I did a portrait test with these two lenses on my R5 and noticed that the EF 2.8v3 version at F4 was sharper than the RF f4 version at around 70/100mm but at 135/200mm the RF 70-200 (F4) version was sharper. I also tested both lenses at F4 on a land/cityscape shot and the RF version was sharper at all focal lengths so realistically the RF 70-200 f/4 is just better over all and you don't need an adapter. You guys were using two different camera bodies so its really hard for people to know the differences in terms of IQ and sharpness.
@igorshaposnik7618
4 ай бұрын
Спасибо
@rayven1089
3 жыл бұрын
Thanks guys ... very useful info. Appreciate that you explained why you were comparing f2.8 and f4.... Budget is a big deal for me and it was good to compare the "cheaper" lens and see how well it stacks up against the older EF. Would like to see these exact 2 go head to head in lower light though. Thanks once again for all the effort at helping us make informed decisions
@brendallsterling4117
6 ай бұрын
Thank you. I have both lenses. I just purchased rf 4 70-200. I was trying to decide if I made the wrong choice. I think not. It's a beautiful lense. I'm trying to decide what to do with my ef mount f2.8
@SpiritLifeMinistriesInt
Жыл бұрын
Them colors on the 5d mark iv are incredible.
@smakunzva
3 жыл бұрын
Great video guys would have loved an indoor comparison as well
@MannyScoot
Жыл бұрын
I used the RF for 6 months on events out in the desert and up in the mountains and the interior of the lens is now covered in dust and haze...... any zoom that sucks in takes in a lot of dust and moisture ..... buy zooms that zoom internally !!!!!!
@coresnap
Жыл бұрын
Awesome vid. These are the comparisons we need. 1 question though… does the EF 2.8 deliver the same or more bokeh on the R body?
@RudiPrihandoko
Жыл бұрын
I did changed EF f2.8 to RF f4 for this focal length. It's amazing.
@mimonbarakagamingvevohd1317
2 жыл бұрын
for me who uses the lens outdoors its internal zoom all the way. especially the price as i want to use it >10 years. so i got me the EF and if i buy a mirrorless in the future i can use the adapter. easy
@vimalneha
5 ай бұрын
You both made a true comparison, thanks!
@AnthonyTadle
2 жыл бұрын
Exactly what I wanted to hear… I have an R6 and it makes more sense.. ty guys
@ikoknyphausen198
Жыл бұрын
3 drawbacks of the RF version: (1) you cannot extend the focal length (2) zooming will protrude the front element(s) and act as a vacuum sucking dust (3) the zoom throw is much longer on the RF version, which makes sports photography and videography more tiring
@coresnap
Жыл бұрын
Can’t you modify that throw in-menu though? Thought you could change the focus ring speed. Imma have to look at that now. Lol
@christopherw9323
3 жыл бұрын
Why, when your are comparing two lenses side by side are not only are the focal lengths different? But also two totally different pictures in different locations. A comparison side by side is just that, identical and same exact as can possibly be captured
@davidboreham
3 жыл бұрын
Probably related to focus breathing which is different between the lenses.
@TheBigBlueMarble
22 күн бұрын
And why didn't they compare the EF lens using the adapter on the R5 body?
@zambination11
2 жыл бұрын
Focus breathing in the RF lens, practically translates that when shooting in closer distances you have an equivalent of a lets say ~170mm lens and not 200mm, depending on the distance. That alone is a no no for me. Also the zoom ring in EF lens is smooth and fast while on the RF is slower. And weather sealing in this barrel extended RF lens is discussable. What a shame keeps discontinuing these excellent EF lenses.
@Hubieee
Жыл бұрын
I wonder why that might be. If I could seel a lens for 1400 or 2800 just because its newer (and arguably a tack sharper probably) and thus sexier to many ;)
@unknownKnownunknowns
2 жыл бұрын
Really helpful thank you. How does the Auto focus perform on each on a canon Mirrorless body such as the R6 or R5? If I can get a higher percentage of in focus shots with the F4, I'd also sell my EF 70-200 2.8 mk ii ! What do you think?
@kathydenton6395
2 жыл бұрын
Could you compare 70-200 RF4 with 70-200 EF4IS
@petrvokurek2286
Жыл бұрын
Guys, thanks a lot for this video! It helped me decide if to go for the rf f4 of the ef 2,8. All I needed to see were the bokeh samples side by side. F2,8 is f2,8...If only the RF 2,8 was not sooo expensive...:)
@mii2oo150
10 ай бұрын
I'm having the same issue. Unfortunately I'm torn about the weight and size factor too. Maybe I just need to hit the gym and then it would be a no-brainer for me as well 💪😂
@jaytcapinpin
2 жыл бұрын
EF L lens are legends for a reason.
@Hubieee
Жыл бұрын
Comparing weight of an f/4 vs an f/2.8 lets me question your starting argument concerning the price ^^. Else, I doubt that the AF is noticeably slower on that rather odern EF L lens with the adapter. Esepcially under lower light conditions where 2.8 lets 100% more light in.
@KottoKTG
2 жыл бұрын
Why don’t you raise the 2.8 up to f4 when shooting? This isn’t a great comparison. Y’all keep talking about the weight lol
@CostaVaggas
Жыл бұрын
I thought the same. However, I think this comparison is more for those who cannot afford the RF 70-200 F/2.8.
@sengtha9396
2 жыл бұрын
this is the video comparison that I've been looking for...F4 it is! selling my EF 2.8.
@unknownKnownunknowns
2 жыл бұрын
did you switch, and what do you think of the f/4 vs EF 2.8? thanks!
@Lamidnightsss
9 ай бұрын
Heck yeah. Gypsy King 👑 out here doing camera reviews 🔥
@unknownKnownunknowns
2 жыл бұрын
How would it feel if you removed the tripod foot from the EF ?
@motiurrahman8361
2 жыл бұрын
What about low light or night photography?
@fuzzytalz
3 жыл бұрын
Good review!
@challenger2724
3 жыл бұрын
this is what I was looking for
@3scorestudios
4 ай бұрын
Where did you get the shirt that says EOS R5?
@OrmsTV
4 ай бұрын
They were supplied by Canon 😁
@tomscott4438
3 жыл бұрын
I'm confused how you can call this a comparison. Sure one is for the DSLR system and the other mirrorless, but one is f/2.8 and the other f/4. If you compared the RF and EF 70-200 f/2.8 the weight difference would be negligible. You also seemed fixated on the weight difference, but unless you are a backpacking landscaping photographer, that is not a huge concern. (FYI, I own the R6 with the 24-105 f/4 "kit lens" and I am considering the 70-200 f/4 addition)
@bigjoshy3531
Жыл бұрын
Its a budget comparison. The ef 2.8 and the rf 4 can be found around the same price. The rf 2.8 is obviously a better kens than the f4 but its also $1000+ more expensive
@SergeyKasimov
Жыл бұрын
Love it that the skinny guy got the heavy camera and the fat dude got the light one
@KottoKTG
2 жыл бұрын
You guys tryna sell me on the f4 lol
@roldancatalonia93
Жыл бұрын
more focal length = more bokeh
@andrewphoto4750
3 жыл бұрын
Bruh I weigh 220 lbs I’m not worried about a 3lb camera 🤦🏿.
@matthewmonkey9934
3 жыл бұрын
Why does every revue care so much about weight. For 2 grand I want a good quality product rather than a light product
@andrewphoto4750
3 жыл бұрын
I swear that’s what I’m saying… the person has to be a piece of paper to worry about lifting something under 5lb
@SamBugas
3 жыл бұрын
Plays a huge role in a lot of peoples photography. Nearly anything shot outside is better served with a smaller lens/gear set
@SergeyKasimov
Жыл бұрын
depends what kind of photography you do as really heavy and doing wedding or safrai that weight does add up in hiking too over time
@unknownKnownunknowns
Жыл бұрын
It matters when 1) when handholding video and 2) constantly traveling w multiple lenses and bodies on you back all day at spprts tournaments
@jamese4729
11 ай бұрын
For hiking I vastly prefer a lighter lens. This and many other comparisons show that if you don’t need f2.8, you can save money, save a ton of weight, and not lose any IQ. seems like a win all around.
@Mr09260
3 жыл бұрын
Can the Canon RF 70-200 both models take a Teleconvertor like my Nikon Z 70-200 f2.8 S lens?
Пікірлер: 49