Are you happy with your Canon RF 70-200 2.8?

Croomrider wrote:

To get that kind of bokeh with the 70-200 f2.8 you need to shoot it wide open at over 150mm. It will never compare to primes that are 2+ stops faster at 50 or 85mm.

If you've been at this for a good number of years you'd know better then to make such a statement. I'm not saying I wouldn't tend to go for a 50 f1.2 or a 85 f1.2 at times just for convenience alone. But if one has the ability/luxury of adjusting their subject distance and also accounting for any background distance involved, with some care it can easily enough be done. With that and a RF70-200 f2.8 you can wipe out the background if that's one's goal. This whole argument/discussion regarding bokeh and how to achieve it is really getting old. But I suppose it's the internet and we should expect it.  Somebody needs to do more homework apparently.

Croomrider wrote:

ProDude wrote:

Croomrider wrote:

To get that kind of bokeh with the 70-200 f2.8 you need to shoot it wide open at over 150mm. It will never compare to primes that are 2+ stops faster at 50 or 85mm.

If you've been at this for a good number of years you'd know better then to make such a statement. I'm not saying I wouldn't tend to go for a 50 f1.2 or a 85 f1.2 at times just for convenience alone. But if one has the ability/luxury of adjusting their subject distance and also accounting for any background distance involved, with some care it can easily enough be done. With that and a RF70-200 f2.8 you can wipe out the background if that's one's goal. This whole argument/discussion regarding bokeh and how to achieve it is really getting old. But I suppose it's the internet and we should expect it. Somebody needs to do more homework apparently.

I was assuming other factors being the same not that you can't get good results at all. You can't expect to get the same bokeh with an f2.8 zoom at the same focal length as a prime which is 2 stops faster.

That is absolutely correct. I was merely mentioning it's "possible" to get a desired end result in many ways with many lenses. Just easier with a fast one.

Croomrider wrote:

Gearacquisitionsyndrom wrote:

R2D2 wrote:

Gearacquisitionsyndrom wrote:

I don't know what's wrong with me (according to my siblings, the list is long ;)), but I haven't fallen in love with this lens after 1500 photos.

I loved this focal length on Pentax and every flower or people you shot with that lens it turned out amazing with amazing bokeh. I don't know if I'm seeing this here. I don't know if it's the contrast or rendering of out of depth focus areas or what.

On the other side I'm also using the Canon EF 85mm 1.4 and those images are a lot nicer and that's a dslr lens.

The RF 70-200 2.8 should be the ultimate lens for portraiture and hiking.

I do feel it's quite good at hiking though because it's so sharp. But the aestaethics of it...

I don't know. Kind of feels like the RF 50 1.2 and EF 85 1.4 are giving me nicer images. Maybe the issue is my brain.

Maybe you just prefer the look from those other lenses. That's absolutely fine! ie I still have the Sigma 135 f/1.8 (poor-man's 200/2) when I want killer bokeh.

The 70-200 is much much more versatile though.

Happy shooting!

R2

True but at the same time you need distance to use the shallow depth of field. But I'm not blaming the lens for that since I knew this from before.

To get that kind of bokeh with the 70-200 f2.8 you need to shoot it wide open at over 150mm. It will never compare to primes that are 2+ stops faster at 50 or 85mm.

Isn't that what I'm saying?😅

The bokeh isn't super pleasing to me even at 200 2.8. Especially photo number two here. Both shot last night