Canon Trade-up Promotion

[LaurieAndersonPhotography]

So I am seriously thinking of trading in several EF lenses (EF-70-200, EF 24-105 and EF 16-35) and purchasing the RF 24-70 and RF 15-35, both being f/2.8. I hate using an adaptor on my EF lenses for my R5 - it's just more to haul around. I primarily do wildlife, nature, landscape and nightscape/astrophotography. With the Canon trade-up event going on till the end of the month, it makes it a benefit to trade-in, rather than try to sell myself. I would make enough off the trade-in to pay for one of those RF lenses. I just hope I am making the right choices in the 2 lenses I want - I have no time to rent and test out. Anyone else have those 2 RF lenses? What's your thoughts?

 

[lostnomore]

I absolutely LOVE the RF 24-70 f/2.8, but I realize I rarely take photos at wider than f/4. The RF 24-105 f/4 would have been the better option for me (in terms of reach AND cost) and there's a rumor posted in another thread about a possible RF 24-105 f/2.8. If you shoot wildlife, I can't see how a 70-200 would have good enough reach (I also have the RF 70-200 f/2.8). People rave about the RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1L despite the smaller apertures, and I'm no fan of a non-constant max. aperture, but that would certainly nail better wildlife shots for you in good light. I actually tried that lens out myself for a day, fired off a whole bunch of shots, and loved the compression effects I could also get with landscapes (my favorite landscape lenses are actually telephoto zooms!), but at the time it was just too much cost to commit to. I'm not sure any of this helps; just wanted to offer my random thoughts on RF lenses I've actually used.

 

[LaurieAndersonPhotography]

I absolutely LOVE the RF 24-70 f/2.8, but I realize I rarely take photos at wider than f/4. The RF 24-105 f/4 would have been the better option for me (in terms of reach AND cost) and there's a rumor posted in another thread about a possible RF 24-105 f/2.8. If you shoot wildlife, I can't see how a 70-200 would have good enough reach (I also have the RF 70-200 f/2.8). People rave about the RF 100-500mm f4.5-7.1L despite the smaller apertures, and I'm no fan of a non-constant max. aperture, but that would certainly nail better wildlife shots for you in good light. I actually tried that lens out myself for a day, fired off a whole bunch of shots, and loved the compression effects I could also get with landscapes (my favorite landscape lenses are actually telephoto zooms!), but at the time it was just too much cost to commit to. I'm not sure any of this helps; just wanted to offer my random thoughts on RF lenses I've actually used.

Oh I failed to mention I have the RF 100-500 and the RF 1.4x - that lens stays on my camera nearly constant! I was wondering about the RF 24-105 f/4, if that would be a better pick than the RF 24-70 f/2.8. I like having the wide aperture available on that lens, but, like you said, how often would I shoot that wide? Then it's also tempting to wait and see if Canon really does make a 24-105 f/2.8. A 24-105 makes a good walk-around lens for times that I will just be taking one lens for a hike or travel. I barely used the EF 70-200 f/2.8 lens - nice lens but so dang heavy - not enough reach for wildlife, and not a good "walk-around" lens.

 

[Dean Wilson]

I cannot compare the RF 24-105 f/4 to the RF 24-70 f/2.8, I don't have the RF 24-105 f/4
However I do have and love the RF 24-70mm f/2.8 and 15-35mm f/2.8. I typically photograph landscapes and night when the f/2.8 shines. I also play around indoors when the weather and lighting are very less than desirable.
I made a Steampunk Minion that stands one inch tall.

 

[Copterdoc]

So I am seriously thinking of trading in several EF lenses (EF-70-200, EF 24-105 and EF 16-35) and purchasing the RF 24-70 and RF 15-35, both being f/2.8. I hate using an adaptor on my EF lenses for my R5 - it's just more to haul around. I primarily do wildlife, nature, landscape and nightscape/astrophotography. With the Canon trade-up event going on till the end of the month, it makes it a benefit to trade-in, rather than try to sell myself. I would make enough off the trade-in to pay for one of those RF lenses. I just hope I am making the right choices in the 2 lenses I want - I have no time to rent and test out. Anyone else have those 2 RF lenses? What's your thoughts?

I have the RF 15-35mm and love it. For wildlife, though I depend on my RF 100-500mm and my RF 70-200mm mostly. Got the RF 100mm Macro just recently and am trying to figure out where it fits. It takes relatively good macro shots, but I think I can do better once I figure out how to focus stack more efficiently.

 

[Hali]

So I am seriously thinking of trading in several EF lenses (EF-70-200, EF 24-105 and EF 16-35) and purchasing the RF 24-70 and RF 15-35, both being f/2.8. I hate using an adaptor on my EF lenses for my R5 - it's just more to haul around. I primarily do wildlife, nature, landscape and nightscape/astrophotography. With the Canon trade-up event going on till the end of the month, it makes it a benefit to trade-in, rather than try to sell myself. I would make enough off the trade-in to pay for one of those RF lenses. I just hope I am making the right choices in the 2 lenses I want - I have no time to rent and test out. Anyone else have those 2 RF lenses? What's your thoughts?

I wish I had known about the event. I would have definitely traded in my ef 70-200 and 16-35 f/2.8's for a RF 24-70 . I couldn't find any information about it on the Canon site.

 

[GregO]

My first RF lens was the 24-105 mm F4 L IS USM. I think it is a very good lens for landscapes, and as a walk around lens. I've even used it for outside portraits. I wish it has a little more reach, and sometimes it is a little heavy. I then bought the 15-35 mm F2.8 L IS USM for landscape, and astrophotography. If I wasn't using for the astrophotography, I would have purchased the 14-35 mm F4 L IS USM. It is lighter and less expensive. The 15 - 35 is a very sharp lens, and I've gotten some great star, and landscape photos. I then bought the 50 mm F1.2 L USM, but I ended up selling it and buying the 24-70 mm F2.8 L IS USM. I don't do a lot of portraits, and none in a studio, so the zoom capabilities, and the image stabilization, were better for me than the 1.2 aperture of the 50 mm. Also, the wider aperture than the F4 of the 24-105 mm allows me to get better pictures in lower light. If a 24-105 mm F2.8 L IS USM were available, I probably would have bought that, but as noted above, I already feel at times that the F4 version gets a little heavy at times.

I'm fortunate that my day job allows me to have both the 24-105 mm F4, and the 24-70 mm F2.8, but If I had to choose between them, it would be hard. I think the 24-105mm is a better all-around lens, and for that reason was the first one I bought. However, it isn't as sharp as the 24-70 mm, and it's nice to have the f/2.8 aperture.

 

[dmanthree]

Oh I failed to mention I have the RF 100-500 and the RF 1.4x - that lens stays on my camera nearly constant! I was wondering about the RF 24-105 f/4, if that would be a better pick than the RF 24-70 f/2.8. I like having the wide aperture available on that lens, but, like you said, how often would I shoot that wide? Then it's also tempting to wait and see if Canon really does make a 24-105 f/2.8. A 24-105 makes a good walk-around lens for times that I will just be taking one lens for a hike or travel. I barely used the EF 70-200 f/2.8 lens - nice lens but so dang heavy - not enough reach for wildlife, and not a good "walk-around" lens.

I can't compare the 24-105 f4 with the 24-70 f2.8, but I can tell you the 24-105 is an excellent lens. I don't hesitate to shoot it at any focal length and aperture, except for the usual f16 and smaller. Great lens with a very useful range.

 

[LaurieAndersonPhotography]

I can't compare the 24-105 f4 with the 24-70 f2.8, but I can tell you the 24-105 is an excellent lens. I don't hesitate to shoot it at any focal length and aperture, except for the usual f16 and smaller. Great lens with a very useful range.

I decided to go with the rf 24-105…now just waiting for it to arrive!