Canon officially launches the RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM

From what i'm understanding is that you get L quality glass, IS up to 5.5 stops, External Zoom (not in body zoom), and it\'s weather/dust resistant?? Why is this not a L lens???? for the price and it's size/weight it's going to be a huge game changer!! For video you might need to punch in a bit if you\'re getting rid of the in lens corrections but other than that i think this is incredible! For both gimbal work and overall walk around lens.
Maybe Canon decided not to give it a L designation in order not to price it at 2.000 € :ROFLMAO: :ROFLMAO:

Nah, I really don't know, but I do know I´m getting one :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
It won't replace the EF 100-400 L II, an excellent lens for BIF or dragonflies, far less for landscapes. I've tested one: center was very sharp, sides and corners were a different story.
No, the only alternative to the EF 100-400 L II is the RF 100-500. Period! :)
OK, I'll get one...
The only downside for my RF100-500 is the hood.
Turned around, it covers the zoom ring so you end up push/pull the lens to zoom.
The other issue is the window on the hood for turning a CPL. Mine opens way to easy which is annoying. Some have glued theirs shut, others don't seem to open easily.
Minor issues though and well worth the money IMO (if you can afford it!) I didn't have an option for longer focal lengths as the RF70-200/2.8 doesn't handle TCs vs the EF version. I love the collapsibility though. The RF100-400 hadn't been released at that time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
The only downside for my RF100-500 is the hood.
Turned around, it covers the zoom ring so you end up push/pull the lens to zoom.
The other issue is the window on the hood for turning a CPL. Mine opens way to easy which is annoying. Some have glued theirs shut, others don't seem to open easily.
Minor issues though and well worth the money IMO (if you can afford it!) I didn't have an option for longer focal lengths as the RF70-200/2.8 doesn't handle TCs vs the EF version. I love the collapsibility though. The RF100-400 hadn't been released at that time.
The window on the hood was introduced with the EF 100-400 L II. There's a 3M solution for this annoying "improvement"...
And the reverse mounted EF's lensshade on the RF prevents conventional zooming as well.
The TC issue doesn't bother me at all, since extenders are used to obtain longer focal lengths.
But the real issue, for me, will be a feeling of betraying a good old friend. (I know this is silly, but I can't help feeling this way)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
The only downside for my RF100-500 is the hood.
Turned around, it covers the zoom ring so you end up push/pull the lens to zoom.
The other issue is the window on the hood for turning a CPL. Mine opens way to easy which is annoying. Some have glued theirs shut, others don't seem to open easily.
Minor issues though and well worth the money IMO (if you can afford it!) I didn't have an option for longer focal lengths as the RF70-200/2.8 doesn't handle TCs vs the EF version. I love the collapsibility though. The RF100-400 hadn't been released at that time.

I use my 100-400 II a lot for bird and animal photography. I covered the white coating (and hood) with Lenscoat camouflage. This also solves the problem of unwanted opening of the CPL opening.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
From what i'm understanding is that you get L quality glass, IS up to 5.5 stops, External Zoom (not in body zoom), and it\'s weather/dust resistant?? Why is this not a L lens???? for the price and it's size/weight it's going to be a huge game changer!! For video you might need to punch in a bit if you\'re getting rid of the in lens corrections but other than that i think this is incredible! For both gimbal work and overall walk around lens.
Well, one theory is that Canon didn't go all out with this lens. After all, we already have a similar lens, with a wider zoom range, less distortion (better optical corrections), and higher grade focusing motors.

A proper L-series RF 28-70mm f/2.8 should be better than the RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L, due to the shorter zoom range, but that's not to be expected from this one, because they say it's on the same level as the RF 24-105mm f/4 L, perhaps slightly better.

Since this is not the best they can do, it doesn't get the red ring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
The other issue is the window on the hood for turning a CPL. Mine opens way to easy which is annoying. Some have glued theirs shut, others don't seem to open easily.
Yes, it certainly seems there is some manufacturing variability with this hood. I have two copies of it, and neither have a propensity to open on their own.

I started acquiring RF lenses in the weeks between my RV pre-order and delivery and the 70-200/2.8 and 100-500 or among those purchased at that time. Perhaps Canon applied a silent upgrade to avoid the need for that 3M improvement @Del Paso mentioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0
The only downside for my RF100-500 is the hood.
Turned around, it covers the zoom ring so you end up push/pull the lens to zoom.
The other issue is the window on the hood for turning a CPL. Mine opens way to easy which is annoying. Some have glued theirs shut, others don't seem to open easily.
Minor issues though and well worth the money IMO (if you can afford it!) I didn't have an option for longer focal lengths as the RF70-200/2.8 doesn't handle TCs vs the EF version. I love the collapsibility though. The RF100-400 hadn't been released at that time.
I bought the ES-93 hood (for an RF 50/1.2). Not as bulky when in use and fits closer to the body when reversed. Also black rather than white.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I bought the ES-93 hood (for an RF 50/1.2). Not as bulky when in use and fits closer to the body when reversed. Also black rather than white.
Thanks! :love:
I was already thinking of a screw-on shade, but this is a very good option. I also prefer hoods in black rather than in white. And shorter could mean no removal needed when I put the lens back into the backpack.
But I will first order this 100-500, after the last vacation with my beloved EF 100-400 L II :cry:.
Edit: And I'll save 45 grams on the weight of the hood!
Ergo: (both lenses on the EOS R, sans tripod foot or collar)
EF 100-400 L II: 1785 grams, including original hood and EF-RF adapter
RF 100-500 L: 1410 grams with ES-93 hood
I'll save 375 grams, quite a lot when hiking! And gain 100mm...
Since I always had the 1,4 ext. with me, another 225 grams saved, but 60mm lost (500 vs. 560mm).
Yet, in case the 100-400 is used on the 5 D IV, and the 100-500 on the R 5II, through cropping the missing 60mm can easily be compensated for.
I MUST get this 100-500! :cool:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Thanks! :love:
I was already thinking of a screw-on shade, but this is a very good option. I also prefer hoods in black rather than in white. And shorter could mean no removal needed when I put the lens back into the backpack.
But I will first order this 100-500, after the last vacation with my beloved EF 100-400 L II :cry:.
Edit: And I'll save 45 grams on the weight of the hood!
Ergo: (both lenses on the EOS R, sans tripod foot or collar)
EF 100-400 L II: 1785 grams, including original hood and EF-RF adapter
RF 100-500 L: 1410 grams with ES-93 hood
I'll save 375 grams, quite a lot when hiking! And gain 100mm...
Since I always had the 1,4 ext. with me, another 225 grams saved, but 60mm lost (500 vs. 560mm).
Yet, in case the 100-400 is used on the 5 D IV, and the 100-500 on the R 5II, through cropping the missing 60mm can easily be compensated for.
I MUST get this 100-500! :cool:
I owned the EF 100-400mm II and now own the RF100-500mm: You wont’t regret buying the RF 100-500mm. On the contrary, you will regret that you have delayed the inevitable for so long ;) .
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
The only downside for my RF100-500 is the hood.
Turned around, it covers the zoom ring so you end up push/pull the lens to zoom.
The other issue is the window on the hood for turning a CPL. Mine opens way to easy which is annoying. Some have glued theirs shut, others don't seem to open easily.
Minor issues though and well worth the money IMO (if you can afford it!) I didn't have an option for longer focal lengths as the RF70-200/2.8 doesn't handle TCs vs the EF version. I love the collapsibility though. The RF100-400 hadn't been released at that time.
I like the hood on my RF 100-500mm. but I haven't experienced the difficulties you have. Mine stays closed when I want it to and it opens easily and smooth. I just wish the RF 70-200mm F4 would have a window in the hood. I often use it for landscapes at lakes or when we travel to the Northsea or such and therefore I often use a CPL. Meanwhile, because it is so annoying turning the CPL with the hood on the lens I often just leave it in my backpack or at home.
 
Upvote 0
Thanks! :love:
I was already thinking of a screw-on shade, but this is a very good option. I also prefer hoods in black rather than in white. And shorter could mean no removal needed when I put the lens back into the backpack.
But I will first order this 100-500, after the last vacation with my beloved EF 100-400 L II :cry:.
Edit: And I'll save 45 grams on the weight of the hood!
Ergo: (both lenses on the EOS R, sans tripod foot or collar)
EF 100-400 L II: 1785 grams, including original hood and EF-RF adapter
RF 100-500 L: 1410 grams with ES-93 hood
I'll save 375 grams, quite a lot when hiking! And gain 100mm...
Since I always had the 1,4 ext. with me, another 225 grams saved, but 60mm lost (500 vs. 560mm).
Yet, in case the 100-400 is used on the 5 D IV, and the 100-500 on the R 5II, through cropping the missing 60mm can easily be compensated for.
I MUST get this 100-500! :cool:
Yaaaay! So excited for you You won´t regret getting the RF 100-500mm at all :)

The weight savings for your use cases sound amazing 600gr total savings is a lot and while hiking it kind feels like you saved 3 kg :)
Although I don´t know whether you will need the ES-93 hood because a lot of hoods do work and as neuro pointed out, Canon might have silently fixed the issue.

Enjoy you're last vacation with the EF 100-400mm and may it take very memorable pics on that trip :)
 
Upvote 0
Lowepro? My opinion about them has changed, in a very negative way. Some expensive models are known for very poor seams since they were taken over by the Manfrotto owner.
Mindshift (not rotation): :love:
F-Stop: :love: :love:Superb backpacks, the best in my subjective opinion
Shimoda: never had, same about Compagnon.
Nya Evo: :love:
Rotation 34L: :love:
I was looking thoroughly at the the Compagnon, Shimoda, F-stop and Nya Eco backpacks this week and one question evolved. With all backpacks it seems pretty easy and convenient to access the camera. But how convenient is it to change the lens? When hiking, I usually carry a two lense combo e.g. RF 35mm and 100-400mm (or 70-200mm) or so.

With the Rotation backpack I don´t have to take down my backpack plus the lenses are protected against wind, dust whatsoever. With the Shimoda e.g. it seems like you can only access a second lens when you take the backpack down. If so, this would be a huge deal for me and would probably make me purchase the 34 L rotation.

Does anybody have any experience about accessing the camera and changing lenses with these backpacks? I´m asking because I was only able to look at them online... a camera store that carries Shimoda backpack is 80 miles away, compagnon about 40 miles in the other direction and would take me forever to get a real-life look at them...

thx for your replies and sorry for hijacking this thread :)
 
Upvote 0
I was looking thoroughly at the the Compagnon, Shimoda, F-stop and Nya Eco backpacks this week and one question evolved. With all backpacks it seems pretty easy and convenient to access the camera. But how convenient is it to change the lens? When hiking, I usually carry a two lense combo e.g. RF 35mm and 100-400mm (or 70-200mm) or so.

With the Rotation backpack I don´t have to take down my backpack plus the lenses are protected against wind, dust whatsoever. With the Shimoda e.g. it seems like you can only access a second lens when you take the backpack down. If so, this would be a huge deal for me and would probably make me purchase the 34 L rotation.

Does anybody have any experience about accessing the camera and changing lenses with these backpacks? I´m asking because I was only able to look at them online... a camera store that carries Shimoda backpack is 80 miles away, compagnon about 40 miles in the other direction and would take me forever to get a real-life look at them...

thx for your replies and sorry for hijacking this thread :)
I use a ThinkTank digital holster with the harness to carry the camera on my chest so I can access the camera quickly. It has a built-in rainsleeve and small pocket for a lens cap.

See: https://www.thinktankphoto.com/collections/shoulder-bags-digital-holsters

The 50 (tightly) fits a R5 with grip + RF 100-500mm or a 5D Mk IV with EF 70-200mm f2.8. The holster has an extendable part at the bottom that enables the lens to be carried with the hood extended. You can add a ThinkTank pouch on the side for a smaller lens.

The quality is, as with all ThinkTank bags and accessories, very good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
Having tried the RF 28-70mm f/2, realising it is pretty much the same as carrying a traditional 70-200mm f/2.8, on my neck, made me resist the temptation to buy it, because it would be my main lens. That was almost a year ago and it still itches me. I love that lens.
(...)
Otherwise, I’d always go with the 28-70mm f/2.

I never went for the RF 24-70mm f/2.8 because the size and weight are almost the same as my EF lens with an adapter.
That made me consider jumping to the RF 28-70mm f/2, and it's been less than a year since I almost pulled the trigger on that one, but the weight on my neck and forearms made the final decision. Since then, I decided to keep my EF lens until something else came, like a RF 24-70mm f/2.8 II, but this may do the trick. Sacrificing 24mm has never been an issue to me, so...

Considering the 28-70 and the 24-105 f/2.8 weight pretty much the same as an EF 70-200 2.8, while my hands may feel more comfortable, due to the better balance between the camera and the lens (and good ergonomics on the 28-70), I know the rest of my body will have to sustain aproximately the same weight. When I tested the 28-70, the feeling on the neck and forearms was very "familiar" :LOL:

That said, I will probably buy it anyway, someday. That lens is just too tempting:sneaky:

Same for the RF 28-70mm f/2, unfortunately, even though that one is a lot easier to handle in the hands, but the weight on neck, shoulders and forearms is essentially the same.
I voted on the 24-70mm, but the lens I like the most is definitely the 28-70. Damn, that lens stills tempts me today, and the fact that the RF 24-70mm f/2.8 doesn’t feel like enough for me to replace my EF 24-70 II doesn’t help:ROFLMAO:


WELL.....it didn't take long.

The past weekend I found myself an open box brand new RF 28-70mm f/2 for less than 2000€ :eek: :ROFLMAO:


I couldn't resist. Not this time. It was almost 500€ less than the lowest price I ever saw for this lens.

ca18cb55.jpg

precious-lotr.gif
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
WELL.....it didn't take long.

The past weekend I found myself an open box brand new RF 28-70mm f/2 for less than 2000€ :eek: :ROFLMAO:


I couldn't resist. Not this time. It was almost 500€ less than the lowest price I ever saw for this lens.

ca18cb55.jpg

precious-lotr.gif
Congratulations! I hope you enjoy the new lens. Once it's around your neck, I hope your posture will be better than Gollum's.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Upvote 0
I hope your posture will be better than Gollum's.
Most likely, very similar:ROFLMAO::ROFLMAO:

Thanks :)

The lens arrived today. The packaging has been through hell, but the lens is in mint condition, it doesn’t even look like the lens hood was ever attached to it.
I’m still surprised I was able to get it for pretty much the same price as a RF 24-70mm f/2.8 on rebate. They’re going for higher prices on second hand!

I just couldn’t say no to this deal

Now I can sell my two EF lenses and never look back.
If I ever regret purchasing this lens, for instance, because of the weight, I can sell it with profit and buy the new RF 28-70mm f/2.8
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0
I was looking thoroughly at the the Compagnon, Shimoda, F-stop and Nya Eco backpacks this week and one question evolved. With all backpacks it seems pretty easy and convenient to access the camera. But how convenient is it to change the lens? When hiking, I usually carry a two lense combo e.g. RF 35mm and 100-400mm (or 70-200mm) or so.

With the Rotation backpack I don´t have to take down my backpack plus the lenses are protected against wind, dust whatsoever. With the Shimoda e.g. it seems like you can only access a second lens when you take the backpack down. If so, this would be a huge deal for me and would probably make me purchase the 34 L rotation.

Does anybody have any experience about accessing the camera and changing lenses with these backpacks? I´m asking because I was only able to look at them online... a camera store that carries Shimoda backpack is 80 miles away, compagnon about 40 miles in the other direction and would take me forever to get a real-life look at them...

thx for your replies and sorry for hijacking this thread :)
This is exactly why I bought the rotation 34L...
If, like you, I was carrying only two lenses (RF 100-500 or EF 100-400 L + a 35mm), they could easily fit into the camera/lens compartment for easy, quick, protected and safe access. All the other backpacks must be fully rotated around the waist, opened, and taken down in order to place the straps back on the shoulders.
Unless you are an Indonesian dancer...;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Upvote 0

Image quality test results available

As I suspected from the RAW files I downloaded previously, it doesn't look good at 28mm in the corners, but the rest of the zoom range seems decent.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Upvote 0
I'll definitely not spend 1300 euros on a lens with such disappointing sharpness at 28mm. The EF 24-70 f/4 L I bought new for 550 euros is optically in a higher category and starts at 24 mm. OK, it's only an f/4.
But fully usable at its widest setting.
I only hope Brian got a lemon...
Canon, you can do better! :(
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Upvote 0