For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

Not really much to say here, you just have to decide what is more important.

One is a stop faster, but is much larger and heavier - plus it adds an adapter

The other is small, light, and no adapter, but is a stop slower.

Do you value max aperture or size and weight more? That's the decision to make. We can't make it for you.

Personally I favor the weight and went with RF f4.

I know the obvious differences. If that is all I needed, I would not make a thread. I already mentioned size and weight are of no importance. I dont expect others to make a choice for me but to share their feedback using the lenses.

My main concern is AF accuracy after my experience with the 70-200 is ii. Unlike my Sigma lenses that are pretty much perfect, the Canon is not, when it comes to consistent tack sharp focus.

For single point AF I don't see a performance difference between EF and RF lenses. What makes the real difference is when using eye detection AF.

I try to eliminate all other factors (by using a relatively high shutter speed at 1/512s and removing the UV filter) to make a fair comparison. AF performance on my EF 135 f/2L and EF 70-200 f/2.8 II USM is decent. But when I have the RF 70-200 f/4L or even the RF 85 f/2 IS STM to compare, the RF lenses would give me noticeably higher hit rate (around 90%). I guess the EF 70-200 f/2.8 III USM would not give you drastic improvement in AF, as it has basically the same design as the 2nd version.

If you shoot at 12fps anyway, maybe hit rate is not that important, as you can easily pick the sharpest photo you get.