Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM Z ?

[Stig Nygaard]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

--
/Stig (Copenhagen, Denmark)
https://www.rockland.dk/
https://flickr.com/photos/stignygaard/
Flickr Fixr: https://www.flickr.com/groups/flickrhacks/discuss/72157655601688753/
xIFr, the Firefox exif-viewer: https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/addon/xifr/

 

[PicPocket]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

I just hope they keep the smaller one around when this comes out. I have no issues with zooming and have come to appreciate the compact light carry. This looks like carrying the thing zoomed in all the time

This may appeal to people wanting TC, as this may have gone back to the design with longer back focus distance. I never used TC with a 70-200, so that doesnt appeal to me

This also looks like having an external aperture ring, so perhaps good for video

 

[R2D2]

I'm wondering if it'll balance on the new Ronin 4 Pro gimbal for video work. I certainly appreciate the current RF 70-200 f/2.8's light weight, and in the years that I've used it I haven't had any issues with dust or reliability. Maybe the focus stops would come in handy?

The current model's AF is so fast and accurate (for stills), I'm wondering if I'll need the slower AF option (and continuously variable aperture) for the types of video I'll be shooting. I might be able to expand my repertoire a bit? Hmmm.

R2

 

[Pshots23]

Wow that lens is humongous!!

 

[gossamer88]

Wow that lens is humongous!!

HUH?? This is HUMONGOUS! :-D Also surprised it is black.

 

[LuxinTenebris]

Wow that lens is humongous!!

HUH?? This is HUMONGOUS! :-D Also surprised it is black.

This one is meant for the sports/video people, and they prefer black.

 

[gossamer88]

Wow that lens is humongous!!

HUH?? This is HUMONGOUS! :-D Also surprised it is black.

This one is meant for the sports/video people, and they prefer black.

ummm...ALL the 70-200s have been historically white.

 

[LuxinTenebris]

Wow that lens is humongous!!

HUH?? This is HUMONGOUS! :-D Also surprised it is black.

This one is meant for the sports/video people, and they prefer black.

ummm...ALL the 70-200s have been historically white.

And?

Canon has suggested they are targeting hybrid/video shooters with a series of upcoming lenses. Video shooters are constantly asking for long lenses to be black. This is pretty obviously a nod to those customer requests. The same reason the 24-105 2.8 is black.

 

[PicPocket]

Wow that lens is humongous!!

HUH?? This is HUMONGOUS! :-D Also surprised it is black.

This one is meant for the sports/video people, and they prefer black.

ummm...ALL the 70-200s have been historically white.

things are, until they aren't. Historically, there were only L and DO whites, until 200-800 came along. Historically, all long primes were white, until the RF f11 primes showed up. So, it's really up to Canon. Historically all RF Z lenses have been black too, they have to finally choose

--
PicPocket

 

[Jeff_0000]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

Sony 70-200 GM II is the golden standard when it comes to all 70-200. High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring. I am curious to see if how this lens perform overall.

 

[LuxinTenebris]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

Sony 70-200 GM II is the golden standard when it comes to all 70-200. High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring. I am curious to see if how this lens perform overall.

The Sony is only lighter than the current RF if you include the tripod collars, and hoods.

I suspect part of the reason Canon is releasing this lens is to one up Sony, and I fully expect it to exceed the Sony in optical quality, and price.

 

[Sittatunga]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

I just hope they keep the smaller one around when this comes out. I have no issues with zooming and have come to appreciate the compact light carry. This looks like carrying the thing zoomed in all the time

This may appeal to people wanting TC, as this may have gone back to the design with longer back focus distance. I never used TC with a 70-200, so that doesnt appeal to me

This also looks like having an external aperture ring, so perhaps good for video

 

[Alastair Norcross]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

Sony 70-200 GM II is the golden standard when it comes to all 70-200.

That’s pretty funny. I’d only take the Sony in exchange for my Canon (if they came in the same mount), if you threw in $2500 so I could buy another Canon. After using the superb RF 70-200, I couldn’t go back to the much bigger 70-200 versions that everyone else makes (or this new Canon one).

High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring. I am curious to see if how this lens perform overall.

--
“When I die, I want to go peacefully in my sleep like my grandfather. Not screaming in terror, like the passengers in his car.” Jack Handey
Alastair

anorcross

Keen hobbyist since teaching myself film photography as a teenager in the 70s, using manual SLRs and black and white film. Love photographing people and animals.

anorcross.smugmug.com

Equipment in profile

 

[Jeff_0000]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

Sony 70-200 GM II is the golden standard when it comes to all 70-200. High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring. I am curious to see if how this lens perform overall.

The Sony is only lighter than the current RF if you include the tripod collars, and hoods.

Nah Sony is lighter, see the figures below:

Canon: 1070g

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1510031-REG/canon_rf_70_200mm_f_2_8l_is.html/specs

Sony: 1045g

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1666363-REG/sony_fe_70_200mm_f_2_8_gm.html/specs

I suspect part of the reason Canon is releasing this lens is to one up Sony, and I fully expect it to exceed the Sony in optical quality, and price.

Even if it doesn't exceed Sony or Nikon, I think many Canon users will still be happy to purchase.

 

[Jeff_0000]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

Sony 70-200 GM II is the golden standard when it comes to all 70-200.

That’s pretty funny.

Funny for what? Sony 70-200 GM II is indeed the best lens for the reasons I have stated below. This is a fact.

I’d only take the Sony in exchange for my Canon (if they came in the same mount), if you threw in $2500 so I could buy another Canon. After using the superb RF 70-200, I couldn’t go back to the much bigger 70-200 versions that everyone else makes (or this new Canon one).

High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring. I am curious to see if how this lens perform overall.

 

[LuxinTenebris]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

Sony 70-200 GM II is the golden standard when it comes to all 70-200. High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring. I am curious to see if how this lens perform overall.

The Sony is only lighter than the current RF if you include the tripod collars, and hoods.

Nah Sony is lighter, see the figures below:

Canon: 1070g

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1510031-REG/canon_rf_70_200mm_f_2_8l_is.html/specs

Sony: 1045g

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1666363-REG/sony_fe_70_200mm_f_2_8_gm.html/specs

I suspect part of the reason Canon is releasing this lens is to one up Sony, and I fully expect it to exceed the Sony in optical quality, and price.

Even if it doesn't exceed Sony or Nikon, I think many Canon users will still be happy to purchase.

You're linking factory listed specs like they mean something. Those specs are with the lens hood, and tripod collars. You're simply misinformed, or can't read. Again, the Sony is only lighter when you include the tripod collar... because Sony cut theirs out for weight savings, while Canon did not. If you throw the two lenses on a scale with just their hoods, the Canon is actually lighter by a few grams. Ask me how I know, or just do a google search.

 

[Jeff_0000]

Probably good news for someone wishing for an internal zoom RF 70-200mm F2.8...

https://www.canonrumors.com/is-this-the-canon-rf-70-200mm-f-2-8l-is-usm-z/

Sony 70-200 GM II is the golden standard when it comes to all 70-200. High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring. I am curious to see if how this lens perform overall.

The Sony is only lighter than the current RF if you include the tripod collars, and hoods.

Nah Sony is lighter, see the figures below:

Canon: 1070g

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1510031-REG/canon_rf_70_200mm_f_2_8l_is.html/specs

Sony: 1045g

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1666363-REG/sony_fe_70_200mm_f_2_8_gm.html/specs

I suspect part of the reason Canon is releasing this lens is to one up Sony, and I fully expect it to exceed the Sony in optical quality, and price.

Even if it doesn't exceed Sony or Nikon, I think many Canon users will still be happy to purchase.

You're linking factory listed specs like they mean something. Those specs are with the lens hood, and tripod collars. You're simply misinformed, or can't read. Again, the Sony is only lighter when you include the tripod collar... because Sony cut theirs out for weight savings, while Canon did not. If you throw the two lenses on a scale with just their hoods, the Canon is actually lighter by a few grams. Ask me how I know, or just do a google search.

If you say so, then prove I am wrong, don't just make a statement without figures.

And even Sony is heavier (as you describe), it doesn't cut corners like the RF 70-200 does. And also this is why Canon is going to introduce a new 70-200 f2.8.

 

[PicPocket]

it doesn't cut corners like the RF 70-200 does.

It also doesn't have one of the the key feature that I bought the RF lens for (I had the EF version before). Carry length - Canon 146mm, Sony 200mm. Choosing different compromises isn't the same as cutting corners. If Canon didn't introduce this lens, we will all keep believing that the smallest lens in this class has to be about 200mm long all the time



Except for internal / external zooming, which leads to above difference, the claims on IQ etc are fairly flat. There is no gold standard as you claim - https://www.the-digital-picture.com...s-or-the-Sony-FE-70-200mm-F2-8-GM-OSS-II-Lens

And also this is why Canon is going to introduce a new 70-200 f2.8.

A bit of a stretch to infer the motives. Sure, some people prefer internal focusing design and TC at the expense of size, and yes, it makes sense to fill that demand. Hence my desire that they keep both types of lenses on the market (though it may be economically less of an incentive for them)

--
PicPocket

 

[LuxinTenebris]

I mean, it's readily available to anyone that can type.

Should I get the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM Lens or the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Lens?

Should I get the Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8 L IS USM Lens or the Sony FE 70-200mm F2.8 GM OSS II Lens? — The-Digital-Picture.com

www.the-digital-picture.com

With the tripod collar removed the RF is actually a few grams lighter. Again, not that a gram or two is significant at all, just pointing out how misinformed you are.

I'm willing to say I prefer the optical quality of the Sony, because I do, but not when it comes at the cost of being the size of the Sony, because the differences are negligible relative to the burden of carrying the lens around on international flights, or on the end of a body all day. The Canon is simply perfect for travel, which is why I own it.

We'll see how this new 70-200 turns out, but I'm willing to bet it tops the Sony offering in optical performance overall, especially for video uses.

 

[Jeff_0000]

it doesn't cut corners like the RF 70-200 does.

It also doesn't have one of the the key feature that I bought the RF lens for (I had the EF version before). Carry length - Canon 146mm, Sony 200mm. Choosing different compromises isn't the same as cutting corners. If Canon didn't introduce this lens, we will all keep believing that the smallest lens in this class has to be about 200mm long all the time

Bu



Except for internal / external zooming, which leads to above difference, the claims on IQ etc are fairly flat. There is no gold standard as you claim - https://www.the-digital-picture.com...s-or-the-Sony-FE-70-200mm-F2-8-GM-OSS-II-Lens

When I said about the golden standard, it's not just about IQ. Here's what my first post mentions:

"High optical quality, lightweight (lighter than the current RF 70-200 and Nikon 70-200), internal zoom, TC-compatible, aperture ring"

Also, I've forgotten to mention that the Sony lens can focus at 0.4m away from the subject at 70mm, and the lens have very little focus breathing. Another pair of useful features of the Sony lens.

So it's a combination of things featured on the Sony lens that make me think it's the golden standard.

And also this is why Canon is going to introduce a new 70-200 f2.8.

A bit of a stretch to infer the motives. Sure, some people prefer internal focusing design and TC at the expense of size, and yes, it makes sense to fill that demand. Hence my desire that they keep both types of lenses on the market (though it may be economically less of an incentive for them)

Yeah so I said I am curious how the Z version of Canon will be.