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

edoorn

EOS RP
Apr 1, 2016
356
330
Well to be honest, I did drop a 24-70 in Botswana fine sand. Result: wrecked AF motor. And my 100-400 has a lot of dust behind the front element. So maybe this design is more prone to problems. Curious to see how this will play out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

deleteme

EOS RP
Dec 25, 2012
751
380
I have had extending zooms sided by side with my 70-200 2.8 L IS since 2003. Dust intrusion has never been an issue on any lens I have owned ever.
I shoot daily with the 24-70 and the 24-105 yet they are as clean as my 70-200.
 

RayValdez360

Soon to be the greatest.
Jun 6, 2012
782
539
40
Philadelphia
I dont see the incentive to buy any lenses that are already similarly available on the EF mount until a new body comes out. This is pretty much investing into a new system minus a few accessories. We need to be sure the future is bright before we start dropping tens of $1000s on lenses again. I like the R because it is convenient but I need to feel like the R system is a necessity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,566
2,468
I dont see the incentive to buy any lenses that are already similarly available on the EF mount until a new body comes out. This is pretty much investing into a new system minus a few accessories. We need to be sure the future is bright before we start dropping tens of $1000s on lenses again. I like the R because it is convenient but I need to feel like the R system is a necessity.

Whenever that happens you can buy ONLY the body. You don't need to factor the cost of RF lenses in at all. Every single EF and EF-S lens you already own will work fine on it. There's nothing that says you have to spend thousands of dollars on lenses even if you buy an EOS-R body.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

slclick

EOS 3
Dec 17, 2013
4,647
3,051
I've never once considered F/4 to be as good as F/2.8.Slightly sharper on occassion. But also a lot dimmer. YMMV when it comes to the 2.8 lens though. Every lens has it's sweet spot insofar as distance is concerned.
I've never considered them to be better or worse than another yet different tools for different scenes and bags. You can gather more light with one and save money and weight with the other and that's just for starters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users

pj1974

80D, M5, 7D, & lots of glass and accessories!
Oct 18, 2011
690
212
Adelaide, Australia
Canon's RF 70-200mm lens looks a great option, for people wanting a f/2.8 lens in a compact design. Time will tell how well it handles harsh environments (moisture, dust, etc) - as indeed externally zooming lenses do by default let in more dust than the internally zooming versions. In that respect, the 70-200mm EF lenses are very well sealed. I have used a number of them over the years.

I currently own a number of L lenses, including the 70-300mm L - which is one of my favourite lenses. One of the main reasons being that I love its size and compactness, while still having great image quality and a very versatile / useful zoom range for much of my photography. I have used it extensively since I bought it (within the first month it became available) - and my lens has a small amount of dust inside it, but all the dust particles are small (and few) - so this is in no way impacts image quality (with different light scenarios). :cool:

The placement of the RF zoom ring and 'other ring' (which I believe might be a control ring, which can be 'switchable' between focus or other functions) - is similar to my 70-300mm L. I have no problem with the placement of that - in fact I find my 70-300mm L very ergonomic on both my 7D and 80D, as well as on FF bodies I have used it with. I also find I am adjustable to use the 70-200mm L lenses which have the zoom and focus rings in the other sequence (zoom closer to the body).

So, in summary, yes I'm looking forward to reading more news, hearing both professional reviews as well as 'real world purchaser/user reviews' of the up coming Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8

Now if Canon could just come out with a FF mirrorless body that will tempt me (and my wallet) ... Yes, I have used the Canon EOS R extensively (borrowed from friends, used on photography outings, in store, etc), and while it has a lot going for it, the EOS R has a number of limitations (fps, etc) and also misses a number of features that prevent me being brought over to the RF mount just yet.... However I'm sure that a future and improved RF mount camera body will..... ;)

It's a great time to be a photographer!

Paul
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users

flip314

EOS RP
Sep 26, 2018
288
426
The placement of the RF zoom ring and 'other ring' (which I believe might be a control ring, which can be 'switchable' between focus or other functions) - is similar to my 70-300mm L. I have no problem with the placement of that - in fact I find my 70-300mm L very ergonomic on both my 7D and 80D, as well as on FF bodies I have used it with. I also find I am adjustable to use the 70-200mm L lenses which have the zoom and focus rings in the other sequence (zoom closer to the body).

The prototypes had a (white) control ring right near the mount
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user

jhpeterson

EOS RP
CR Pro
Feb 7, 2011
265
35
Another thing I notice - the amount of zoom twisting needed to get from 70 to 200 on the RF version seems significantly longer than on the EF version...one of the latter’s strengths in my opinion. Not sure how I feel about that.
Looks rather awkward from what I see. Hopefully I'll never need to go from infinity to MFD anytime soon.
 

Berowne

... they sparkle still the right Promethean fire.
Jun 7, 2014
392
319
Dust does not matter at all.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user

RayValdez360

Soon to be the greatest.
Jun 6, 2012
782
539
40
Philadelphia
Whenever that happens you can buy ONLY the body. You don't need to factor the cost of RF lenses in at all. Every single EF and EF-S lens you already own will work fine on it. There's nothing that says you have to spend thousands of dollars on lenses even if you buy an EOS-R body.
My whole statement was about buying these lenses if you already have a version of them or access to the cheaper EF versions. Also I dont know how many bought into the R system as their first ILC.
 

SteveC

R5
CR Pro
Sep 3, 2019
2,566
2,468
My whole statement was about buying these lenses if you already have a version of them or access to the cheaper EF versions. Also I dont know how many bought into the R system as their first ILC.

Well I misunderstood you then, I thought you were saying it wasn't worth buying the body because then you'd have to buy the lenses too.