the 15mm and 20mm in between those 3 lenses...
I just retained all my lenses from my EF mount camera, all sigma, and used the adaptor ring. Zero complaints
Glad you mentioned prices in the video 🧐
The trinity I think most people should get is the RF 15-35mm 2.8, RF 50mm 1.2, and the RF 70-200mm 2.8.
Other considerations:
Both 70-200 lenses, the 24-105 f/4, and the 14-35 f/4 all use the same filter size whereas the 24-70 f/2.8 and 15-35 f/2.8 both use the larger 82mm filter. That may be a consideration for those who don't want to buy a second set of filters and f/2.8 isn't a necessity at those wider focal lengths.
You should always buy the largest filters you can, and then a set of step up rings to fit the filters to smaller lenses. Step up rings are super cheap. That way you don’t need to buy several of the same filter. I always buy 82mm filters and I have step up rings from 49mm all the way to 82mm.
OK, so I sold my RP and should be getting my R6 this week. When I got my RP, it came with the 24-240 kit lens. Since then I bought, in order, a RF 35 1.8 and RF 14mm 2.8 Samyang MF. About 2 weeks after I got those, I bought a used RF 15-35 2.8, which I also love. The Samyang sits, for sale. Then I bought an EF Sigma 150-600 5-6.3 Contemporary. Then came the RF nifty fifty. I already have an EF 85mm 1.8.
When I sold the RP, the 24-240 went with it. Right now, I have in my cart on Amazon an RF 24-105 f4. You can buy it and make payments over 5 months, but receive the lens now. I'm watching this video thinking about pulling the trigger. I want the flexibility it gives and I want an EF 135mm f2 until an RF version comes out. That should basically give me about every focal length I could want, for now. Ideally, I'd run the 2.8/2.0 trifecta and maybe an RF 100-500. But I'm poor. Even poorer now, LOL...
Ha! That's a lot of lens swaps. Which one is your favorite, if you could only choose one?
@@AnthonyGugliotta Honestly? Right now if I could only choose 1, it's probably the EF 85mm 1.8. i just love that distance and aperture. When I was in Alaska in Sept, the Sigma 150-600 was incredible. That was my walk-around lens, lol.
@@AnthonyGugliotta I liked the versatility of the 24-240, obviously. But none of my pictures ever looked amazing out of camera, they always needed editing to make me go wow.
@@derbagger22 85mm 1.8 is so juicy. I would love to own one!
@@AnthonyGugliotta Probably the best bang for the buck lens I've ever used. Although a 1.2 would be amazing.
I got the 14-35 F4 and 50mm 1.2 and 70-700mm F4 as my "trinity" for a beginner setup to my first every full frame R6 M2 :) Hope I made a good choice w these 3..
My EF Zeiss lenses work great adapted on my R8. The CPL adapter is fantastic. You can get top-quality EF glass now for a bargain. RF lenses that are worth using are insanely expensive.
The trick with using the adapters is to just get enough for each of your EF lenses so they can live on them. No awkward switches then
I'm a bit blown away that 70+ comments and no one has mentioned the RF 24-240mm non-L lens. I have the RF 24-105mm (non-L), RF 15-25mm, the RF 50mm f/1.8, the RF 100-500mm and the RF 24-240mm. I get it's not the fastest/sharpest lens, however, I do mostly landscape and if I had to pick a single lens you can't beat the versatility of the 24-240.
Sounds like it's a lens I need to try. How do you find the optical quality in terms of vignetteing and distortion?
@@AnthonyGugliotta At 24-25mm you cannot miss the fairly heavy vignetting. If you shoot in JPG, the camera will correct. I shoot in RAW and the lens profiles in Adobe Camera Raw do a reasonable job of fixing. Whatever they don't, I can easily address in Photoshop. The lens definitely has some barrel distortion as well though, again, ACR fixes. As a beginner, who bought my first ILEC camera in January 2021, the technical performance of the lens does not matter to me as much as the range of focal lengths and the possibilities it allows in a single lens. I hike/bike with a sling bag so optimized primarily for weight while still requiring full frame/mirrorless. I also have the luxury that the camera does not have to pay for itself. Cheers and thank you for your work.
I use the 24-240 RF for any outdoor daytime events. The results are excellent for this use case and versatility is incredible. While I also have 28-70 RF L and use it indoors and outdoors in low light, I find myself selecting the 24-240 much more often during the middle of the day outdoors.
Okay Dude here is our comment to help your channel grow. First let me say thank you for the review. I am an amateur travel photographer and your review was helpful in helping me understand this new world of Canon Mirrorless photography. My world in photography started a long time ago, in a land far away called silver Halide photography. I was a forensic photographer back in the late 1980s, early 1990s and most of my work was macro, micro or copy photography with view cameras. I was always a big Nikon fan boy, but went with Canon for mirrorless because it seemed to offer a little more flexibility and in Googling seemed to be better than Nikon and on par with Sony, which I know nothing about. I bought a Canon R6, RF 24-105 f4 and the RF 100-500 f4-7.1 and so far, everything I have seen including your video is confirming for me that I made the right choice especially given that it will be used for both still and video work.
My Friend, you are the reason i bought my first camera, i bought the R6 mark ii with the 50mm f1.8
Keep posting videos! i really like them.
ps: when i manage to sell my kidney ill go for the 28-70 f2 :)
In the EF world I had the 5D2 with a 17-40 F4, 50 F1.4, and 100 F2.8 Macro and was super happy.
When I switched to the R6 I got the 15-35, 50 1.8, and kept the EF 100 Macro.
However, as a hobbyist wo likes to take mainly pictures of friends and vacations, the 15-35 was rather annoying. Now I switched to the RF 24-105 L for vacations, I use the 50 1.8 if I go to parties or meet outside with friends and I am looking for an ultra wide prime lens if I have the time for landscape. Because that was the issue with the 15-35, I either used it at 15mm for landscape or switched to an other lens. So I guess I can just have a prime for these rare occasions. I do like 35mm in general, but then F2.8 is normally not enough for an image with 3D-pop. Also, since the lens is very big and you need to get close, it kind of makes people uncomfortable. This is also why I prefer the 50 1.8 over the 1.2 at the moment. For the future a small, ultrasharp RF 50 1.4L USM would be perfect.
Long story short - I understand why people go for the F2.8 zooms as professionals. But as a hobbyist, even though money isn't the issue, I do not really see the point in carrying the big zoom lenses.
Great points. Love 50mm and if you don't mind carrying all the primes then it's a wicked idea.
My 50mm rf 1.2 almost never comes off my lens. I also have the 24-105 rf. Like it for landscape and all purpose lens also
I got the Rokinon 14mm for Milky Way shots and the RF 70-200mm F4 so far for my R6. There's a certain price point on lenses where I back off since I'm not a pro. So the 70-200 F4 being considerably less $$$ than the F2.8 was the primary factor in my decision. I would say go with the F2.8 if you actually make any money off of your photography. I'm debating on getting the nifty 50 or a dedicated macro lens next. I like macro shots but I don't know how often I would take them myself and I would like something to bridge the gap between the 14mm and 70-200mm. I'm just a hiker/tourist. While I'd love to have a 600mm and sit around bird watching, am I actually going to get to do that? Maybe. Food/rent > dreams.
I have what you have, except I got a 35mm and 50mm and 85mm too
considering you go on hikes more often I recommend getting a 35!
When I travel I carry around 35mm and if I "need" that extra length moments, I switch my lens to 70200F4
these two lenses are the best combos in my opinion (versatile and light weight)
I’d love to get your take on the Canon RF 24-240 f4-6.3. I bought that first with my R62 and a 50 f1.8 for low light. I think a longer telephoto is my next purchase( or borrow). I love telephoto’s reach.
The only RF lens I own is the RF 35mm f1.8. I primarily have EF lenses which include:
- Rokinon EF 14mm f1.8
- Tamron EF 24-70mm f2.8 g2
- Canon EF 50mm f1.8
- Canon EF 85mm f1.8
- Tamron EF 70-200mm f2.8 g2
- Tamron EF 150-600mm f5-6.3 g2
Tamron is easy to say the route I went. Affordable yet still super high quality. I'm missing that 14-35/15-35/16-35 lens tho.
This video has heen amazing and informative. Been wanting clarification on the different RF lenses canon has and i think I learned everything here
Bought the R6 with the 24-70 f2.8 and love the lens! Looking to then buy the 70-200mm f2.8. I'd love the 85mm 1.2 as third lens. Great video!
I am buying a R7 and rf 24 to 100 f4 lens only because of my tight budget, what will be your suggestion, I do sport, nature and travel photography all the time, love your content ❤️
Everything you said is %100 honest. I experienced almost the same things about those ranges and models.
I have the 16-35 F4 EF and the 100 mm 2.8 EF that I use on my EOS R with the adaptor which is fantastic! My wife has the 15-35 2.8 RF which is amazing ! We also have the 24-70 2.8 , 100-500 F4.5- 7.1 ,70-200 F4. we also have the 35 RF F4 macro.
Very helpful - just sold my ef 70-200 to save for the RF version.
The EFS17-55 f2.8 on canon’s apsc sensor would actually have the same depth of field as a F4 on a full frame sensor, so you wouldn’t really be missing out on bokeh.
That's right! Gotta account for that 1.4x factor.
@@AnthonyGugliotta 1.6x
I went with the 24-105 (because I could kit it with my camera for 200 less than it would be to buy them separate), 14-35 f/4 because I do a lot of real estate and I'm using a tripod for that and I'm not shooting wide open anyhow, then nifty fifty, 85 f/2 macro, and I'm saving for the 70-200 2.8 next.
After that it's either saving for the 1.2 or 2.8 versions of the ones I've got or going all the way for a 400 f/2.8, because it'll be about the same cost, but either way there's a lot of kitchens and bedrooms to photograph between me and that.
Here's a personal story, but still relevant. I'm a professional photographer at Shamrock Space Studio. Recently, I sold my old EF 16-35 f2.8 III USM and bought an RF 15-35 f2.8 IS. Guess what? I sent it back yesterday and ordered a new "old" EF 16-35 f2.8 III USM. Simply put, I achieve much better results with the old EF, particularly when using this lens on my Canon R5 & Canon R5C. But stay with me, that's not the end of the story. I conducted some research and discovered that I'm not alone. Many professionals and amateurs around the globe have done pretty much the same or at least arrived at the same conclusion: the EF 16-35 f2.8 III USM is better than the RF 15-35 f2.8 IS. I forgot to mention that the EF is 20-25% cheaper...
But which one would you use for low light fast action video?
Holy Trinity and 85mm prime. That’s what I’m working towards
I would love a 24-105 F2.8
I have the R6 and the RF100 - 400. My plan was to purchase the RF 14 - 35 and RF100 - 500. Since I have the RF100 - 400, I am going to wait on the 100 - 500, but my next RF lens will be the 14 - 35. If I went with just 1 lens, it would be the RF24 - 105 L lens.
Very good video. I have the same lenses for my R5. You do know on the 24 to 105 you have to update the firmware. It fixed a lot of problems. When you use it as movie mode or for that matter stills. Set the correction to on for all three options. It basically sets the profile in the camera without using Lightroom.
Good luck your a good instructor.
Fraser Schwalley
Thanks Fraser! I don't think I've updated the lens firmware. I'll have to check that out. I've also been shooting with some new lenses lately so it might be time to reshoot my lens review! :)
I got a RF 70-200mm F2.8L which replaced my Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 A009.
I already have a Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 G2, EF 24-105mm F4L and EF 17-40mm F4L. 😂 I'm thinking of adding an RF 15-35 F2.8L for the IS and I do not want to get rid of the 17-40mm yet.
Canon RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM Lens - Sub $1k, a bargain for weekend warriors. Along with 24-150 kit lens on APS-C R7, all bases covered...
I have the rf 15-35, 24-105, and 70-200 f2.8 lenses. The one I really want, but can’t afford right now is the luxurious 85 f1.2.
Great video! I'm coming at it from a very different angle than you return my R6, started out with the 50 mm, then the 35 mm working my way up! My EF 'L' collection of lens are still amazing adapted.
Love the rf 35 "macro" f1.8
I know this video is little bit old, but I'm hoping to get an answer here since you seems like you totally know what you're talking about.
So my situation at the moment is, I can get a USED 15-35L f2.8 for ard $1,480 or get a NEW 14-35L f4 for ard $1,250.
I've been waiting and searching for the used market for 14-35f4 for months but none are available. So for that little difference in $, which do you think I should go for?
My used case is, travel, kids, and family events (mostly indoor).
My other lenses are RF70-200f4L, EF17-40L(gonna get sold since I hate adapters), and RF35mm f1.8 (also gonna get sold and replaced with rf50mm).
Lastly, my camera is Canon r8.
Thank you very much in advance.
Liked and subbed
For shooting people, RF 28-70/2 that is the one single lens that is the most amazing and without alternative. I scaled back to the RF 24-105/4 for video and it is very far away in terms of look.
No IS on the 28-70 though :(
I bought Canon RP less than a year ago mainly for astrophotography, but to be able to shoot other things too. It came with the Canon RF 24-105mm F4-7.1 IS STM kit lens. It is Ok for some situations, but I have missed many shots, because the lens is just too slow. I also tried to shoot some A-roll for RUclips at 24mm, but it had way too much barrell distortion to be usable. I did get Sigma EF 14mm f/1.8 Art + rf/ef adapter with a filter for Milky way shooting, but now I’ve been planning what do I need the most next. I would like to replace my 24-105mm to something faster, but maybe it would be wiser to get more reach first and I have been comparing many options like Canon rf 70-200 in both f/2.8 and f/4. F/2.8 might be an overkill for RP, but I dream of upgrading it to probably R6 at some point. The biggest reason is IBIS what I would like to have. In lenses, there are so many expensive options, it is a pain to choose. My mind keeps jumping from one option to another. This is just a hobby, so I try to keep that in mind. I would also like to get a fast 85mm for portraits. Like ef 85mm f/1.4. Sigh. And then there are squirrels and birds and zoos where 200mm isn’t enough…
The adapter hassle is minimized if you lock one to a lens. It means getting more than one but you save cash over buying pricey RF glass.
Good point. That works too!
70-200mm is a beast...
I have the EF 50mm because that's not my only lens I have to adapt. Buying the adapter anyway and replacing the 50mm didn't make sense. Maybe eventually, but it's still my sharpest and fastest lens.
I'd skip the 24-70... get the 50mm 1.2... you already have the 24-105...
Agreed!
Tbh I have a 24-105 and a 50mm f1.8 which is a great focal length combination especially if ur on a budget but getting the 24-70 and a 70-200 mm lenses will be a better but more expensive combination because they both have a lower aperture which can be better for low light situations and can separate the subject from the background better but that’s if ur going for a more expensive route
Or the 85mm 1.2
@@phillipornelas3348agree. 50 is boring to me. 35 or 24 at the wide and 85 for the beautiful aesthetic
Hmmm, your f2.8 lens on aps-c is going to give the equivalent bokeh to your f4 on full frame. The 2.8 will capture more light but the full frame ISO performance should put the lenses on very similar ground.
I just added an 85mm 1.2 DS to my wishlist for Xmas.
Just in case 😅
I really like all the images you showed in this video. Beautiful work.
If I had to choose ONE lens, it would be the RF 28-70.
The RF 28-70 is MASSIVE, but also incredible.
I have:
28mm 2.8
50mm 1.4
70-200mm 2.8 II
10-18mm 4.5-5.6\
(and a couple of other starter kit lenses not worth mentioning).
I'm looking for my next lens. I take Portraits, Macro, and pictures of my family mostly. With this lineup, which one would you choose next?
I dont find RF lens anymore expensive than others at all, not sure what your referring to. you want expensive buy a Leica
I can't afford RF lenses so I got all EF lenses and there's a couple of benefits. 1) Since they're all EF lenses, the RF adapter stays on all the time so changing lenses is no issue than if I had mixed RF and EF lenses. 2) The RF adapter with built-in ND filter saves the hassle of changing different ND filters for different lenses. It's so convenient to have the same one ND filter in the back for all your lenses. 3) Bought third party lenses that had 95% of performance compared to Canon 50% of the cost. Saved thou$ands. 4) The weight and size usually ends up being almost the same as with RF lenses since those lenses are so big.
what ef lenses do you use the most? would you care to share your experience?
@@베이스치는마이콜 I changed to Sony.
For my still photography RF24-105 f4 L and RF100-500 L is all I need.
Rileally liked this video! I bricked my 60D and was considering the R6 or R6... In the end i went with the R7 but I am planning on buying full frame lenses bit by bit and then finally switch to full frame!
I already own for my EOS R:
Samyang RF 14mm F2.8 for Landscape and Night
Canon RF 24 - 105mm F4 for everything :D
Canon RF 800mm F11 for animals and far away things (I got a shot of the Saturn with this thing. Its amazing)
Now the only thing i need is something for macro. So i think about the Rf 100mm F2.8
A macro would be really fun!
Hey Anthony, this video was great! I liked and subscribed. I love your energy and vibe. Very informative and I appreciate the b roll.
Excellent videos!! I think they might rival Think Media, Jared Polin, Tim Shields, & Peter McKinnon. I also have a Canon R6 with the following lenses :
Rokinon 85mm f/1.4 Lens for Canon RF
Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens
Canon RF 50mm f/1.2 L USM Lens
Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Lens
I have a RF 85mm 1.2L, 35mm 1.8 , and 24mm 1.8 … now confused if i shud get a 24-105 f2.8 and sell off 35 and 24 ? Or to get a 70-200 f2.8 ?
I don't agree that having both wide angles 15-35 & mid-range 24-70 makes any sense. Of course, unless you feel comfortable with your budget and want to accommodate all possible scenarios, then fill that range out! However, if you start with 24-70, that's great because you get a relatively wide angle at 24mm, versatile 35mm, and portraiture/street 50 & 70mm, but you don't want to pay an additional thousand boxes to extend just 9mm down from 24 to 15mm. In this case, getting a prime lens of 16mm makes your bag much lighter and your wallet happy. On the contrary, if you have started with a wide angle 15-35, and have your roadmap of getting 70-200, then purchase a nitty fifty or 50mm f1.2 because that's almost the only focal length you'll use in that 36-69 range.
What’s the best Canon RF lenses for Street photography
This is really good video. Kind of something I was looking for. I think I will opt for f4 versions because it's good enough, when I start making some serious money as a photographer I can always sell and upgrade for 'not that big' of difference in price. Right now RF nifty fifty make me some decent amount but still feeling scared going into a job with one and only prime, I ofcourse manage to deliver but the stress is not worth it and because of it I have to charge less. RF24-105 f4 first then we will see.
The RF 24-70 tends to show bokeh fringing at apertures below f/5.6 when shooting at 70mm at close range. Flowers in out of focus areas will have a blue or red fringe.
You mean Chromatic aberration?
@@AnthonyGugliotta I mean longitudinal chromatic aberration rather than lateral.
@@martyn420 Interesting. I'll have to go look at some sample imaged. Thanks for this info!
You NEED to redo this with the 28-70 F2.0 and 24-105 F2.8 launched. Please I can´t decide. I dont have IBIS so the IS of the 24-105 would be very favorable but I don´t know how much bokeh I am missing with "just" 2.8.
What about a 24mm-240mm lense?? What are the pros and cons of this lense?
You dont need swap adapter if buy it for every EF lens. So it will be always converted to RF
My holy trinity is the rf 70-200 2,8 / rf 50 1.2 and the rf 135 1.8 is ordered
10/10 Content Bro
I guess no one really wants to adapt lenses but at least the EF lenses adapt flawlessly and in most cases with no downside other than the adapter,, I think I'm probably in the minority of not loving the 70-200, I had one once and sold it. As a bit for a prime monster, there are still no 24 and 35mm options, so adapting is still the only way, and I'm going to stick with the EF 85mm f1.4 IS, for now.
I was really hoping you would mention the 35mm prime lens… that’s what I bought to be my go go lens with my Rp 😂
Кто бы что не говорил, но фиксированные линзы с диафрагмой 1.2-1.4 на голову выше, всех объективов 28-70 2.0. И наподобие. Для фотографа очень важна картинка, 3-d эффектом. Они дают вау-эфект.
Сейчас продаю комплект sony. Собираюсь купить, Canon r6 II, Canon r, Canon ef 24 1.4, Canon ef 35 1.4 ll, Canon rf 85 1.2 .
Думаю они дадут максимальный эффект, чтоб клиент был доволен.))
My first lens choice has also kept me awake at night for over a year now. Finally decided to buy the Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM on Black Friday.. off of Amazon when it was on sale but not in stock... but I'm still awake at night wondering when it will be shipped 🙄 I did receive the Canon EOS R6, which I also bought on amazon on sale.. so meanwhile I'm biding my time by reading the manual and checking out the menus... first world problems..
Ha! At least you saved a bit even if it means you had to wait. Enjoy the 24-70!
How much did you get it for?
Hey great vid,
I am a amateur photographer, I have canon R6 & RF85 1.2.
I previously had RF50 1.8 RF35 1.8 all sold.
What lens do you think is best all rounder, I mainly take picture of my family, indoor outdoor & in low light. Which RF lens do you think is the best for this?
Hi im new and recently picked up the R50 as a start. What Ultrawide RF lens would you suggest? I will mainly use it for video. Thanks for the video
Wow! Never seen your channel before, but I have the exact set of lens. But, r5 instead of r6
Btw- the r5 replaced my t90. R5 is my first digital, and even my first autofocus. Guess I have a lot to learn
Which one is the best only for portraits?
I'd take the 35mm RF over the 50mm RF... macro capabilities and amazing video lens too.
How is the focus breathing?
@@AnthonyGugliotta it's there, but honestly minimal unless you're focusing at macro-level.
Thanks Anthony for your useful video , I’m about to upgrade from canon 90D to R6 II and would love to know if sigma 24-105mm f4 that I own is good to be adapted on the r6 mark ii or should I buy RF 24-105mm f/4. Thanks again.
I have canon R5 , lenses rf 24mm-105mm f4L , 100-500mmL i also order the 200-800mm
I’m considering either getting 70-200 f2.8 , 85mm or 24-70mm
What do you all think?
it's exactly my kit of lenses, 1 by 1 :)