Canon Road Trip in BC - Canada Tried the RF 28-70 and love it

Ali wrote:

MannyV wrote:

...

Anyone with both lenses or the RF 28-70 - what has been your experience? Please share.

It is a great lens! Even if when mostly used for cats...

It's my most often used lens, replaced the EF 24-70mm. I haven't missed the 4mm on the wide end...

Cats make great subject 

EOSSpeedLite wrote:

It makes no sense to buy both RF 24-70L f2.8 and RF 28-70L f2 lenses. The only reason would be to collect them both.

The better of the two is the f2 model, which I have. The f2.8 is a great lens too, but the f2 is more magical and more flexible of the two for its f2 aperture.

I held the f2 during a 2 week Paris trip, averaging 10 miles per day walking, and I did not find the lens too heavy, nor too big. And it balances perfectly on the body if one knows how to hold that kit: from the belly of the lens.

You cannot go wrong with either, however, to own both smacks of hardware collector/vanity sensibilities.

For my use case it does make sense to keep the 24-70 f2.8. The RF 28-70 will be the lens for portraits and events. Otherwise it will be the 24-70 2.8. I am tempted to sell all my primes though as I doubt I will pick up my primes after I get the 28-70.

EOSSpeedLite wrote:

MannyV wrote:

EOSSpeedLite wrote:

It makes no sense to buy both RF 24-70L f2.8 and RF 28-70L f2 lenses. The only reason would be to collect them both.

The better of the two is the f2 model, which I have. The f2.8 is a great lens too, but the f2 is more magical and more flexible of the two for its f2 aperture.

I held the f2 during a 2 week Paris trip, averaging 10 miles per day walking, and I did not find the lens too heavy, nor too big. And it balances perfectly on the body if one knows how to hold that kit: from the belly of the lens.

You cannot go wrong with either, however, to own both smacks of hardware collector/vanity sensibilities.

For my use case it does make sense to keep the 24-70 f2.8. The RF 28-70 will be the lens for portraits and events. Otherwise it will be the 24-70 2.8. I am tempted to sell all my primes though as I doubt I will pick up my primes after I get the 28-70.

The RF 28-70L f2 is a great event/wedding lens. However, for portraits, there are far, far better lenses like these:

1. RF 85L f1.2
2. RF 50L f1.2
3. RF 85 f2
4. EF 135L f2
5. EF 85L f1.4
6. EF 100L f2.8

The problem with f2 is that it's not f1.2, nor f1.4, nor f1.8, so it's not going to give you the awesome bokeh, nor separation that those faster primes will give.

So what use-cases would make sense for one to keep both RF 28-70L f2 and RF 24-70L f2.8?

Wider and lighter and hence general purpose walk around is the use case for 24-70. Events and studio and portraits will be 28-70. The primes I have are f1.8 and 2 and hence will sell those most likely when I get the 28-70.

EOSSpeedLite wrote:

MannyV wrote:

EOSSpeedLite wrote:

MannyV wrote:

EOSSpeedLite wrote:

It makes no sense to buy both RF 24-70L f2.8 and RF 28-70L f2 lenses. The only reason would be to collect them both.

The better of the two is the f2 model, which I have. The f2.8 is a great lens too, but the f2 is more magical and more flexible of the two for its f2 aperture.

I held the f2 during a 2 week Paris trip, averaging 10 miles per day walking, and I did not find the lens too heavy, nor too big. And it balances perfectly on the body if one knows how to hold that kit: from the belly of the lens.

You cannot go wrong with either, however, to own both smacks of hardware collector/vanity sensibilities.

For my use case it does make sense to keep the 24-70 f2.8. The RF 28-70 will be the lens for portraits and events. Otherwise it will be the 24-70 2.8. I am tempted to sell all my primes though as I doubt I will pick up my primes after I get the 28-70.

The RF 28-70L f2 is a great event/wedding lens. However, for portraits, there are far, far better lenses like these:

1. RF 85L f1.2
2. RF 50L f1.2
3. RF 85 f2
4. EF 135L f2
5. EF 85L f1.4
6. EF 100L f2.8

The problem with f2 is that it's not f1.2, nor f1.4, nor f1.8, so it's not going to give you the awesome bokeh, nor separation that those faster primes will give.

So what use-cases would make sense for one to keep both RF 28-70L f2 and RF 24-70L f2.8?

Wider and lighter and hence general purpose walk around is the use case for 24-70. Events and studio and portraits will be 28-70. The primes I have are f1.8 and 2 and hence will sell those most likely when I get the 28-70.

I too thought getting an RF 28-70L f2 would allow me to sell my RF f1.2 primes...because the f2 is a "bag of primes" right? I thought so at first, but then found out it was not. The f2 is a Jack of All Trades, but not a master at portraits.

Over time, I started reaching for my f1.2 primes more and more, until the day came when I only used those L primes for portraiture. This is not a slam of the 28-70L f2...I still have it, but I no longer perceive it as my go-to portrait lens. Still, it's nice to grab a portrait at an event with it.

I'd suggest you keep the primes a bit after getting the f2 so then you can decide if it really is the best way to go for portraits. I suspect you will be like me...you will miss the better bokeh and better wide-open sharpness of the f1.2 primes.

Sounds good.

MannyV wrote:

Canon Canada is having a road trip in Province of British Columbia. Previous week Saturday the location was Bloedel Conservatory in Queen Elizabeth Park.

I had the opportunity to participate in the Portrait session. I chose the RF 28-70mm F2 as the lens. Since I have the R6, I chose that camera as I wanted to try the RF28-70 lens with that camera.

A lot of youtubers say the lens is heavy and hefty and more importantly front heavy.

My own experience it is for sure heavier than the RF24-70 2.8 which I own. And it is much much chunkier. Oddly the chunkiness makes this lens feel more balanced in real life handling. I did not feel the front heaviness. It seemed to me well balanced.

Now here is the thing. I shot SOOC JPG's and 90% of time at F2 at various focal length with various camera - subject, and various subject - background distances. When I came home and reviewed the images, I was stunned. The colours, the sharpness, rendering, and the bokeh just stuns me. To the point this lens is now on my want to buy list.

I tried to shoot some images to see how my 24-70 fares. The good news is if I can manage the camera to subject vs the background distance appropriately, at f2.8 the rendering and bokeh is also very pleasing. So while I do not regret this purchase and I won't sell my RF 24-70 (as that is my general purpose lens), if I knew what I know now, I would have prioritized the RF 28-70 first and then buy the RF 24-70.

Anyone with both lenses or the RF 28-70 - what has been your experience? Please share.

Yes. Apparently I am a hardware collector with vain sensibilities because I have both of those lenses...

And my experience matches your assessment. The RF28-70/2L is the ultimate event lens (weddings, parties, etc.) and is a joy to use.  However, it is not a joy to carry on an extended trip.

Enter the RF24-70/2.8LIS which is significantly lighter and smaller while providing an excellent focal range for travel and still delivering very good contrast, sharpness, bokeh (for an f2.8 lens) and saturation. It's definitely usable for environmental portraits as well as many landscape situations.  Some might prefer a collection of decent primes for this purpose but I find I enjoy shooting with mostly one zoom lens when traveling.

And, if you do a lot of event work, it's clearly useful to have a solid backup to the RF28-70/2L (in case of damage during a once-in-a-lifetime event). The RF24-70/2.8LIS fills that role quite well.

gimp_dad wrote:

MannyV wrote:

Canon Canada is having a road trip in Province of British Columbia. Previous week Saturday the location was Bloedel Conservatory in Queen Elizabeth Park.

I had the opportunity to participate in the Portrait session. I chose the RF 28-70mm F2 as the lens. Since I have the R6, I chose that camera as I wanted to try the RF28-70 lens with that camera.

A lot of youtubers say the lens is heavy and hefty and more importantly front heavy.

My own experience it is for sure heavier than the RF24-70 2.8 which I own. And it is much much chunkier. Oddly the chunkiness makes this lens feel more balanced in real life handling. I did not feel the front heaviness. It seemed to me well balanced.

Now here is the thing. I shot SOOC JPG's and 90% of time at F2 at various focal length with various camera - subject, and various subject - background distances. When I came home and reviewed the images, I was stunned. The colours, the sharpness, rendering, and the bokeh just stuns me. To the point this lens is now on my want to buy list.

I tried to shoot some images to see how my 24-70 fares. The good news is if I can manage the camera to subject vs the background distance appropriately, at f2.8 the rendering and bokeh is also very pleasing. So while I do not regret this purchase and I won't sell my RF 24-70 (as that is my general purpose lens), if I knew what I know now, I would have prioritized the RF 28-70 first and then buy the RF 24-70.

Anyone with both lenses or the RF 28-70 - what has been your experience? Please share.

Yes. Apparently I am a hardware collector with vain sensibilities because I have both of those lenses...

And my experience matches your assessment. The RF28-70/2L is the ultimate event lens (weddings, parties, etc.) and is a joy to use. However, it is not a joy to carry on an extended trip.

Enter the RF24-70/2.8LIS which is significantly lighter and smaller while providing an excellent focal range for travel and still delivering very good contrast, sharpness, bokeh (for an f2.8 lens) and saturation. It's definitely usable for environmental portraits as well as many landscape situations. Some might prefer a collection of decent primes for this purpose but I find I enjoy shooting with mostly one zoom lens when traveling.

And, if you do a lot of event work, it's clearly useful to have a solid backup to the RF28-70/2L (in case of damage during a once-in-a-lifetime event). The RF24-70/2.8LIS fills that role quite well.

My thinking is similar to yours. The 28-70 has a clear purpose. It is unlikely to become my general purpose lens though. The 24-70 will keeps it place. I guess time will tell once I have both lenses and over a period  of time I may see a pattern of which lens I end up picking.

thunder storm wrote:

To my eye it's either both the RF 28-70mm f/2.0 and 24-105mm f/4.0, or just a 24-70mm f/2.8, as the f/2.0 is a bit too heavy as a walk around lens. For the RF mount the first option is 4700 euro, the last option 2500.

I went with a compromise: an EF 24-70mm f/2.8 mkII, and I added some primes: 40mm f/1.4 Art, 50mm f/1.4 Art, RF 85mm f/2.0 IS stm, which costed me 2780 euro all together. (Maybe some will prefer the 28mm Art over either the 40 or 50mm Art here.)

I do see the value of the f/2.0L zoom, and although it's huge, for me my zoom and primes have a much better value proposition. The zoom is (adapter included) 900 grams when walking around, and so is the 50mm Art. The 40mm Art gives me f/1.4 (the 50mm needs to be at f/1.8 or 2.0 though). Except for the 85mm all these lenses work with the drop filter adapter with polarizer filter.

It's less weight on the camera, but obviously more weight in the bag, and you do have to change lenses. Nonetheless I'm not ready to give up the benefits and pay the price of the f/2.0 L.

When I was shooting with 5D classic and then 5D II, I started with the EF 24-70 2.8. Then moved to 24-105 F4 L purely due to  the 24-105 having IS. When I look back at the images, there is something with the 24-70 2.8 which I could not get the with 24-105. I understand it is just one stop of light. I can't say with logic and clarity what it is, for me the 24-70 is what I went back to and hence with mirrorless my path was clear. Funny thing is now both the camera body and lens have IS

Those budget RF primes I have, they are good. Being dependent on software (in camera or on PC) for corrections does not bother me. The end result is good for me. The only reason to let go is that 28-70 images makes me think it is unlikely I will carry those primes anymore.

RLight wrote:

MannyV wrote:

Canon Canada is having a road trip in Province of British Columbia. Previous week Saturday the location was Bloedel Conservatory in Queen Elizabeth Park.

I had the opportunity to participate in the Portrait session. I chose the RF 28-70mm F2 as the lens. Since I have the R6, I chose that camera as I wanted to try the RF28-70 lens with that camera.

A lot of youtubers say the lens is heavy and hefty and more importantly front heavy.

My own experience it is for sure heavier than the RF24-70 2.8 which I own. And it is much much chunkier. Oddly the chunkiness makes this lens feel more balanced in real life handling. I did not feel the front heaviness. It seemed to me well balanced.

Now here is the thing. I shot SOOC JPG's and 90% of time at F2 at various focal length with various camera - subject, and various subject - background distances. When I came home and reviewed the images, I was stunned. The colours, the sharpness, rendering, and the bokeh just stuns me. To the point this lens is now on my want to buy list.

I tried to shoot some images to see how my 24-70 fares. The good news is if I can manage the camera to subject vs the background distance appropriately, at f2.8 the rendering and bokeh is also very pleasing. So while I do not regret this purchase and I won't sell my RF 24-70 (as that is my general purpose lens), if I knew what I know now, I would have prioritized the RF 28-70 first and then buy the RF 24-70.

Anyone with both lenses or the RF 28-70 - what has been your experience? Please share.

The RF 28-70 f/2L creates unique shots. The RF 24-70 f/2.8L, less so.

You pretty much said that, and I'll second it.

Both? Me personally? I'd sell the 24-70 f/2.8L and buy the 28-70 f/2L.

I've never shot the RF version of the 24-70 f/2.8L, but the EF I've extensively used the 2nd version, the RF 28-70 f/2L, it just cleans everyone's clock so to speak. And you have IBIS, I don't. You're really sitting happy with that thing.

Regarding handling? You said it, my thoughts too.

At this point not owning the 28-70 yet, the vision I have is 24-70 for general purpose, and 28-70 if it is an event, or outdoor portraits - or wedding (though I run away as fast as I can from shooting a wedding these day). However after having both for a while I may see a pattern which I can't see at the moment. So time will tell me