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

[edoorn]

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.

 

[psolberg]

Sometimes hope overpowers common sense.

LOL good one. But hope? more like delusional fans. Like the ones that thought canon would not make a new mount for mirrorless

 

[deleteme]

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]

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.

 

[SteveC]

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.

 

[slclick]

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.

 

[pj1974]

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).

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

 

[vjlex]

Now if only they would offer it in black... what a handsome trinity that would be.

 

[flip314]

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

 

[YuengLinger]

Now if only they would offer it in black... what a handsome trinity that would be.

What, and have them melt like chocolate pretzels in the sun?

 

[f119a]

The video has died as they made it private.

 

[DrahtPhotography]

I personally am very okay with the lens zooming externally as long as I can fit a real 70-200 2.8 in a small bag. The ergonomics of this lens look amazing.

I actually came here to say that too. If it takes up less space in my bag, I'm very happy to see it expand and retract.

 

[jhpeterson]

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.

 

[Ozarker]

The mythical RF 70-135mm f/2L will internal zoom.

Personally, I loved that the EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM did not extend. Uber cool.

 

[Berowne]

Dust does not matter at all.

 

[IsaacImage]

WOW, what a beauty!
Can't wait to fit it in my bag.

 

[RayValdez360]

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]

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.

 

[Del Paso]

Mfd of 0.7m is definitely one! Portability another.

If I had the money...(just bought the 24-105)

 

[harrylarsen]

It´s a Hoover.