Canon RF 28-70 F/2 L

R2D2 wrote
The 28-70 is incomparable.

For its list price of $3100, it's saved me from buying $9,450 worth of fast prime lenses (Canon MSRP).
  • RF 85mm f/1.2 (non-DS, although I'd probably buy the DS, +$300)
  • RF 50mm f/1.2
  • EF 35mm f/1.4 II
  • EF 28mm f/1.4 (Sigma)
  • EF 24mm f/1.4 II
Plus it saves me another $2400 if I were to add in the RF 24-70 f/2.8L (which I'd also need alongside those primes).
Don't forget about the time saved from "analysis paralysis". I'm half way serious, but with one lens you don't have to figure out which primes stay and which primes go in the bag.
 
The 28-70 is incomparable.

For its list price of $3100, it's saved me from buying $9,450 worth of fast prime lenses (Canon MSRP).
  • RF 85mm f/1.2 (non-DS, although I'd probably buy the DS, +$300)
  • RF 50mm f/1.2
  • EF 35mm f/1.4 II
  • EF 28mm f/1.4 (Sigma)
  • EF 24mm f/1.4 II
That does not make any sense unless you didn't need f/1.2 or f/1.4. That one (and +) stop is very special IMO.
 
The most stupid things on this planet are
  1. Buying prime lens
  2. Buying super expensive prime lens
  3. Buying super expensive 50mm prime lens
  4. Buying super expensive MF 50mm prime lens
This is a century for zoom AF lens, not for century old wine with new bottle.
Phew, I thought you were going to tell us to use cellphone cameras and rely on Topaz AI processing to get the shots. With AI, is a camera or a lens even necessary? That is so early 21st century.
 
The 28-70 is incomparable.

For its list price of $3100, it's saved me from buying $9,450 worth of fast prime lenses (Canon MSRP).
  • RF 85mm f/1.2 (non-DS, although I'd probably buy the DS, +$300)
  • RF 50mm f/1.2
  • EF 35mm f/1.4 II
  • EF 28mm f/1.4 (Sigma)
  • EF 24mm f/1.4 II
That does not make any sense unless you didn't need f/1.2 or f/1.4. That one (and +) stop is very special IMO.
I'll chime in because I asked the same in another thread, got an answer, and he takes awhile to respond.

It's not that the RF 28-70 f2 technically does what those other lenses do but that getting his RF 28-70 f2 ended his burning desire for those lenses. He canceled plans to buy those primes once he had that zoom. Therefore, saved lots of $$.
 
The 28-70 is incomparable.

For its list price of $3100, it's saved me from buying $9,450 worth of fast prime lenses (Canon MSRP).
  • RF 85mm f/1.2 (non-DS, although I'd probably buy the DS, +$300)
  • RF 50mm f/1.2
  • EF 35mm f/1.4 II
  • EF 28mm f/1.4 (Sigma)
  • EF 24mm f/1.4 II
That does not make any sense unless you didn't need f/1.2 or f/1.4. That one (and +) stop is very special IMO.
I'll chime in because I asked the same in another thread, got an answer, and he takes awhile to respond.

It's not that the RF 28-70 f2 technically does what those other lenses do but that getting his RF 28-70 f2 ended his burning desire for those lenses. He canceled plans to buy those primes once he had that zoom. Therefore, saved lots of $$.
Ah, I wish I can give up f-stops so easily, and I would be super happy with a lot of good quality zooms.

Case in point:
  • EF 200-400mm f/4L IS
  • RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS (had owned EF IS version I and version II, but...)
I think the RF 28-70mm f/2 belongs to the same category. Even f/2 is fast, I know I can do better with primes. Waiting patiently for the RF 35mm f/1.2L and the RF 200mm f/1.8L...
 
I shoot only with primes since I'm pretty happy with either 35mm or 85mm. There are times when I wish I had a single lens and although 28mm isn't that wide, I rarely shoot ultra wide and I have a Sigma 14-24mm if I needed to go wider. There were several times when I wish I had the 28-70mm. I couldn't justify the cost at the moment and I'm pretty happy with the RF 85mm 1.2L so that'll have to do for now.
 
The 28-70 is incomparable.

For its list price of $3100, it's saved me from buying $9,450 worth of fast prime lenses (Canon MSRP).
  • RF 85mm f/1.2 (non-DS, although I'd probably buy the DS, +$300)
  • RF 50mm f/1.2
  • EF 35mm f/1.4 II
  • EF 28mm f/1.4 (Sigma)
  • EF 24mm f/1.4 II
That does not make any sense unless you didn't need f/1.2 or f/1.4. That one (and +) stop is very special IMO.

--
Ray
He conceded that he was giving up speed, separation and bokeh but that for what he shoots that was ok. Makes sense for him.
 
There hasn’t been a lot of discussions on the RF 28-70 lately with all the new stuff from Canon surfacing.

About a year ago I went to my local camera store and tested the RF-28-70. One of the reasons I didn’t buy it was for the size and weight compared to my EF 24-70 2.8L ii. (of course price was a consideration also)

Well, I am back to the RF 28-70 consideration again. I don’t think I want to keep the 24-70 if I purchase the 28-70.

Has anyone that bought the RF 28-70 and had the EF 24-70 2.8L ii keep them both? Any regrets either not keeping them both if you sold the 24-70 and are you happy with the RF 28-70?
Never had both at the same time.

Very happy with the 28-70.

What you’re looking for is someone unhappy with it, that also has a 24-70. The only people unhappy with the 28-70 are folks with the 24-70 that have never tried it due to cost. That’s it.
 
There hasn’t been a lot of discussions on the RF 28-70 lately with all the new stuff from Canon surfacing.

About a year ago I went to my local camera store and tested the RF-28-70. One of the reasons I didn’t buy it was for the size and weight compared to my EF 24-70 2.8L ii. (of course price was a consideration also)

Well, I am back to the RF 28-70 consideration again. I don’t think I want to keep the 24-70 if I purchase the 28-70.

Has anyone that bought the RF 28-70 and had the EF 24-70 2.8L ii keep them both? Any regrets either not keeping them both if you sold the 24-70 and are you happy with the RF 28-70?
Never had both at the same time.

Very happy with the 28-70.

What you’re looking for is someone unhappy with it,
I wouldn’t think anyone is not happy with it. I wasn’t sure if I wanted to keep both the EF 24-70 2.8L ii and buy the 28-70 but don’t see any need, really. I’m just getting ready in the next couple of days to post and sell the EF 24-70. I’m just trying to figure out a fair price.

I had already considered the RF 24-70 but changed my mind on that purchase.
that also has a 24-70. The only people unhappy with the 28-70 are folks with the 24-70 that have never tried it due to cost. That’s it.
 
There hasn’t been a lot of discussions on the RF 28-70 lately with all the new stuff from Canon surfacing.

About a year ago I went to my local camera store and tested the RF-28-70. One of the reasons I didn’t buy it was for the size and weight compared to my EF 24-70 2.8L ii. (of course price was a consideration also)

Well, I am back to the RF 28-70 consideration again. I don’t think I want to keep the 24-70 if I purchase the 28-70.

Has anyone that bought the RF 28-70 and had the EF 24-70 2.8L ii keep them both? Any regrets either not keeping them both if you sold the 24-70 and are you happy with the RF 28-70?
Never had both at the same time.

Very happy with the 28-70.

What you’re looking for is someone unhappy with it,
I wouldn’t think anyone is not happy with it. I wasn’t sure if I wanted to keep both the EF 24-70 2.8L ii and buy the 28-70 but don’t see any need, really. I’m just getting ready in the next couple of days to post and sell the EF 24-70. I’m just trying to figure out a fair price.

I had already considered the RF 24-70 but changed my mind on that purchase.
that also has a 24-70. The only people unhappy with the 28-70 are folks with the 24-70 that have never tried it due to cost. That’s it.
The RF 28-70 is “special”, I can’t say that of most glass. It’s kept me bound to RF. It’s the apex of the RF mount.

In a nutshell the 28-70 is “the” event shooters lens. Bar none.
 
Last edited:
The 28-70 is incomparable.

For its list price of $3100, it's saved me from buying $9,450 worth of fast prime lenses (Canon MSRP).
  • RF 85mm f/1.2 (non-DS, although I'd probably buy the DS, +$300)
  • RF 50mm f/1.2
  • EF 35mm f/1.4 II
  • EF 28mm f/1.4 (Sigma)
  • EF 24mm f/1.4 II
That does not make any sense unless you didn't need f/1.2 or f/1.4. That one (and +) stop is very special IMO.
I'll chime in because I asked the same in another thread, got an answer, and he takes awhile to respond.

It's not that the RF 28-70 f2 technically does what those other lenses do but that getting his RF 28-70 f2 ended his burning desire for those lenses. He canceled plans to buy those primes once he had that zoom. Therefore, saved lots of $$.
Your answer is right on the money. Thanks friend! :-)

I’ve been so darn busy with shoots (and editing). Finally got caught up today, and taking some time for myself this weekend (going owl hunting with some friends!).

Cheers,

R2

--
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
http://www.pbase.com/jekyll_and_hyde/galleries
 
Last edited:
The 28-70 is incomparable.

For its list price of $3100, it's saved me from buying $9,450 worth of fast prime lenses (Canon MSRP).
  • RF 85mm f/1.2 (non-DS, although I'd probably buy the DS, +$300)
  • RF 50mm f/1.2
  • EF 35mm f/1.4 II
  • EF 28mm f/1.4 (Sigma)
  • EF 24mm f/1.4 II
That does not make any sense unless you didn't need f/1.2 or f/1.4. That one (and +) stop is very special IMO.
With my event and sports shooting I don’t need the ultra-fast lenses, but rather the flexibility of a good zoom. And the 28-70 produces images with excellent character, which is one aspect I’m after. I just don’t need to get that kind of rendition from primes now. :-)

R2
 
I have the Rf 24 70, rf28 - 70 rf50 1.2 and rf 85. 12.

I bought the rf 28 - 70 the last, I got a deal I couldn't refuse. It is not mind blowing better than my rf 24 70. I could be more creative with my rf 24 70 because that one is lighter and has the wider option and it does super cool macro within the 24 35 range (around 20 cm). BUT when I know I need to make 'commercial' kind of pictures easy it is easier with the 28 70. It is this canon pro look only canon does, nice organic renditions. But, it doesn't replace my rf 50 1.2, that lens is still unique in its looks.

Do you know any 70mm lens which does 2.0? I don't. This makes this lens quite unique haha. You only live once, just do it, spend monies, life your life and be happy, regret, sell it and buy the rf 24 70.
 
Thank you to everyone that gave me input to my question on the RF 28-70 lens.

I looked up my metadata in Lightroom over the past several years and in 2022 using the R5 camera.

Out of 4,500 shots in 2022 with all lenses I own I used f/1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.2 only 74 times. 1,755 shots were at f/5.6

I spoke to my local camera shop today and he mentioned Canon might have their trade-in program starting tomorrow. I am not familiar with that program.

Based on my aperture uses and owning the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L and Canon RF 85mm 1.2L I might just go with the Canon RF 24-70mm and either trade-in or sell my current Canon EF 24-70 2.8L ii.

I don’t have an issue paying the extra $700 for the RF 28-70 but think it will be more practical to use the RF 24-70mm. Easier to haul around all day, 24mm vs 28 mm. Not saying that if I had f/2.0 I wouldn’t shoot more below f/2.8 since I don’t need to change lenses but that is hard to say.

Out of the 4,500 shots I used 24mm 192 times and 28mm 76 times. 1,200 shots were between f/5.6 and f/7.1.

Thank for listening for my rationalization. :-)
 
Last edited:
Thank you to everyone that gave me input to my question on the RF 28-70 lens.

I looked up my metadata in Lightroom over the past several years and in 2022 using the R5 camera.

Out of 4,500 shots in 2022 with all lenses I own I used f/1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.2 only 74 times. 1,755 shots were at f/5.6

I spoke to my local camera shop today and he mentioned Canon might have their trade-in program starting tomorrow. I am not familiar with that program.

Based on my aperture uses and owning the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L and Canon RF 85mm 1.2L I might just go with the Canon RF 24-70mm and either trade-in or sell my current Canon EF 24-70 2.8L ii.

I don’t have an issue paying the extra $700 for the RF 28-70 but think it will be more practical to use the RF 24-70mm. Easier to haul around all day, 24mm vs 28 mm. Not saying that if I had f/2.0 I wouldn’t shoot more below f/2.8 since I don’t need to change lenses but that is hard to say.

Out of the 4,500 shots I used 24mm 192 times and 28mm 76 times. 1,200 shots were between f/5.6 and f/7.1.

Thank for listening for my rationalization.
I think it's a good plan. You've done your due diligence, now go enjoy! :-D

R2
 
Thank you to everyone that gave me input to my question on the RF 28-70 lens.

I looked up my metadata in Lightroom over the past several years and in 2022 using the R5 camera.

Out of 4,500 shots in 2022 with all lenses I own I used f/1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.2 only 74 times. 1,755 shots were at f/5.6

I spoke to my local camera shop today and he mentioned Canon might have their trade-in program starting tomorrow. I am not familiar with that program.

Based on my aperture uses and owning the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L and Canon RF 85mm 1.2L I might just go with the Canon RF 24-70mm and either trade-in or sell my current Canon EF 24-70 2.8L ii.

I don’t have an issue paying the extra $700 for the RF 28-70 but think it will be more practical to use the RF 24-70mm. Easier to haul around all day, 24mm vs 28 mm. Not saying that if I had f/2.0 I wouldn’t shoot more below f/2.8 since I don’t need to change lenses but that is hard to say.

Out of the 4,500 shots I used 24mm 192 times and 28mm 76 times. 1,200 shots were between f/5.6 and f/7.1.

Thank for listening for my rationalization. :-)
I made the exact same decision and I’m still confident that I made the right decision for me. That doesn’t mean that I have 100% stopped dreaming of the 28-70 :-).
 
Thank you to everyone that gave me input to my question on the RF 28-70 lens.

I looked up my metadata in Lightroom over the past several years and in 2022 using the R5 camera.

Out of 4,500 shots in 2022 with all lenses I own I used f/1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.2 only 74 times. 1,755 shots were at f/5.6

I spoke to my local camera shop today and he mentioned Canon might have their trade-in program starting tomorrow. I am not familiar with that program.

Based on my aperture uses and owning the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L and Canon RF 85mm 1.2L I might just go with the Canon RF 24-70mm and either trade-in or sell my current Canon EF 24-70 2.8L ii.

I don’t have an issue paying the extra $700 for the RF 28-70 but think it will be more practical to use the RF 24-70mm. Easier to haul around all day, 24mm vs 28 mm. Not saying that if I had f/2.0 I wouldn’t shoot more below f/2.8 since I don’t need to change lenses but that is hard to say.

Out of the 4,500 shots I used 24mm 192 times and 28mm 76 times. 1,200 shots were between f/5.6 and f/7.1.

Thank for listening for my rationalization. :-)
I made the exact same decision and I’m still confident that I made the right decision for me. That doesn’t mean that I have 100% stopped dreaming of the 28-70 :-).
For the few times I use less than f/2.8 I will just change lenses. If I owned both the RF 28-70 and RF 24-70 I would probably use the 24-70 considerably more frequently.
 
Thank you to everyone that gave me input to my question on the RF 28-70 lens.

I looked up my metadata in Lightroom over the past several years and in 2022 using the R5 camera.

Out of 4,500 shots in 2022 with all lenses I own I used f/1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2.2 only 74 times. 1,755 shots were at f/5.6

I spoke to my local camera shop today and he mentioned Canon might have their trade-in program starting tomorrow. I am not familiar with that program.

Based on my aperture uses and owning the Canon RF 50mm f/1.2L and Canon RF 85mm 1.2L I might just go with the Canon RF 24-70mm and either trade-in or sell my current Canon EF 24-70 2.8L ii.

I don’t have an issue paying the extra $700 for the RF 28-70 but think it will be more practical to use the RF 24-70mm. Easier to haul around all day, 24mm vs 28 mm. Not saying that if I had f/2.0 I wouldn’t shoot more below f/2.8 since I don’t need to change lenses but that is hard to say.

Out of the 4,500 shots I used 24mm 192 times and 28mm 76 times. 1,200 shots were between f/5.6 and f/7.1.

Thank for listening for my rationalization. :-)
Do you shoot P, Auto, Fv, Tv, Av? Very important question.

By what I just heard, either A. You’re best served with stabilized F/4L lenses or B. You’re just not using what’s on tap to you now. A 28-70 as cool as it is, won’t fix anything for you other than put a dent in you wallet. Even an f/2.8 is a waste for you. Seriously give it some thought as to why you shoot, what you shoot. If you can answer, you have answered your own question.
 
Last edited:
From 50/1.2 to 2870/2.0 there are 1.5 stops of difference.

From 2870 to 2470/2.8 it is one f-stop difference.

For me the 1 stop difference doesn't justify the big size and reduced wide angel of the 2870 vs the 2470.

For my taste the 2870 is too big. In this range I shoot subjects/people where I want to get close and where I do not want to put a monster lens in their face.

Even the 2470/2.8 is a little big for my taste.

I wish Canon offered some high quality compact primes in the 1.4-1.8 range.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top