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

Started 6 months ago | Questions thread
tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 17,224
Re: For Example

Shaun_Nyc wrote:

Sittatunga wrote:

Shaun_Nyc wrote:

I would take either EF 2.8 III or F4 II over their plastic dust sucker counterparts. Yea I really don't care that both RF offerings collapse smaller for storage lulz I also think the RF lens will not hold up compared to the EF L build quality.

Environmental filters up the wazoo to compensate for this poor design, we already knew this. I think these poly carbonate lens bodies & lens barrels are going to age terribly and look like hell in short order. Users are scratching them w their finger nails by accident .

As far as practical reasons for sports ?

We have 30+ years of Canon zoom lenses that extend when zooming or focusing.  The 70-200mm models are literally the only ones that do not.  How come nobody calls the 24-105L or the 70-300L "dust suckers" or proclaim that they are fragile?

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow