DPReview.com is closing April 10th - Find out more

RF 70-200 f/2.8 vs 4.0 decisions decisions!

Started 1 month ago | Discussions thread
KevinRA Senior Member • Posts: 1,457
Re: RF 70-200 f/2.8 vs 4.0 decisions decisions!

MarshallG wrote:

Alastair Norcross wrote:

MarshallG wrote:

You’re very correct that the f/2.8 is very heavy.

OTOH, there’s a limitation to the 200mm length and if f/2.8 isn’t so important to you, then your comparison should be the 70-200 f/4 vs the 100-500mm L.

RF teleconverters are very expensive and using one to create a 400mm f/8 lens doesn’t make much sense anyway.

It's also impossible. The RF 70-200s don't take the RF extenders. At least the F2.8 version doesn't. Does the F4 version?

That’s just ridicililious!!!! (So ridiculous I had to invent a new word just to describe how ridiculous it is!).

As if the $500 price tag isn’t ridicililious enough!

Well I guess it is so they can shrink the size - even the 100-500 cant take extenders and retain full range.....

I guess really such an expensive lens you'd only use wide open and if one needed 280mm f/4 then the 100-500 is only ~1 stop behind on the RF 2.8 70-200 and is just as good as the f/4 70-200.  So guess Canon thought TC's not relevant for these RF's.

I take Alistair's point on size/weight on the 70-200 f/2.8 but at a huge cost premium on the RF vs EF II mint used warranty copy.   I'd never use a 2X TC on these as better options out there - the 1.4X can sometime be handy and retains good IQ on the EF.   One can buy the EF, a slightly bigger bag and a very nice extra lens (or extra vacation) for the price difference.

 KevinRA's gear list:KevinRA's gear list
Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R7 Canon EOS R10 Canon EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM +14 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow