RF 24-70 f2.8 L IS vs EF 24-70 f2.8 LII - both on EOS R

Larsskv

EOS 7D MK II
Jun 12, 2015
768
192
The digital pictures have released comparison images of the new RF 24-70 and the EF 24-70 f2.8 L II, both on the EOS R. The new lens seems to be a better performer at all focal lengths.

 

Mt Spokane Photography

I post too Much on Here!!
Mar 25, 2011
15,519
746
The difference is quite noticeable at all focal lengths, but with zoom lenses, a large number need to be tested to get a good idea, since the variation from lens to lens can be substantial.

I would certainly expect the lens to be improved a little.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,212
773
The difference is quite noticeable at all focal lengths, but with zoom lenses, a large number need to be tested to get a good idea, since the variation from lens to lens can be substantial.

I would certainly expect the lens to be improved a little.
I remember Roger (LensRentals) stating for all new’ish lenses from Canon that copy variation was extremely low. That is always promising.

DPReview posted a gallery, 0.5% looked not boring. Not sure if that’s the nature of a standard zoom or they just took boring pictures. But the choice, for me, between the 28-70 and the 24-70 is annoying. I would like IS and 24 and the f2.0.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,013
113
General theme seems to be (generally speaking):

EF lens - (slightly) better in the center
RF lens - better in the corners

Given the MILC system of AF going out to the edges of the frame, trading some center sharpness for improved corners seems like a reasonable trade-off.
 
Last edited:

Maximilian

The dark side - I've been there
Nov 7, 2013
2,628
441
Germany
Looks like the RF comunity has a nice tool to work with...

EF lens - (slightly) better in the center
RF lens - better in the corners
YMMV, but to me it looks different, esp. at 50 and 70 mm.
There I can see a slight advantage for the RF in the cener sharpness and a visible advantage in the corners.

But the difference in the center is less than what I would expect from (even little) copy variations.
 

edoorn

EOS RP
Apr 1, 2016
233
148
interesting! I had the chance to shoot the R yesterday with the new 24-70 and took home some raw files; looks pretty good. In the center, the old 24-70 already was quite sharp so no complaints there, but the RF looks a lot better in those corners and that indeed for me is worth it.

Also impressive is the IS, and the focus speed which is near instant. So there's more to this lens than just the IQ.
 

Viggo

EOS 5D SR
Dec 13, 2010
4,212
773
interesting! I had the chance to shoot the R yesterday with the new 24-70 and took home some raw files; looks pretty good. In the center, the old 24-70 already was quite sharp so no complaints there, but the RF looks a lot better in those corners and that indeed for me is worth it.

Also impressive is the IS, and the focus speed which is near instant. So there's more to this lens than just the IQ.
The AF was great on the EF-version, but from the short videos here and there the nano-usm looks like it really is something else. And sharpness means nothing without af-precision. And the R is by extreme lengths the most accurate body I’ve used so, include IS and I think it’s a real winner.
 

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,576
679
Southeastern USA
Since I have the 50 1.2, easy choice for me: 24-70 w/IS. BUT I am in no hurry to trade in the ef 24-70 2.8 II, because for fast paced events where I use the mid-range zoom, the R just doesn't cut the mustard.
 

edoorn

EOS RP
Apr 1, 2016
233
148
The AF was great on the EF-version, but from the short videos here and there the nano-usm looks like it really is something else. And sharpness means nothing without af-precision. And the R is by extreme lengths the most accurate body I’ve used so, include IS and I think it’s a real winner.
I find the focus on the 24-70 fine, although newer lenses are better, in particular in harder situations like less light, contrast, etc. IMO, that is. A reason to mount the 35 II in those situations. With what I saw yesterday with the RF version there will be much less need to do that.

And I do agree that for fast paced events the R doesn't cut it yet, so waiting patiently to see what comes next year..
 
  • Like
Reactions: SecureGSM

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,013
113
Since I have the 50 1.2, easy choice for me: 24-70 w/IS. BUT I am in no hurry to trade in the ef 24-70 2.8 II, because for fast paced events where I use the mid-range zoom, the R just doesn't cut the mustard.
And therein lies the problem...

Thanks to a sweet deal I will soon enter into the R-mount world via the RP. But as badly as I lust after the RF 24-70, I can’t justify it yet. It can’t replace the EF version at this stage. It’s not the lens itself - it’s because at the events that call for a 24-70, I need to use a 5D body anyway for optimal results.

In fact I’m going with just the 35mm right now and will hold off on any higher-end RF stuff until I see a more capable R body(ies) that justifies investment in them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

YuengLinger

EOS 5D MK IV
Dec 20, 2012
2,576
679
Southeastern USA
And therein lies the problem...

Thanks to a sweet deal I will soon enter into the R-mount world via the RP. But as badly as I lust after the RF 24-70, I can’t justify it yet. It can’t replace the EF version at this stage. It’s not the lens itself - it’s because at the events that call for a 24-70, I need to use a 5D body anyway for optimal results.

In fact I’m going with just the 35mm right now and will hold off on any higher-end RF stuff until I see a more capable R body(ies) that justifies investment in them.
I just posted same sentiments in the "Big Price Drops..." thread! Yes. The market has had a year since the release of the R to learn its strengths and weaknesses. I can tell you it is the BEST portrait camera I've ever owned, due to its incredibly precise AI Servo AF, being able to see the exposure while composing, and the Rf prime lenses available now. But, for me, once action is involved, even typical event type movements (not talking about sports or dance, etc!), the 5DIV is what I trust.
 

Act444

EOS 6D MK II
May 4, 2011
1,013
113
I can tell you [that the EOS R] is the BEST portrait camera I've ever owned, due to its incredibly precise AI Servo AF, being able to see the exposure while composing, and the Rf prime lenses available now.
Interesting, I’ve heard people say that. For me that camera has been the 5DSR due to its resolution and color science. Would be interesting to see its MILC replacement and how it holds up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: YuengLinger

koenkooi

EOS 7D MK II
Feb 25, 2015
482
283
And therein lies the problem...

Thanks to a sweet deal I will soon enter into the R-mount world via the RP. But as badly as I lust after the RF 24-70, I can’t justify it yet. It can’t replace the EF version at this stage. It’s not the lens itself - it’s because at the events that call for a 24-70, I need to use a 5D body anyway for optimal results.

In fact I’m going with just the 35mm right now and will hold off on any higher-end RF stuff until I see a more capable R body(ies) that justifies investment in them.
I'm extremely happy with the CPL adaptor on my RP, so much that I'm no longer GAS'ing about the RF lenses. That and discovering not one, but two rental places nearby with tons of RF and EF lenses :)