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

RF 70-200 f/2.8 vs f/4 Flipin' and flopin'

Started 3 weeks ago | Discussions thread
MarshallG
MarshallG Veteran Member • Posts: 8,951
Depth of Field

As you’ve concluded, the reason for the f/2.8 is thinner depth of field, not better low light performance.  But for portraits, there are other lenses which are lighter and better performing for portraits.  The $1,200 you save won’t buy a top-end portrait lens, but it will get you a long way there.

I have an EF 70-200 f/2.8 and I love it. The image quality is fantastic. But it stays home a lot because it is very heavy.

 MarshallG's gear list:MarshallG's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon EF 16-35mm F2.8L II USM Canon Extender EF 1.4x II +4 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow