As an coming R5 user, I am willed to change my <200mm zooms. The 70-200 IS has been sold, also all EF zooms 2.8 L are gone.
I will definitively get the RF 70-200. With wideangle lenses, I am thinking of not buying an zoom again (there is the EF 16-35 4 L IS still in my pocket) - better 3-4 primes for better IQ. Later on, the RF 85mm and the 50mm RF will follow. Later on, because of pricing...
So, the 24-70mm zoom range is open. And I am not sure, which lens to buy. The RF 27-70 2.8 or RF 28-70 2.0
I do not think, I will notice the 2.8 to 2.0 in case of brightness and bokeh difference. But all tests I read, saw the 2.0 lens 20-25% sharper at >35mm (up to 70mm).
So I wonder If the more weight (I will use the lens as an "always on" at walking and hiking for landscapes) and the €800 plus is worth the money.
Are RF users in the community that can place their practical experience here? (optically and handling)
I will definitively get the RF 70-200. With wideangle lenses, I am thinking of not buying an zoom again (there is the EF 16-35 4 L IS still in my pocket) - better 3-4 primes for better IQ. Later on, the RF 85mm and the 50mm RF will follow. Later on, because of pricing...
So, the 24-70mm zoom range is open. And I am not sure, which lens to buy. The RF 27-70 2.8 or RF 28-70 2.0
I do not think, I will notice the 2.8 to 2.0 in case of brightness and bokeh difference. But all tests I read, saw the 2.0 lens 20-25% sharper at >35mm (up to 70mm).
So I wonder If the more weight (I will use the lens as an "always on" at walking and hiking for landscapes) and the €800 plus is worth the money.
Are RF users in the community that can place their practical experience here? (optically and handling)
Last edited: