R5 + RF 28-70mm f/2 weekend train and tram photos

There are many discussion threads but not many pictures shared, so I chose some examples which I'm pretty happy with. It was my first weekend with R5 + RF 28-70 f/2. I used the lens before with rented RP because I didn't order early enough to get R5 for my vacation. The bokeh and resulting 3D effect is something magical on its own. If I could have only one lens this would be it, worthy upgrade from my previous favorite Sigma 18-35 f/1.8.

Now I had a chance to test the duo in challenging situation: mostly wide open at f/2, tracking moving subjects, and zooming out (sometimes in) at the same time. The AF is very responsive and sticks solidly on the subjects, be it for movement tracking or just recomposing across the frame. Very refreshing compared to 80D producing some amount of out of focus shots, being tricked by window reflections or just limited to fixed zones in the frame. Also upgrade from X-T3 which was better but not being able to track while zooming with adapted Sigma 1.8 zooms and the 18-35mm wasn't always reliable even on static subjects wide open. Video subject tracking is as good as in stills, another advantage over the Fuji.

These are shot with default AF settings, OOC JPEG with Faithful and +2 sharpness picture profile, all lens corrections enabled, no further editing so you can be the judge how well it performs.

Shooting tram going away from me is more difficult, I have to grab the focus at the right place (the end of car) just as it's entering the frame, wait split second for useful composition, and capture it. With R5 it's easy.

Subject coming directly at and close to me, both camera and lens have no problem keep the pace.

The sharpest focus here is slightly behind front of this train, as bad as I managed to get so far. Still very usable.

Lisa Kiehls wrote:

Would anybody guess that these were shot with an $8000 camera?

Looks more like it was shot with a $4000 camera.

kelpdiver wrote:

starfly wrote:

Lisa Kiehls wrote:

Would anybody guess that these were shot with an $8000 camera?

Looks more like it was shot with a $4000 camera.

with the lens, nearly a 7k camera.

That lens is very interesting....just wondering about the weight factor. And is losing 24-27mm to get f2 a good trade or not?

The 28-70 lens is my go to for weddings and events, for that scenario it’s perfect

for landscapes I use the 24-70 Or 24-105

Lisa Kiehls wrote:

Would anybody guess that these were shot with an $8000 camera?

That's a good question. If you look at the full size and see also the depth of field then you should be able to guess it's from more expensive full frame combo. You can get same result with cheaper kit but it will be less universal, fixed fast lens.

The good thing is this camera and lens can do more than shoot moving subjects in good light while having creamy background. You won't guess the same camera can shoot with low noise handheld at night or that it can record 8K, both features that I will or already am using.

kelpdiver wrote:

starfly wrote:

Lisa Kiehls wrote:

Would anybody guess that these were shot with an $8000 camera?

Looks more like it was shot with a $4000 camera.

with the lens, nearly a 7k camera.

That lens is very interesting....just wondering about the weight factor. And is losing 24-27mm to get f2 a good trade or not?

It's not small or light but it's (another) price I'm willing to pay when I chose to have ultimate quality gear. I'm already used to shooting Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 which starts with around 28mm equivalent. The RF 28-70mm is almost comically fat but also shorter, better balanced I would say. It's a little heavier now but still usable, not that bad as I read everywhere what monster it is. As general walkaround lens that I don't have to change instead of primes it's worth it to me. If you don't need the f/2 for best DoF control or low light performance then you will of course save a lot of money and weight by going with f/2.8.

I am using a strap attached to tripod thread and in my opinion it is absolutely OK.