Canon RF 28-70 F/2 L

PhotoKhan wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

cpharm86 wrote:

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?

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).

Seriously. I had the Joneses HARD for the RF 50mm f/1.2 and RF 85mm f/1.2 (and also had the need for excellent high-speed wide angle lenses too). I was all prepared to buy them, and more!

Then the RF 28-70 hit my radar, and the rest was history. I have no desire to buy any of those primes (or RF 24-70 f/2.8) any longer.

I shoot a lot of events and sports, and this baby just nails it. The zoom range is right on, the AF is fast and sure, the rendition is as heavenly as any other premium L. The DOF isn’t as shallow of course, but that can actually be a detriment for this kind of shooting. If I want max DOF control, I have my Siggy 135mm f/1.8 anyways, and RF 70-200 f/2.8 for longer stuff (plus the sweet RF 15-35 f/2.8 for the U/W range).

IMHO the only real down-side of the 28-70 might be its size. I don’t mind it for event or sports or portrait shooting, but I wouldn’t want to carry it while just walking about, or for travel. YMMV!

R2

The strong trait of the 28-70 is that it has a very distinct, "character-filled" optical signature, adding to its technical quality.

I simply love it and find myself quite often just picking up the camera, snapping this lens on and going for a "photographic stroll", just because.

This said, I don't think it replaces RF 1.2L primes.

I also have the 85 f/1.2 and never had an instance where the two conflicted in my mind as to which I should use to do what.

It is true one can think of the 28-70 as an apt replacement for multiple primes, given the superb optical quality of this RF zoom gem.

But f/2 primes, not f/1.2 ones.

PK

It all depends on usage.  Yours is simply different than mine.  Like I’ve mentioned before, if I still shot a lot of portraits and weddings I’d definitely want the f/1.2 primes in addition to the zoom (they’re truly awesome).  But I don’t do much of that any more, and instead I have the outstanding Sigma 135mm f/1.8 to fit that need.

Shooting events though, I find the big zoom to be indispensable, and the fast primes are the ones that are in fact dispensable (IME).  Especially since I’m using such an outstanding RAW image processor.

R2