Here is the Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM

Codebunny

EOS R1
Sep 5, 2018
647
627
The AF is supposed to still be working at f/8, no ? If it is f/5.6, then you might use a 1.4x one...
It isn’t about the AF. You can AF at f/22on these bodies. It looks like it is built like the f/2.8 which means they’ll be no room for a TC. One of the reasons my 70-200 might be Nikon is that I can shove a 1.4x and 2x converter on it as they went for a ‘old’ design. The Canons are giving that up for shorter in the bag and lighter to carry lenses. So you would need this and a RF 100-500. Instead of just shoving a TC on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldenhusky

goldenhusky

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 2, 2016
373
173
It isn’t about the AF. You can AF at f/22on these bodies. It looks like it is built like the f/2.8 which means they’ll be no room for a TC. One of the reasons my 70-200 might be Nikon is that I can shove a 1.4x and 2x converter on it as they went for a ‘old’ design. The Canons are giving that up for shorter in the bag and lighter to carry lenses. So you would need this and a RF 100-500. Instead of just shoving a TC on.
Interesting. I did not know until now that the RF 70-200 is not compatible with the RF extenders. While I never used extender on my EF 70-200 f/2.8 II. I may have to stick to that for longer I guess. I may upgrade to the III.
 

goldenhusky

EOS RP
CR Pro
Dec 2, 2016
373
173
And here (copied from the lenses Forum) two size comparisons, one with the 24-105 f/4 and the other with the 24-70 f/2.8:
This will be a fantastic hiking or trekking lens! Curious about the price though...
The size of the lens is definitely tempting but I do not think I will get this 70-200 f/4 ever.
 

Codebunny

EOS R1
Sep 5, 2018
647
627
Interesting. I did not know until now that the RF 70-200 is not compatible with the RF extenders. While I never used extender on my EF 70-200 f/2.8 II. I may have to stick to that for longer I guess. I may upgrade to the III.
Aye for a lot of people it doesn't matter, but for me extenders are one of the ways I can justify getting a 70-200. It for most of the time I would use a 1.4x on it or even a 2x(which produces sharp results and fast AF on the Nikon). But a bare 70-200 to me is always used exclusively at 200 as a light lens for bigger animals.... honestly a 200mm fast focusing macro would be a better buy for my use cases. I could focus on a close deer, hedgehog, or right down to a spider with a 200mm macro. The 70-199 part only comes into play when I use it for company events and for weddings.
 

EOSR FAN

550d, 70d, Eos r, Eos r5
Sep 29, 2020
4
6
Beautiful looking and compact lens. My GAS is really wanting to kick in. If I hadn't just bought EF70-200 f4 ii last year I'd be all over it. I can't imagine it will be any sharper but just look better with size, control ring and no adapter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danglin52

Bert63

What’s in da box?
CR Pro
Dec 3, 2017
928
2,008
Aye for a lot of people it doesn't matter, but for me extenders are one of the ways I can justify getting a 70-200. It for most of the time I would use a 1.4x on it or even a 2x(which produces sharp results and fast AF on the Nikon). But a bare 70-200 to me is always used exclusively at 200 as a light lens for bigger animals.... honestly a 200mm fast focusing macro would be a better buy for my use cases. I could focus on a close deer, hedgehog, or right down to a spider with a 200mm macro. The 70-199 part only comes into play when I use it for company events and for weddings.
I can agree with this. My 70-200L II f2.8 is one of my least used lenses...
 

armd

I'm New Here
Aug 21, 2019
22
24
Interesting lens to be sure, though I am waiting for the "great whites". Hopefully, the price will be reasonable as the cost of RF lenses has compelled me to keep and use my excellent EF glass. I understand the start up costs, need to recoup investment, declining sales volumes etc. however it still doesn't eliminate the pain for the rest of us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: canonmike
Oct 31, 2020
32
34
I never liked the EF Version of the 70-200mm... too big, too bulky for so I'd always opt for the EF 100-400mm because it is only slighter heavier. The RF 70-200mm was already a game changer, but for an amateur shooter just not within the budget. If this one has the right pricing I'll preorder it asap and use it as a new hiking lense :):) This one might weigh less the 1 KG!!! And, I could easily pack a wide-angle lens, the 24-105mm, the 70-200mm and the 100-400mm in my backpack :) Sooooooo excited :)
 

mb66energy

EOS R
Dec 18, 2011
1,453
331
Germany
www.MichaelBockhorst.de
Hmmmmmm
It's so cute ... but on the other hand I have the mark i incarnation of the image stabilized f/4 lens which is gorgous
and works with my M50 and RP extremely well for photo and video.
Maybe if my EF version dies and I own a C70 or C50 ...
 

Ale_F

6D - 7D
Nov 22, 2018
71
46
looking at the first image comparison it was identical to 24-105.
Fantastic