Facebook Twitter Instagram
    Canon Rumors – Your best source for Canon rumors, leaks and gossip
    • Home
    • Forums
    • Media
    • Contact
    Canon Rumors – Your best source for Canon rumors, leaks and gossip
    Home»Canon Reviews»Review: Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM by CameraLabs
    svg+xml;base64,PHN2ZyB2aWV3Qm94PScwIDAgNzI4IDEwMjQnIHhtbG5zPSdodHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy8yMDAwL3N2Zyc+PC9zdmc+ - Review: Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM by CameraLabs

    Review: Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM by CameraLabs

    By Canon RumorsFebruary 16, 202137 Comments2 Mins Read Canon Reviews
    Share
    Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

    Gordan Laing from CameraLabs has completed his review of the Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM, in which he compares it directly to the EF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM II and the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM. I mean, you're comparing 3 amazing lenses against each other, you can't lose.

    From CameraLabs

    What makes the RF lens really special though is its size, little larger than a 330ml can when zoomed to 70mm and considerably more portable than the EF version, particularly when the adapter’s fitted for EOS R bodies. The extending barrel is a double-edged sword though as it’s way too soon to know about long-term sealing. Like the RF 2.8 version, the optical design sadly rules out the use of RF teleconverters and also results in significant focus breathing where the magnification reduces at closer focusing distances – this, in turn, means even though it can focus almost twice as close as the EF model, the resulting image size is actually roughly the same. Some may also prefer the slightly smoother background rendering of the EF lens. Read the full review

    Whichever of these three great lenses you choose, it looks like you're going to come away happy in the end.

    Go to discussion...

    EF 70-200 f/4L IS II review RF 70-200 f/2.8L IS RF 70-200 f/4L IS
    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
    Previous ArticleDelays seem to be the name of the game for 2021
    Next Article Deal of the Day: Plustek OpticFilm 8200i SE – 35mm Film & Slide Scanner $349 (Reg $399)

    Related Posts

    Canon USA restocks refurbished gear, now includes EOS R5 and EOS R6 with 10% discount

    November 11, 2022

    Used Stock Notice: Canon RF 28-70mm f/2L and Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS at B&H Photo

    October 29, 2022

    The Canon USA Store is having a sale on a small selection of refurbished RF lenses

    September 22, 2022

    Firmware: Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM v1.1.1

    September 13, 2022

    Review: Canon RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM

    September 13, 2022

    Refurbished Canon RF 70-200mm f/4L IS USM lenses appear for the first time

    August 27, 2022

    37 comments

    1. amorse
      February 16, 2021 at 3:29 pm
      I really like his reviews. He always seems to take a sober look what he's testing without getting too caught up in hype.
      • Reply
      • 0
    2. Del Paso
      February 16, 2021 at 4:29 pm
      No extender?
      No buy!
      (I'll keep the EF...)
      Yet, sometimes, an ultra compact telezoom would be nice.
      Maybe I'll get one someday.
      Edit: I certainly will. Soon.
      • Reply
      • 0
    3. festr
      February 16, 2021 at 5:19 pm
      No extender?
      No buy!
      (I'll keep the EF...)
      Yet, sometimes, an ultra compact telezoom would be nice.
      Maybe I'll get one someday.
      Edit: I certainly will. Soon.
      the F2.8 version is so small that I can afford to bring it with me all time.
      • Reply
      • 0
    4. IcyBergs
      February 16, 2021 at 6:08 pm
      I like the review, but.....

      What portrait and/or event photog is going to opt for f4 over f2.8?

      Not many I imagine.
      • Reply
      • 0
    5. deleteme
      February 16, 2021 at 7:45 pm
      I like the review, but.....

      What portrait and/or event photog is going to opt for f4 over f2.8?

      Not many I imagine.
      As a portrait photographer I use f4 almost all the time on my 70-200 2.8 because the last little bit of OOF BG is not worth the annoyance of a focus miss on the end of a nose as opposed to the eyes. Wiht the R5 I know this is not much of an issue compared to the DSLR cameras.

      I often use f4 and even 5.6 for events on stage where bright lighting is present.
      Weddings are the venue where a fast zoom would be welcome but even now we can get a way with a bump in ISO and the excellent IBIS now available to us. The lighter weight would actually be very welcome for someone on their feet with a lot of gear.
      • Reply
      • 0
    6. bbasiaga
      February 16, 2021 at 7:57 pm
      I like the review, but.....

      What portrait and/or event photog is going to opt for f4 over f2.8?

      Not many I imagine.
      Studio portraits or portraits using lots of flash/strobe are often shot at smaller apertures in order to better control ambient light. Subject separation is handled with the lighting and choice of background.

      But I see this lens as more of a travel lens, despite its ability to be used in studio. And that is where it has its most attraction for me. So small and light.

      Gordon's review on youtube seemed more positive than I read the comment clipped above. IQ wise its a wash with the EF version, but AF wise it is faster. So if you're going to upgrade, you'll do it on the size. If you don't have one, you've got a choice to make to trade off the cost for the larger size plus adapter, or go with the native.

      I'm torn, as I have the V1 EF version and have always liked it. But when I ultimately upgrade to an R body this will call to me. I could also instead upgrade to the EF 2.8 V2 or 3 for about the same price. Just not sure I'd really benefit much from the 2.8 for a travel/walk around lens.

      -Brian
      • Reply
      • 0
    7. Random Orbits
      February 16, 2021 at 8:51 pm
      Studio portraits or portraits using lots of flash/strobe are often shot at smaller apertures in order to better control ambient light. Subject separation is handled with the lighting and choice of background.

      But I see this lens as more of a travel lens, despite its ability to be used in studio. And that is where it has its most attraction for me. So small and light.

      Gordon's review on youtube seemed more positive than I read the comment clipped above. IQ wise its a wash with the EF version, but AF wise it is faster. So if you're going to upgrade, you'll do it on the size. If you don't have one, you've got a choice to make to trade off the cost for the larger size plus adapter, or go with the native.

      I'm torn, as I have the V1 EF version and have always liked it. But when I ultimately upgrade to an R body this will call to me. I could also instead upgrade to the EF 2.8 V2 or 3 for about the same price. Just not sure I'd really benefit much from the 2.8 for a travel/walk around lens.

      -Brian
      Canon definitely had a different strategy for its RF 70-200s than what it had with EF or what Nikon has done with with its Z 70-200. Gone are compatibility with extenders and constant length, and instead what Canon produced were variable length lenses that are compact and lighter. I think I like the tradeoff that Canon made. Even with the EF variants, I rarely used extenders with the 70-200s. If I needed more reach, I chose the 100-400.

      I do think that the RF versions of the 70-200s may have effectively killed off the 70-300L. The 70-300L's advantage was a shorter package than the fixed length 70-200s, and with the RF 70-200 f/4 as small and light as it is, I'm not sure there is a big market for a 70-300L for RF, which may be why there are rumors of a non-L 100-400.
      • Reply
      • 0
    8. Tirmite
      February 16, 2021 at 9:02 pm
      Good review. I miss the old days, though, when people -especially writers/journalists- knew how to use the English language.
      “...focuses twice as close as...” The correct terminology is: FOCUSES HALF AS CLOSE. It’s insulting to assume readers are too stupid and we can’t figure it out. Or are fractions really that difficult for otherwise smart writers to comprehend? What happened to our education system? Same goes for when you hear a commercial for a “3 Times” zoom lens (3X). It’s called a 3 Power lens. X refers to power, not “times”.
      • Reply
      • 0
    9. GreenViper
      February 16, 2021 at 9:15 pm
      Good review, fair and balanced. Can't quibble with any of his observations.

      Have mine on order - looking forward to size and weight. Planning on using it as the alternative lens in my 2 lens/camera set ups - 16-35F4 & 70-200F4 for landscapes & 400 DO II or 100-400 and 70-200 for wildlife. I'd have gone for the 70-200 F2.8 if I was still doing indoor sports and I have the 85 F2 for occasional portraits so the F4 fits my use case perfectly. Suspect it'll be a step up from my 70-200 F4 non-IS which was my first L lens back in the day.
      • Reply
      • 0
    10. Sharlin
      February 16, 2021 at 9:19 pm
      I like the review, but.....

      What portrait and/or event photog is going to opt for f4 over f2.8?

      All of those who can’t afford a 2.8?
      • Reply
      • 0
    11. IcyBergs
      February 16, 2021 at 9:59 pm
      As a portrait photographer I use f4 almost all the time on my 70-200 2.8 because the last little bit of OOF BG is not worth the annoyance of a focus miss on the end of a nose as opposed to the eyes. Wiht the R5 I know this is not much of an issue compared to the DSLR cameras.

      I often use f4 and even 5.6 for events on stage where bright lighting is present.
      Weddings are the venue where a fast zoom would be welcome but even now we can get a way with a bump in ISO and the excellent IBIS now available to us. The lighter weight would actually be very welcome for someone on their feet with a lot of gear.
      I didn't say those photogs wouldn't use smaller apertures, just said they'd probably buy the 2.8. And after reading this anecdote, it appears you've confirmed my suspicions. Especially the part where you say "my 70-200 2.8" ;)
      • Reply
      • 0
    12. IcyBergs
      February 16, 2021 at 10:00 pm
      All of those who can’t afford a 2.8?
      Agreed, but if they had their druthers?
      • Reply
      • 0
    13. stevelee
      February 16, 2021 at 11:40 pm
      “...focuses twice as close as...” The correct terminology is: FOCUSES HALF AS CLOSE. It’s insulting to assume readers are too stupid and we can’t figure it out.
      I don’t think either expression is particularly logical, so better just rephrased. But I suspect people can figure out what he means.

      Neither is as bad as “It is half as cold today as it was yesterday.”
      • Reply
      • 0
    14. stevelee
      February 16, 2021 at 11:45 pm
      For studio work, might one not prefer a prime lens?

      Size and weight are lesser concerns in the studio, as is price if you are making enough money with it over time. The extra stop would be of less value for studio portraits, I’d assume.
      • Reply
      • 0
    15. Act444
      February 16, 2021 at 11:52 pm
      I do think that the RF versions of the 70-200s may have effectively killed off the 70-300L. The 70-300L's advantage was a shorter package than the fixed length 70-200s, and with the RF 70-200 f/4 as small and light as it is, I'm not sure there is a big market for a 70-300L for RF, which may be why there are rumors of a non-L 100-400.
      I sure hope not. As a user of the 70-300L I opted for that over the 70-200 f4 not because of size, but due to the 100mm extra reach. For indoors/low light, that's what the 70-200 2.8 is for.

      In this case, it appears that the f2.8 version would already be compact and light enough (by my standards) for me to not desire the f4 version. I would like to see a 70-300 or 80-400 L-class lens in the same size category, personally.
      • Reply
      • 0
    16. SteveC
      February 17, 2021 at 12:23 am
      I don’t think either expression is particularly logical, so better just rephrased. But I suspect people can figure out what he means.

      Neither is as bad as “It is half as cold today as it was yesterday.”

      what do those people do when it's 10 one day and -5 the next? (Question exists whether you use Celsius or Fahrenheit, but not if you use Kelvins.)
      • Reply
      • 0
    17. Treyarnon
      February 17, 2021 at 12:42 am
      No extender?
      No buy!
      (I'll keep the EF...)
      Yet, sometimes, an ultra compact telezoom would be nice.
      Maybe I'll get one someday.
      Edit: I certainly will. Soon.
      With a (45MP) R5, you won't need an extender -> you will get better results by simply cropping.

      R6 will be a different matter though.
      • Reply
      • 0
    18. Quarkcharmed
      February 17, 2021 at 3:29 am
      Maybe I missed it but he hasn't covered vignetting, chromatic aberrations and distortion at all. Strong vignetting is a weak point of some of the new RF lenses.
      • Reply
      • 0
    19. Surab
      February 17, 2021 at 6:25 am
      I think I'm too much of an amateur to see the appeal in a 70-200 F4: It's still kinda expensive, not crazy fast, and doesn't have much reach. But again that's on me really.

      Same goes for when you hear a commercial for a “3 Times” zoom lens (3X). It’s called a 3 Power lens. X refers to power, not “times”.

      I can't tell if this is sarcasm.
      • Reply
      • 0
    • 1
    • 2
    • Next »

    Leave a comment

    Please log in to your forum account to comment

    • Facebook 105K
    • Twitter 65.7K

    Subscribe to our newsletter

    Get the latest news to your inbox

    Resources

    Third-party lenses for the Canon RF mount

    January 19, 2021

    Canon RF lens roadmap

    November 9, 2020
    Latest Announcements

    Canon announces EOS Webcam Utility Pro subscription service

    November 9, 2022

    Preorder: Canon EOS R6 Mark II, Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L IS USM & Canon Speedlite EL-5

    November 1, 2022

    Canon officially announces the Canon EOS R6 Mark II, Canon RF 135mm f/1.8L IS USM and Canon Speedlite EL-5

    November 1, 2022

    Venus Optics officially announces the Laowa Argus RF 25mm f/0.95 for APS-C

    October 25, 2022
    Latest Reviews

    Review: Canon RF 15-30mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM

    September 13, 2022

    Review: Canon RF-S 18-45mm F4.5-6.3 IS STM

    July 20, 2022

    Review: Canon RF-S 18-150mm F3.5-6.3 IS STM

    July 20, 2022

    OpticalLimits reviews the Canon EOS RF 16mm F2.8 STM

    February 21, 2022
    Canon EOS R1 Rumor Round-up

    Canon EOS R5 Mark II to arrive before EOS R1? [CR2]

    February 20, 2023331

    There have been some rumblings about a follow-up to the brilliant Canon EOS R5, and…

    The Canon EOS R1 may not come until 2024

    November 10, 2022

    We haven’t forgotten about the Canon EOS R1, and you probably haven’t either [CR2]

    September 22, 2022
    Canon EOS R5 S Rumor Round-up

    EOS R camera between EOS R7 and EOS R10 coming [CR3]

    November 28, 202292

    It feels like the old days again, as numerous camera rumors continue to flow in.…

    Canon is gearing up to finally release a high megapixel camera with 100+ megapixels [CR3]

    May 26, 2022

    A high megapixel camera is coming [CR2]

    February 21, 2022
    Canon EOS R50/R100 Rumor Round-up

    Stock Notice: Canon EOS R50 Body & Kits at B&H Photo

    March 16, 20234

    B&H Photo has somewhat limited stock of the brand new Canon EOS R50 in body…

    After almost 30 years, Canon is ending the “Kiss” branding in Japan

    February 9, 2023

    Preorder the new Canon Gear

    February 8, 2023
    Facebook Twitter RSS Discord
    © 2023 Canon Rumors hosting is fully managed by Host Duplex | Design & community services from Audentio

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.