My take on the RF 70-200 F4 Locked

davel33 wrote:

This lens is awesome, its a pleasure to use. There are two small details I don't care for.

#1 you cant use it with an extender, none made at this time, same for the 2.8 version.

Really limits its all around usefulness I think.

#2 the hood is a monster, does not have a small door to adjust your CPL.

Why do they do this? They finally give us a 70-200 4 that can pack away in a smaller space (the others with their internal zoom were very long for their FL range). Then you get a monster hood that takes away all that advantage (problem shared by the EF versions). Makes no sense. Who's gonna take the lens along and leave the hood behind because it wouldn't fit in the bag?

I'd add its lack of a tripod collar as a con also. I'm sure it works OK without one, but It is so much nicer to rotate the whole lens/camera than to have to tilt the tripod head I'd still want that capability.

Details I DO care for
#1 Its SMALL, 1/2" longer than the RF 24-105 f4L, same width and a few grams lighter.

#2 Most of the weight of the lens is near the mount, its easy on your wrist

#3 The focus is very fast, silent and dead on.

#4 It has the same size filter 77mm filter and lens cap as the RF 24-105, same hood mount as the RF 24-105 and I would think the same as RF 70-200 f2.8.

#5 My finger is long enough to reach a rotating filter and I DONT have long fingers

#6 It does not rattle when used in the horizontal position but it does rattle a bit in a vertical position.

#7 Its very sharp.

#8 With the BIS in the R6, I can get a high degree of good shots at 1/10 of a sec hand held even at 200mm,

#9 The zoom action is very smooth

#10 did I say its SILENT

I plan on using it with the Rf 24-105 f4 for event shooting. I replaced the EF 70-200 f4 IS with this and am SO GLAD I did. In a room with people, when I did the half press to focus half the room would stop and turn to me, sorta blows your chance for a candid. This lens on my R/R6 is silent

I would not hesitate to use this on a tripod with out a collar for the lens.

Like I said in the first line this lens is a pleasure to use

I don't doubt it is a great lens, but for me at least I'm beginning to think It's not something I really need and I've had some sort of 70-200 almost forever. I've had both the original EF 70-200 4L and still have the IS V1 lens. I'm fairly satisfied with the 70-105 range of my 24-105 4L IS so I'm wondering if this really accomplishes much for me, especially given the rather steep price. Of course some people really need 70-200 in one lens and if so it looks like a great lens with your 2 noted cons (and lack of tripod collar) being the only reasons to question its suitability.

For me personally, I think either a 70-300 or 100-400 lens would be more useful. The other thing I'd like to see is a 200 2.8 (like the old EF V1 with sliding lens hood) that works with TCs.

Thanks for the review/comments.