Here’s the upcoming Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L USM zooming in and out

riker

5D4
Jan 19, 2015
71
26
riker.hu
I feel similar to many before me, not a fan of extending lens BUT the small size is a real advantage.
I got one real concern tho. GRAVITY. I love my 100-400 but gravity just extends it every time I let t go on my shoulder, or just turn the body down to check a photo I just took. It is hugely annoying. Using the locking ring every time is just not possible to do especially when working. It's a serious minus for ergonomics.
I see that lock switch on the 70-200 and worry. I already know it's going to behave the same way :((((
 

Joaquim

I'm New Here
Aug 20, 2019
17
9
Portraits wide open, same distance to subject, not only have more subject/background separation and creamier bokeh, but a more appealing luminosity to skin tones. At least comparing the ef 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II to the older ef 70-200mm f/4 IS. This makes it worth using the 2.8 for portraiture, though for family traveling I'd never bring it.

And for me, personally, even with great sensor performance these days, I'm always looking to lower my ISO, all other exposure factors considered.
I second the opinion about ISO. Just came back from a kid's bday event (a challenge in itself with 2-6 year olds..hhehe the munchkins made me work for my images..bless them) I was more focused on reducing ISO and balancing my flash output at high speed sync when they were jumping and running around. For me, reliable auto focus and low noise are the biggest needs at events, irrespective of the sensor capacity in low light. Especially since I shoot crop sensor to keep the weight down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

Joaquim

I'm New Here
Aug 20, 2019
17
9
Ok so if we're being realistic, I've seen prime lenses with more dust inside them than a zoom lens that extends.

You either take care of your gear while still taking them out to play OR you don't.

Like a fool I once ended up buying a used 85 1.8 that has a ton of specks inside and I usually don't make such I'll informed purchases. Having said that, while the OCD inside me gets annoyed looking at the specks (need to factor a budget for professional lens cleaning, that I'm not entirely sure is needed for fear of screwing up the AF etc.), I haven't seen any issues in my images yet. (To be honest haven't clicked much with it since its like a 135 mm on crop)

But yes, zoom internal/external or prime, we gotta use them with care while still not babying them.
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,577
679
Southeastern USA
I second the opinion about ISO. Just came back from a kid's bday event (a challenge in itself with 2-6 year olds..hhehe the munchkins made me work for my images..bless them) I was more focused on reducing ISO and balancing my flash output at high speed sync when they were jumping and running around. For me, reliable auto focus and low noise are the biggest needs at events, irrespective of the sensor capacity in low light. Especially since I shoot crop sensor to keep the weight down.
Right! And some folks who think ISO is not an issue seem to be focused on the lower range. I agree--going from ISO 320 to ISO 640 these days doesn't make a serious difference in IQ on a full-frame.

But if we're already in low light and bumping up against ISO 2500, needing that extra stop to hand-hold or freeze moderate subject movement, thus going to ISO 5000, now we approaching some significant degradation of sharpness and color. (Ok, they can be corrected to an extent in post-processing, but it sure is nice to get as many things right in-camera as possible. All these little things that could be corrected start adding up!)
 
Last edited:

mpmark

EOS T7i
Aug 9, 2016
52
59
Are we holding our breaths to see how well this lens handles focus breathing ?
I'm sure it will be similar if not the same as the 100-400 II. Why does that matter anyway? I have no issues with my 100-400 II after 4 years now. And yes there is a bit of dust in it, but who cares? it means nothing.

Unless you're one of those that losses their mind when they see a dust spot inside the lens.
 

whothafunk

EOS RP
Apr 17, 2013
264
9
I've never quite got how in the 70-200 range folks lust after the 2.8 when there's hardly any noticeable difference between the 2.8 and F4?

It's not like we don't have the available extra stop of ISO to bump to. (Unlike the days of the 1Ds3) and the F4 is half the weight. Unless it helps the AF speed I guess.
You're obviously not a sports photographer, where lowlight at indoor sports is a constant problem. ISO 6400 vs 12800 is quite the difference, 1D series or not. Also, the isolation.
 
Jul 19, 2016
3
1
Is the zoom rotation the opposite to traditional Canon lenses? I’m personally not a fan of the Nikon and Tamron direction of rotation... I think the only exception was the 24-70 2.8L mkI, the opposite hand to my mkII.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hamoser

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,084
1,627
Irving, Texas
I've never quite got how in the 70-200 range folks lust after the 2.8 when there's hardly any noticeable difference between the 2.8 and F4?

It's not like we don't have the available extra stop of ISO to bump to. (Unlike the days of the 1Ds3) and the F4 is half the weight. Unless it helps the AF speed I guess.
Shocking statement.
 

CanonFanBoy

EOS 5D SR
Jan 28, 2015
4,084
1,627
Irving, Texas
I'm sure it will be similar if not the same as the 100-400 II. Why does that matter anyway? I have no issues with my 100-400 II after 4 years now. And yes there is a bit of dust in it, but who cares? it means nothing.

Unless you're one of those that losses their mind when they see a dust spot inside the lens.
I don't think focus breathing and dust have anything to do with each other. However, dust can be a problem when it turns out to be mold spores. In some places, lens fungus can be a real concern.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GMCPhotographics
Aug 22, 2010
1,621
317
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
I don't think focus breathing and dust have anything to do with each other. However, dust can be a problem when it turns out to be mold spores. In some places, lens fungus can be a real concern.
One of the main causes of lens fungus is darkness. Putting a lens away for 6 months plus in a lens case is really unhealthy for lens optics. Leaving them out with the caps off for a few days at a time allows microscopic fungus to be killed off by UV rays.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pape
Aug 22, 2010
1,621
317
48
Uk
www.GMCPhotographics.co.uk
Mfd of 0.7m is definitely one! Portability another.
Short MFD's are only useful if the Min Magnification stays the same. But unfortunately lens focal breathing usually dictates that the MM stays the same.
Portability is good positive for this lens, although it's likely to be equally as heavy as the current EF version.
I personally don't like the huge rotation on the zoom ring and the narrow and fiddly focus ring. I would prefer a less tactile zoom ring and really accurate feeling focus ring.

It kind of reminds me of the unloved (unjustly) Ef 70-300 LIS.

For photographers transitioning to pure mirrorless, it's a great opportunity. For dual system photograpers...there's not a lot here to justify the selling of their mkII/mkIII EF variant and purchase of this new lens. For dual system users...there's still a lot of mileage in having a lens that works on both systems. Especially if they are both as sharp as each other and turn in similar results.
 

Antono Refa

EOS 6D MK II
Mar 26, 2014
849
128
I've never quite got how in the 70-200 range folks lust after the 2.8 when there's hardly any noticeable difference between the 2.8 and F4? ... Unless it helps the AF speed I guess.
Most pro bodies have several AF points that only work with lenses that are f/2.8 or wide, e.g. the 5Dmk3 has a column of 5 at the center.