My take on the RF 70-200 F4 Locked

drsnoopy wrote:

davel33 wrote:

"It actually costs more than I paid (new) for my EF 100-400 L mk2"

Where can you get the 100-400 L mk2 for less then $1600 ? Amazon price on the EF 100-400 mk 2 is $2400. You must be thinking of the RF 70-200 F2.8 @ $2600. Let me tell you if I paid $2600 for a lens I would be looking for new wife

In the UK, the RF 70-200 f4 L is GBP1700 (about USD 2400) including tax. I paid GBP1600 (about USD 2300) for my EF 100-400 L mk ii, about 2 years ago, including a cashback offer. Prices do differ between countries, and discounts on new model lenses are rare. I might consider the RF70-200/4 if the price drops by about 25%, but not at the current price.

I think the price point is an issue for an F4 70-200mm, if you've a body with IBIS then the EF 70-200mm F4 and adapter is far more cost effect. Actually I don't see much optical difference between the two, I think the Cameralabs guy came to the same conclusion.

At the price the EF lens is it looks like a bargain, or possibly a used F2.8 EF

It's interesting what Canon did with the RF lenses, the lack of TC is a shame though not a show stopper. The cost is really quite high, on both the F4 and F2.8 is almost unrealistic really. I can see a lot of people adapting EF lenses even third party stuff too (the Tamron is also a good lens)

For me anyway MILC lenses are a little bit too expensive, OK let's not hold back they are both well overpriced. Go back 10 years and you'd get the F2.8 for the price of the F4 now.