For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?

Started 9 months ago | Questions
Luis Gabriel Photography
Luis Gabriel Photography Senior Member • Posts: 2,578
For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

This one got me a bit confused...on the one hand I l like fast lenses (I shoot primarily with a Sigma 105mm 1.4) but on the other hand, this lens will be used mostly in the studio for the flexibility of that focal range.

Size is nice on the RF of course but not a big deal in my case as if I wanted to use it outdoors like for some event, I will rather be using the 2.8
That is where my confusion is. They can be found around the same price in the used market (the RF F4 and the EF 2.8 version 3).
I guess the main issue is that I experienced focusing issues with the EF 70-200mm mark II version and the R5 where my other lenses all pretty much never miss (all 3 are Sigma lenses).
So that makes me want to go with the RF but that F/4 still bothers me even for my usage. And of course, the 2.8 RF version I just feel is too expensive, and not happy with the focus breathing making it 200mm shorter (although it does focus closer than most).
I am usually very clear about what lens I need but this one got me second-guessing.
Anyone has compared both?

 Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list:Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony RX10 IV +4 more
ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Canon 70-200 F2.8L III Canon EOS R5 Canon RF 70-200 F4 L
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
moon1029 Regular Member • Posts: 304
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
2

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

This one got me a bit confused...on the one hand I l like fast lenses (I shoot primarily with a Sigma 105mm 1.4) but on the other hand, this lens will be used mostly in the studio for the flexibility of that focal range.

Size is nice on the RF of course but not a big deal in my case as if I wanted to use it outdoors like for some event, I will rather be using the 2.8
That is where my confusion is. They can be found around the same price in the used market (the RF F4 and the EF 2.8 version 3).
I guess the main issue is that I experienced focusing issues with the EF 70-200mm mark II version and the R5 where my other lenses all pretty much never miss (all 3 are Sigma lenses).
So that makes me want to go with the RF but that F/4 still bothers me even for my usage. And of course, the 2.8 RF version I just feel is too expensive, and not happy with the focus breathing making it 200mm shorter (although it does focus closer than most).
I am usually very clear about what lens I need but this one got me second-guessing.
Anyone has compared both?

The RF 70-200 f/4 has better correction for pitch/yaw movement. So video footage would be more steady. Its light weight and good balance also make it better for video shooting. The greatest drawback of this lens, in my opinion, is focus would wobble if you zoom in and out. It's a common problem with the nano usm motor.

I have the EF 2.8 version 2. I experienced some focusing issues with it for stills. Removing all filters when shooting would help. By the way, it is very head heavy with the adapter.

 moon1029's gear list:moon1029's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200 F4 L +6 more
Luis Gabriel Photography
OP Luis Gabriel Photography Senior Member • Posts: 2,578
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

moon1029 wrote:

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

This one got me a bit confused...on the one hand I l like fast lenses (I shoot primarily with a Sigma 105mm 1.4) but on the other hand, this lens will be used mostly in the studio for the flexibility of that focal range.

Size is nice on the RF of course but not a big deal in my case as if I wanted to use it outdoors like for some event, I will rather be using the 2.8
That is where my confusion is. They can be found around the same price in the used market (the RF F4 and the EF 2.8 version 3).
I guess the main issue is that I experienced focusing issues with the EF 70-200mm mark II version and the R5 where my other lenses all pretty much never miss (all 3 are Sigma lenses).
So that makes me want to go with the RF but that F/4 still bothers me even for my usage. And of course, the 2.8 RF version I just feel is too expensive, and not happy with the focus breathing making it 200mm shorter (although it does focus closer than most).
I am usually very clear about what lens I need but this one got me second-guessing.
Anyone has compared both?

The RF 70-200 f/4 has better correction for pitch/yaw movement. So video footage would be more steady. Its light weight and good balance also make it better for video shooting. The greatest drawback of this lens, in my opinion, is focus would wobble if you zoom in and out. It's a common problem with the nano usm motor.

I have the EF 2.8 version 2. I experienced some focusing issues with it for stills. Removing all filters when shooting would help. By the way, it is very head heavy with the adapter.

Thanks Video is not an issue for me luckily. I have been also considering the Sigma sports 2.8. But of course, then I have to figure out if the AF on that one is close to Native RF or adapted Canon EF as well. 
Lots of variables.

 Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list:Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony RX10 IV +4 more
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 9,015
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
3

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

This one got me a bit confused...on the one hand I l like fast lenses (I shoot primarily with a Sigma 105mm 1.4) but on the other hand, this lens will be used mostly in the studio for the flexibility of that focal range.

Size is nice on the RF of course but not a big deal in my case as if I wanted to use it outdoors like for some event, I will rather be using the 2.8
That is where my confusion is. They can be found around the same price in the used market (the RF F4 and the EF 2.8 version 3).
I guess the main issue

I think the main issue is size and weight.  If you got the 5DIII + 70-200mm f/2.8 at the age of 50, and you've replaced the 5DIII recently with the R6, that sensor is sooooo much better for high ISO performance.  All you wanna do is getting rid of the weight.

Some might have gotten the 5DIII at the age of 20 or 30, but the majority of customers isn't that young anymore I guess.....

is that I experienced focusing issues with the EF 70-200mm mark II version and the R5 where my other lenses all pretty much never miss (all 3 are Sigma lenses).
So that makes me want to go with the RF but that F/4 still bothers me even for my usage. And of course, the 2.8 RF version I just feel is too expensive, and not happy with the focus breathing making it 200mm shorter (although it does focus closer than most).
I am usually very clear about what lens I need but this one got me second-guessing.
Anyone has compared both?

-- hide signature --

I love 50mm (equivalence)

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 35-80mm f/4.0-5.6 III +22 more
Luis Gabriel Photography
OP Luis Gabriel Photography Senior Member • Posts: 2,578
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

thunder storm wrote:

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

This one got me a bit confused...on the one hand I l like fast lenses (I shoot primarily with a Sigma 105mm 1.4) but on the other hand, this lens will be used mostly in the studio for the flexibility of that focal range.

Size is nice on the RF of course but not a big deal in my case as if I wanted to use it outdoors like for some event, I will rather be using the 2.8
That is where my confusion is. They can be found around the same price in the used market (the RF F4 and the EF 2.8 version 3).
I guess the main issue

I think the main issue is size and weight. If you got the 5DIII + 70-200mm f/2.8 at the age of 50, and you've replaced the 5DIII recently with the R6, that sensor is sooooo much better for high ISO performance. All you wanna do is getting rid of the weight.

Some might have gotten the 5DIII at the age of 20 or 30, but the majority of customers isn't that young anymore I guess.....

is that I experienced focusing issues with the EF 70-200mm mark II version and the R5 where my other lenses all pretty much never miss (all 3 are Sigma lenses).
So that makes me want to go with the RF but that F/4 still bothers me even for my usage. And of course, the 2.8 RF version I just feel is too expensive, and not happy with the focus breathing making it 200mm shorter (although it does focus closer than most).
I am usually very clear about what lens I need but this one got me second-guessing.
Anyone has compared both?

Size and weight are not a priority for me. IQ and AF accuracy are my top requirements. Sure I don't mind a smaller lighter lens all things equal.

 Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list:Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony RX10 IV +4 more
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 9,015
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
2

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

moon1029 wrote:

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

This one got me a bit confused...on the one hand I l like fast lenses (I shoot primarily with a Sigma 105mm 1.4) but on the other hand, this lens will be used mostly in the studio for the flexibility of that focal range.

Size is nice on the RF of course but not a big deal in my case as if I wanted to use it outdoors like for some event, I will rather be using the 2.8
That is where my confusion is. They can be found around the same price in the used market (the RF F4 and the EF 2.8 version 3).
I guess the main issue is that I experienced focusing issues with the EF 70-200mm mark II version and the R5 where my other lenses all pretty much never miss (all 3 are Sigma lenses).
So that makes me want to go with the RF but that F/4 still bothers me even for my usage. And of course, the 2.8 RF version I just feel is too expensive, and not happy with the focus breathing making it 200mm shorter (although it does focus closer than most).
I am usually very clear about what lens I need but this one got me second-guessing.
Anyone has compared both?

The RF 70-200 f/4 has better correction for pitch/yaw movement. So video footage would be more steady. Its light weight and good balance also make it better for video shooting. The greatest drawback of this lens, in my opinion, is focus would wobble if you zoom in and out. It's a common problem with the nano usm motor.

I have the EF 2.8 version 2. I experienced some focusing issues with it for stills. Removing all filters when shooting would help. By the way, it is very head heavy with the adapter.

Thanks Video is not an issue for me luckily. I have been also considering the Sigma sports 2.8. But of course, then I have to figure out if the AF on that one is close to Native RF or adapted Canon EF as well.
Lots of variables.

It's even possible the Sigma 70-200 works better than the Canon EF mkIII.  The 105 Art focused better on the R than the 100L macro.

-- hide signature --

I love 50mm (equivalence)

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 35-80mm f/4.0-5.6 III +22 more
thunder storm Senior Member • Posts: 9,015
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

Yes, it's the same for me, but when trying to find explanations for price points on the used marked preferences of other customers should be considered as well.

-- hide signature --

I love 50mm (equivalence)

 thunder storm's gear list:thunder storm's gear list
Canon EOS 6D Canon EOS M6 II Canon EOS R5 Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM Canon EF 35-80mm f/4.0-5.6 III +22 more
Luis Gabriel Photography
OP Luis Gabriel Photography Senior Member • Posts: 2,578
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

thunder storm wrote:

Yes, it's the same for me, but when trying to find explanations for price points on the used marked preferences of other customers should be considered as well.

Yes in that case it makes sense as well as brand names.
I remember having such much issues selling Tamron lenses before even when they were as good or in cases better than the Canon ones.

 Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list:Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony RX10 IV +4 more
dmanthree
dmanthree Veteran Member • Posts: 9,923
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

I compared both and bought the RF. The size and weight, combined with much better IS is what sold me. And it's a really sharp lens, too. I might like to have f2.8 sometimes, but can easily live with f4 max aperture.

-- hide signature --

---on the cutting edge---

 dmanthree's gear list:dmanthree's gear list
Sony Mavica FD-200 Apple iPhone 12 Pro
Luis Gabriel Photography
OP Luis Gabriel Photography Senior Member • Posts: 2,578
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

dmanthree wrote:

I compared both and bought the RF. The size and weight, combined with much better IS is what sold me. And it's a really sharp lens, too. I might like to have f2.8 sometimes, but can easily live with f4 max aperture.

Did you notice any difference in AF accuracy?

 Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list:Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony RX10 IV +4 more
dmanthree
dmanthree Veteran Member • Posts: 9,923
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
3

Nope, AF was fine on both, but the RF seemed a little faster. Maybe my imagination, but it felt that way. I have five lenses, some RF and a couple EF, and no AF issues on any of them.

-- hide signature --

---on the cutting edge---

 dmanthree's gear list:dmanthree's gear list
Sony Mavica FD-200 Apple iPhone 12 Pro
ZX11
ZX11 Veteran Member • Posts: 5,846
Re: For about the same price..RF 70-200mm F/4 or EF 70-200mm 2.8 IS iii ?
1

It's a magical f/4?,...no big deal.  I have my RF 24-105 if I want constant f/4.

A great f/2.8 zoom works for me.  My mark III cost $1800 new and was well worth it when I bought it for my R.

-- hide signature --

"Very funny, Scotty! Now beam me down my clothes."
"He's dead, Jim! You grab his tri-corder. I'll get his wallet."

 ZX11's gear list:ZX11's gear list
Canon EF 50mm F1.4 USM Canon EF 85mm F1.8 USM Canon 70-200 F2.8L III Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS STM Macro Canon RF 24-105mm F4L IS USM +1 more
tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 17,358
Obvious differences
8

Not really much to say here, you just have to decide what is more important.

One is a stop faster, but is much larger and heavier - plus it adds an adapter

The other is small, light, and no adapter, but is a stop slower.

Do you value max aperture or size and weight more?  That's the decision to make.  We can't make it for you.

Personally I favor the weight and went with RF f4.

Luis Gabriel Photography
OP Luis Gabriel Photography Senior Member • Posts: 2,578
Re: Obvious differences
1

tkbslc wrote:

Not really much to say here, you just have to decide what is more important.

One is a stop faster, but is much larger and heavier - plus it adds an adapter

The other is small, light, and no adapter, but is a stop slower.

Do you value max aperture or size and weight more? That's the decision to make. We can't make it for you.

Personally I favor the weight and went with RF f4.

I know the obvious differences. If that is all I needed, I would not make a thread. I already mentioned size and weight are of no importance. I dont expect others to make a choice for me but to share their feedback using the lenses.

My main concern is AF accuracy after my experience with the 70-200 is ii. Unlike my Sigma lenses that are pretty much perfect, the Canon is not, when it comes to consistent tack sharp focus.

 Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list:Luis Gabriel Photography's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Sigma 105mm F1.4 DG HSM Art Sony RX10 IV +4 more
PicPocket Veteran Member • Posts: 5,618
Re: Obvious differences
2

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

My main concern is AF accuracy after my experience with the 70-200 is ii. Unlike my Sigma lenses that are pretty much perfect, the Canon is not, when it comes to consistent tack sharp focus.

FWIW, I moved from EF 70-200 f2.8 II to the RF 2.8, and what I observed was:

  • RF is lighter, compact and handles better. f4 should be even better
  • AF accuracy was similar, speed RF is slightly better. The relevant point here is that I didn't see accuracy problems with EF lens on R5 using Canon control ring adapter
  • RF IS is better
  • focus breathing isn't something that bothered me for stills shooting. Can achieve same magnification and in fact prefer shorter MFD. This is something people will have different views on.

Personally, I don't know how the f4 lens compares

-- hide signature --
 PicPocket's gear list:PicPocket's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EF 24-70mm F2.8L II USM Sigma 135mm F1.8 Art Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 100-500mm F4.5-7.1L IS USM +13 more
moon1029 Regular Member • Posts: 304
Re: Obvious differences
2

Luis Gabriel Photography wrote:

tkbslc wrote:

Not really much to say here, you just have to decide what is more important.

One is a stop faster, but is much larger and heavier - plus it adds an adapter

The other is small, light, and no adapter, but is a stop slower.

Do you value max aperture or size and weight more? That's the decision to make. We can't make it for you.

Personally I favor the weight and went with RF f4.

I know the obvious differences. If that is all I needed, I would not make a thread. I already mentioned size and weight are of no importance. I dont expect others to make a choice for me but to share their feedback using the lenses.

My main concern is AF accuracy after my experience with the 70-200 is ii. Unlike my Sigma lenses that are pretty much perfect, the Canon is not, when it comes to consistent tack sharp focus.

For single point AF I don't see a performance difference between EF and RF lenses. What makes the real difference is when using eye detection AF.

I try to eliminate all other factors (by using a relatively high shutter speed at 1/512s and removing the UV filter) to make a fair comparison. AF performance on my EF 135 f/2L and EF 70-200 f/2.8 II USM is decent. But when I have the RF 70-200 f/4L or even the RF 85 f/2 IS STM to compare, the RF lenses would give me noticeably higher hit rate (around 90%). I guess the EF 70-200 f/2.8 III USM would not give you drastic improvement in AF, as it has basically the same design as the 2nd version.

If you shoot at 12fps anyway, maybe hit rate is not that important, as you can easily pick the sharpest photo you get.

 moon1029's gear list:moon1029's gear list
Canon EOS R5 Canon EOS R6 Canon 85mm F1.4L IS USM Canon RF 15-35mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200 F4 L +6 more
Paysen New Member • Posts: 19
Re: Obvious differences
2

To me the EF 70-200 2.8 has a big advantage: Internal zoom and internal focus. It is less likely that you get dust or moisture inside of the EF lens imo. The lens is sucking air inside of it when the front element extends because extending the lens increases the internal volume of the lens. This can cause dust and moisture to be pulled into the lens when zooming in and out.

Mr F48 Forum Member • Posts: 87
Re: Obvious differences
1

Paysen wrote:

To me the EF 70-200 2.8 has a big advantage: Internal zoom and internal focus. It is less likely that you get dust or moisture inside of the EF lens imo. The lens is sucking air inside of it when the front element extends because extending the lens increases the internal volume of the lens. This can cause dust and moisture to be pulled into the lens when zooming in and out.

True. But it's also the main reason I have replaced it with the RF 2.8.

The EF 70-200 2.8 III is a fantastic lens that I just never brought with me. I love the compactness of the RF version.

 Mr F48's gear list:Mr F48's gear list
Canon EOS R6 Sigma 50mm F1.4 DG HSM | A Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM Canon RF 16mm F2.8 STM
tkbslc Forum Pro • Posts: 17,358
Not been an issue
1

Paysen wrote:

To me the EF 70-200 2.8 has a big advantage: Internal zoom and internal focus. It is less likely that you get dust or moisture inside of the EF lens imo. The lens is sucking air inside of it when the front element extends because extending the lens increases the internal volume of the lens. This can cause dust and moisture to be pulled into the lens when zooming in and out.

That is all theoretical.  In the real world,  every standard zoom and every zoom longer than 200mm has always had an extending design.  They are not all full of dust and fungus.  Take 70-300L and 100-400 II for example.  Both have been around for years.

hunk
hunk Veteran Member • Posts: 3,403
Re: Obvious differences
1

tkbslc wrote:

Not really much to say here, you just have to decide what is more important.

One is a stop faster, but is much larger and heavier - plus it adds an adapter

The other is small, light, and no adapter, but is a stop slower.

Do you value max aperture or size and weight more? That's the decision to make. We can't make it for you.

Personally I favor the weight and went with RF f4.

I very seldom use f/2.8 in my studio or shooting boats at sea. I did buy the RF70-200 f/2.8 but the f/4 would have been more practical.
I would choose the f4 and buy a 85 f/1.2 for the dreamy shots.

 hunk's gear list:hunk's gear list
Olympus Stylus 725 SW Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Panasonic GH5 Canon EOS R Canon EOS R5 +10 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads