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

[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.