Dilemma in telezoom lens (option 1 or 2)

kinkindoll · Mar 19, 2022

Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

May I please seek your advice and thanks.

thunder storm · Mar 19, 2022

kinkindoll said:
Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities

What kind of sports? How much movement, how much light, what kind of distances?

kinkindoll said:
of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

You should finish this thinking first. Looks to me like an excuse to worry about anything over 200mm.

kinkindoll said:
option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-200 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

I would simply start with the f/2.8 lens and see from there if you need anything longer.

kinkindoll said:
personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight

Oh common, it's just 1070 grams. That's nothing for such a versatile lens.

kinkindoll said:
compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

Especially for expensive lenses and especially for zooms and especially zooms with stabilization it's not recommended to go with gray import.

kinkindoll said:
May I please seek your advice and thanks.

Skipping anything over 200mm, that's where I would cut the cost.

I did cut my costs by going with a used Sigma 70-200mm f/2.8 Sports (850 euro) and 100-400mm Contemporary (450 euro). Accepting weight, size and an adapter is another way to cut costs.

Klaus dk · Mar 19, 2022

kinkindoll said:
Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

May I please seek your advice and thanks.

I'd take option 2. The RF 70-200/2.8 is a fantastic lens, and although I don't own it (yet), the reviews of the RF 100-400 are very promising, and the price and weight are manageable.

Good luck and good light.

Nimonus · Mar 19, 2022

Option 3,

EF 100-400II can do everything, sports or wildlife.

You need not a 70-200 once you have 100-400L, not only overlap of the focal length, but also the IQ.

You may get some good 24-70 lens for kids portraits,

maarensv · Mar 19, 2022

kinkindoll said:
Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

May I please seek your advice and thanks.

Some more option.

option 3) RF 70-200 f/4, nothing else

The f/4 is fast enough for the casual sport activities. Small, lightweight and a whole lot cheaper than the f/2.8 version. The 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 complement each other well. Take the time to think about longer FL options.

option 4) RF 70-200 f/4 and RF 100-400

In case you really want the longer range.

option 5) RF 100-500

If you can afford both RF 70-200 f/2.8 and RF 100-400, like in option 2), than you can afford this one instead as well. Even better than the 100-400 II.

maarensv · Mar 19, 2022

maarensv said:
kinkindoll said:

Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

May I please seek your advice and thanks.

Click to expand...

Some more option.

option 3) RF 70-200 f/4, nothing else

The f/4 is fast enough for the casual sport activities. Small, lightweight and a whole lot cheaper than the f/2.8 version. The 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 complement each other well. Take the time to think about longer FL options.

option 4) RF 70-200 f/4 and RF 100-400

In case you really want the longer range.

option 5) RF 100-500

If you can afford both RF 70-200 f/2.8 and RF 100-400, like in option 2), than you can afford this one instead as well. Even better than the 100-400 II.

Forgot one option. You could get an EF 70-200 f/4 used instead of a new RF 70-200. Works very well adapted to the R system. For less than half the price of a new RF 70-200 f/4.

BobKnDP · Mar 19, 2022

thunder storm said:
thunder storm said:

(snip)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight

Click to expand...

Oh common, it's just 1070 grams. That's nothing for such a versatile lens.

thunder storm said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Common? The curse of spellcheck strikes again?

I spent a while yesterday walking around a park with an R5 plus an RF 800 f/11 USM. (I know, I know. Not versatile. And not equivalent to an $18k US 800mm f/5.6 L.) 1260g. The RF 70-200 f/2.8L approaches that if you don't remove the ring.

I found it heavy, after a while. I was carrying it by hand. (Happily, I was pleased with its performance.)

The RF 800 f/5.6 must be fun, not that I'll ever know from personal experience. 3140g, $17k list.

R2D2 · Mar 19, 2022

kinkindoll said:
option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4

For sports, option #2 for sure! (The RF 2.8 is a pleasure to shoot compared to the other EF zooms). Then consider adding an RF 1.4x at some point if you really get into birding (and eventually a 100-500!

).

R2

Kokopelli_Rocks · Mar 19, 2022

Indoor or outdoor sports. If you are not doing indoor sports the f4 should be a great option. Have you considered just one lens - the 100-500 would cover most of the ranges and it's AF should be great for sports.

kinkindoll · Mar 19, 2022

Thank you for all your advice. I may consider to get RF 70-200 F2.8 but one negative thing is the TC is incompatible for Rf mount.

thunder storm · Mar 20, 2022

Nimonus said:
Option 3,

EF 100-400II can do everything, sports or wildlife.

You need not a 70-200 once you have 100-400L, not only overlap of the focal length, but also the IQ.

Subject separation and light gathering will be less than ideal. But this can be the best compromise.

Nimonus said:
You may get some good 24-70 lens for kids portraits,

OP has the 50 1.2 L, so the portrait needs are covered i guess.

--
45 is more than enough, but 500.000 isn't

kinkindoll · Mar 20, 2022

R2D2 said:
kinkindoll said:

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4

Click to expand...

For sports, option #2 for sure! (The RF 2.8 is a pleasure to shoot compared to the other EF zooms). Then consider adding an RF 1.4x at some point if you really get into birding (and eventually a 100-500! ).

R2

Sadly the new RF 70-200 cannot add the TC, otherwise I will not bother to just get one 70-200 F2.8

kinkindoll · Mar 20, 2022

Kokopelli_Rocks said:
Indoor or outdoor sports. If you are not doing indoor sports the f4 should be a great option. Have you considered just one lens - the 100-500 would cover most of the ranges and it's AF should be great for sports.

Actually the sport that i mentioned is mainly on my kids like cycling or running, not very fast but love to have the subject separation that's why i want a large aperture lens

kinkindoll · Mar 20, 2022

maarensv said:
kinkindoll said:

Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

May I please seek your advice and thanks.

Click to expand...

Some more option.

option 3) RF 70-200 f/4, nothing else

The f/4 is fast enough for the casual sport activities. Small, lightweight and a whole lot cheaper than the f/2.8 version. The 24-105 and 70-200 f/4 complement each other well. Take the time to think about longer FL options.

option 4) RF 70-200 f/4 and RF 100-400

In case you really want the longer range.

option 5) RF 100-500

If you can afford both RF 70-200 f/2.8 and RF 100-400, like in option 2), than you can afford this one instead as well. Even better than the 100-400 II.

Thank and option 4 is another option to consideration.

thunder storm · Mar 20, 2022

kinkindoll said:
Kokopelli_Rocks said:

Indoor or outdoor sports. If you are not doing indoor sports the f4 should be a great option. Have you considered just one lens - the 100-500 would cover most of the ranges and it's AF should be great for sports.

Click to expand...

Actually the sport that i mentioned is mainly on my kids like cycling or running, not very fast but love to have the subject separation that's why i want a large aperture lens

I don't think you do need more than 200mm for these kind of sports?

If it's about subject separation you can also think of the EF 85mm f/1.4 L IS USM or Sigma 105mm f/1.4 Art or Sigma 135mm f/1.8 Art. For 135mm a used Canon EF f/2.0 USM is another option.

You could also think of the 70-200mm f/4.0 + 85mm f/1.4 (or 105 Art) in stead of the 70-200mm f/2.8 only. The f/4.0 + a prime will come around the same price as the f/2.8 zoom. At 200mm you will get your separation anyway regardless if it's f/4.0 or f/2.8, but at the shorter focal lengths it's where the large aperture makes the difference.

Kokopelli_Rocks · Mar 20, 2022

kinkindoll said:
Kokopelli_Rocks said:

Indoor or outdoor sports. If you are not doing indoor sports the f4 should be a great option. Have you considered just one lens - the 100-500 would cover most of the ranges and it's AF should be great for sports.

Click to expand...

Actually the sport that i mentioned is mainly on my kids like cycling or running, not very fast but love to have the subject separation that's why i want a large aperture lens

I that case I would go with option two. I shot a lot of indoor basketball this year and used my R5 and EF 70-200 f2.8 MK II. Great lens for indoor sports, but the lens is very heavy. If I do much more indoor sports I would find a way to get the RF 70-200 f2.8, but this might be my last year of indoor sports for awhile. I agree the lack of using a TC is a pain, but I have only used a TC once on my 70-200 and that was just a test. For outdoor sports I used a 70-200 f4 for many years and loved the performance and weight.

Being able to get the RF 70-200 f2.8 and the RF 100-400 looks like a great combo. The RF 100-400 has very good AF and the weight and size on a R5 is amazing.

paratom · Mar 20, 2022

I would say depends where are your priorities:

Is the 70200 range more important and do you want the f2.8 subject isolation and low light advantage?

Or is the range above 200mm and reach more important? I don't own the 100-400 but expect it to be good but not as spectacular as the 100-500 (which I plan to get).

Maybe step by step?

I just compared the 70200 2.8 and 4.0 version and while both delivered very good IQ I opted for the f2.8 version (intended use sports (including indoor sports), action, images of the kids).

Andy01 · Mar 20, 2022

kinkindoll said:
Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

The EF 100-400L ii or RF 100-500 might actually cover most of your needs - unless you need the speed of f2.8 for the sports. The subject separation at f5.6 and close to 400mm (100-400L ii) is pretty good.

kinkindoll said:
personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

I am in Oz - keep in mind that Canon Oz offers a 5 year warranty whereas with most "grey" sellers you will get a 1 year "warranty" offered by the seller (not Canon), so in reality you are comparing 5 years with perhaps 14 days in many cases.

Having said that, I have only needed a warranty on Canon gear twice since 2007 - once in 2017 when my new 6D ii (bought from Teds) had a faulty sensor ( a coloured line) and in 2018 when a EF 24-105L ii from a eBay (grey) seller had AF issues - Teds swapped the body immediately and it took a while but I returned the lens to the seller (eBay Plus/PayPal covered most of the return shipping) and eventually got a full refund, but I reported the issue within a few days of receiving it so well within the "DOA" period - I am not sure it would have been so "easy" after 6-12 months.

kinkindoll said:
May I please seek your advice and thanks.

Colin

ZX11 · Mar 20, 2022

kinkindoll said:
Hi all,

Hope you all are safe and well. I have Canon R5 with RF 24-105 F4, Rf 50 F1.2 and RF 35 F1.8. I am thinking to get the telezoom lens but due to limited budget, I cannot decide with combination is suit for me. The reason why I want to get the tele zoom lens is mainly causal sport activities of my kids, and also thinking to do some bird photography...

option 1). Rf 70-200 F4 and a used EF 100-400 L USM II (around AUD 4,500 in total)

option 2). RF 70-20 F2.8 and RF 100-400 F5.6-8 (around AUD 4,600 in total)

personally i prefer large aperture 2.8 but the down size is the weight compare to 70-200 F4, also planning to get the lens from the grey import because it is cheaper.

May I please seek your advice and thanks.

option 2.

The RF 70-200 f2.8 fits casual sports activities you can get reasonable close to. f4 would bug someone who prefers large aperture.

The RF 100-400 fits "do some bird photography".

tdbmd · Mar 21, 2022

Depending on the distances you are shooting at, the EF 100-400L mk II can certainly give you subject separation. It is a great lens, very versatile and great IQ

Dilemma in telezoom lens (option 1 or 2)

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Enthusiast

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Keyboard shortcuts