RF 24-70 f2.8L vs RF 28-70 f2.0L

[DrQandil]

As hobbiest, is there a real advantage from having an RF 28-70 f2.0L vs RF 24-70 f2.8L other than lower F number. Will they be comparable at f2.8, or the 28-70 will still be significantly sharper?

 

[Lookyloo69]

As hobbiest, is there a real advantage from having an RF 28-70 f2.0L vs RF 24-70 f2.8L other than lower F number. Will they be comparable at f2.8, or the 28-70 will still be significantly sharper?

well all i can tell you is I own the F2 and I love it ... its fast it takes awesome photo in low light and it has a wonderful Bokeh when i do singles or close up work ...

 

[Copterdoc]

The one difference I believe is that the RF 28-70mm F3 does not have image stabilization if that is a concern for you. The lens gets great reviews from wedding photographers on Youtube as it provides prime lens quality, covering several of the prime lens sizes. Most are saying that they would buy the 28-70 F2 as it provides the quality and is less expensive than purchasing the individual primes.

 

[Philwright5454]

I’m still trying to get hold of the rf 28-70 f2 wanting to down size on glass a little.

 

[Lookyloo69]

The one difference I believe is that the RF 28-70mm F3 does not have image stabilization if that is a concern for you. The lens gets great reviews from wedding photographers on Youtube as it provides prime lens quality, covering several of the prime lens sizes. Most are saying that they would buy the 28-70 F2 as it provides the quality and is less expensive than purchasing the individual primes.

the well renowned EF24-70 L didnt have it ... works wonderfully ?? i have vs1 and 2 and the rf28-70 f2 and love it

 

[DrQandil]

With IBIS this lack if in-lens IS is less of a problem. But always wonder what makes Canon neglect IS at a $3000 price range? Is it a technical decision?

 

[Copterdoc]

the well renowned EF24-70 L didnt have it ... works wonderfully ?? i have vs1 and 2 and the rf28-70 f2 and lov

With IBIS this lack if in-lens IS is less of a problem. But always wonder what makes Canon neglect IS at a $3000 price range? Is it a technical decision?

It's in my RF 15-35mm so it's curious that it is absent from the RF 28-70 F2.

 

[denver.mike]

The one difference I believe is that the RF 28-70mm F3 does not have image stabilization if that is a concern for you. The lens gets great reviews from wedding photographers on Youtube as it provides prime lens quality, covering several of the prime lens sizes. Most are saying that they would buy the 28-70 F2 as it provides the quality and is less expensive than purchasing the individual primes.

That is why I decided to go with 24-70 for the IS. If your hybrid shooter this is a great lens for video.

 

[Avatarshots]

the well renowned EF24-70 L didnt have it ... works wonderfully ?? i have vs1 and 2 and the rf28-70 f2 and love it

If you get the R5 body it has in body image stabilization

 

[SO8]

Getting my R5 tomorrow with a 24-105L as a walkaround ... now trying to decide if I get a 24-70 f2.8 for closer stuff (as it seems to focus close), a 28-70 as it seems stunning re IQ (but I'm worried re size/weight and no close focus) or a 50 f1.2 ??

I am amateur but when I shot weddings with my wife (who is the professional) I used a 24-70 Mk1 a lot as it focused closer than the Mk2 for detail shots.

I am unsure whether I am going to take as many close focus shots now but with the 24-105 it isn't really a lens that goes close, unlike the RF 24-70.

 

[Copterdoc]

That is why I decided to go with 24-70 for the IS. If your hybrid shooter this is a great lens for video.

Learned something new about the RF 28-70F2 lens. Even though the lens has no IS, the IBIS in the R5 body actually provides 8 stops of stabilization according to the canon rep I spoke to.

 

[SO8]

Well, I went with the RF 24-70 f2.8 as opposed to the 28-70 f2.

I didn’t try the f2 lens but have found the 24-70 f2.8 to be stunning . The sharpness exceeds the older 24-70 ef versions, of which I had both. It is not much heavier in the hand than the RF 24-105 and easily a carry round lens. The DoF is superb and overall I am more than happy. I thought I would use the 24-105 in the min but the 24-70 now sits on the camera alternating with the RF50mm.

The close focus of the RF 24-70 is very impressive and better than I thought it would be. The old Mk1 EF 24-70 went close, but, as I said earlier the EF Mk II didn’t. The RF lens more than corrects that !

Focus is zippy and build predictably RF … not as heavy or solid feeling as the older EF L lenses but if you drop any of them they are done for I guess.

I still hanker after the f2 lens but tbh have no real need as my photography these days is for fun only.

 

[DrQandil]

Thank you all. I got the 28-70 f2. All the pros and cons are accurate. But it is marvelous.

 

[LoneRider]

Sold my RF 24-105mm f/4L for the RF 28–70mm f/2L for use with my R5 and R6 and while it is a phenomenal lens, for me it was the wrong move.

Biggest con (after $$$) was size/weight. Definitely not a lens I wanted to walk around with on a daily basis and subject to damage or theft by frequently being carried around or left in a vehicle.

#2- Didn’t realize how much I would miss the 24-28mm range. A few mm makes a BIG difference on the wide end.

#3- Buyer’s remorse. After having it and realizing what I would/wouldn’t do with it Just no way for me to justify the cost. For those times I really needed the fast aperture, I have the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L (hard pressed to notice difference between f/2 and f/2.8 at 28mm),35mm f/1.8 prime, 50mm f/1.4 prime, and 70-200mm f/2.8L. So really a lot of overlap with my current lenses combined with the other negatives made it a short lived experiment. Thankfully I only lost $100 on the deal after selling it off.

In the end, I bought the RF 24-240mm and it is outstanding as a walk around lens. The RF 24-105mm f/4L is a great lens, and I will probably get another at some point, or maybe the 24-70mm f/2.8L but for now I am good without either and don’t miss the 28-70mm at all. Probably better fit to studio use or where the (to me) nearly insignificant IQ difference actually matters.

 

[SO8]

Sold my RF 24-105mm f/4L for the RF 28–70mm f/2L for use with my R5 and R6 and while it is a phenomenal lens, for me it was the wrong move.

Biggest con (after $$$) was size/weight. Definitely not a lens I wanted to walk around with on a daily basis and subject to damage or theft by frequently being carried around or left in a vehicle.

#2- Didn’t realize how much I would miss the 24-28mm range. A few mm makes a BIG difference on the wide end.

#3- Buyer’s remorse. After having it and realizing what I would/wouldn’t do with it Just no way for me to justify the cost. For those times I really needed the fast aperture, I have the RF 15-35mm f/2.8L (hard pressed to notice difference between f/2 and f/2.8 at 28mm),35mm f/1.8 prime, 50mm f/1.4 prime, and 70-200mm f/2.8L. So really a lot of overlap with my current lenses combined with the other negatives made it a short lived experiment. Thankfully I only lost $100 on the deal after selling it off.

In the end, I bought the RF 24-240mm and it is outstanding as a walk around lens. The RF 24-105mm f/4L is a great lens, and I will probably get another at some point, or maybe the 24-70mm f/2.8L but for now I am good without either and don’t miss the 28-70mm at all. Probably better fit to studio use or where the (to me) nearly insignificant IQ difference actually matters.

Interesting to read given I have borrowed an ex rental Rf 28-70 f2 for 2 days to see if I like it. Yesterday I did ... and IQ seemed better than my Rf 24-70 f2.8 ... but today I am looking at the cost and weight versus the small differences in image quality ... Hmmm

 

[Philwright5454]

I managed to get an RF 28-70 f2 back in June all I can really say is WOW, yes it is big, yes it’s heavyish but it meant I could have best of both sold on a 24mk2 L as was rarely used and sold a 35mk2 L and then the trusty 24-70 f2.8 mk2. Worth it hell yeah! It’s crazy sharp on the R5 and the IBIS performs great. I did buy a cheeki walk round zoom a Tokina 24-70 f2.8 just for travel light days for the bargin price of £460 New!

 

[SO8]

Well, RF 28-70 f2 now ordered and arrives Wednesday (grey import from a firm I have used twice before and £200 cheaper than normal Canon sources) ... that goes with an RF 24-70 f2.8 and an RF 24-105 f4 !

The RF 24-105 is going to have to be sold as it is silly to have 2 lenses covering the same zoom range. My wife wants me to sell the RF 24-70 f2.8 but I will simply not part with it ! The 28-70 is no way a carry round lens so the 24-70 will remain for that.

Now, I have an RF 50 f1.2 ... do I add an RF 85 f1.2 too ... I don't need it but didn't need the 28-70 either ! I tried one and it is a lot more manageable than the 28-70 but obv only 85 ... having just retired I am lucky I can do this but the 'fun' will have to stop there as there will be no more money. Oops !

I do not have a 15-35 nor a flash but my photography has not historically needed these since we stopped doing weddings.

 

[Copterdoc]

Well, RF 28-70 f2 now ordered and arrives Wednesday (grey import from a firm I have used twice before and £200 cheaper than normal Canon sources) ... that goes with an RF 24-70 f2.8 and an RF 24-105 f4 !

The RF 24-105 is going to have to be sold as it is silly to have 2 lenses covering the same zoom range. My wife wants me to sell the RF 24-70 f2.8 but I will simply not part with it ! The 28-70 is no way a carry round lens so the 24-70 will remain for that.

Now, I have an RF 50 f1.2 ... do I add an RF 85 f1.2 too ... I don't need it but didn't need the 28-70 either ! I tried one and it is a lot more manageable than the 28-70 but obv only 85 ... having just retired I am lucky I can do this but the 'fun' will have to stop there as there will be no more money. Oops !

I do not have a 15-35 nor a flash but my photography has not historically needed these since we stopped doing weddings.

I am at the same point in time. I may soon be living out of my camera bag

 

[SO8]

RF 28-70 f2 and RF 24-70 f2.8 now in bag ... and I have to say the 28-70 is def better for IQ ... but then I would be disappointed if it wasn't given it's size, weight and extra cost. It is not hugely better but it is definitely very noticeable (and the 24-70 is very good !)

I now have to decide if the 24-105L goes or the 24-70 f2.8. My gut feeling is the 24-105 but there is precious little between the 2 lenses in IQ and I was surprised how little difference there is in the pics I took between f2.8 and f4 ... decisions decisions ... I'll take a bit of time and not rush into selling, unlike my buying habits which are awful.