Canon officially launches the RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM

[Halfmoon]

If I was shooting moxed EF and RF, yes I agree that juggling / managing the adapter could be an additional burden. However, I would use one camera body for the EF lenses with a permanent adapter fitted and the other camera body I would use strictly for RF lenses.

I'm pretty sure the R5 and R6 had the same AF system at launch, The R6ii has a slightly better AF system (more detection types), it's slightly faster and tracks a bit better. I've not compared the R5ii and the R6ii, but it's reasonable to assume that the R5ii is a bit better than the R6ii now. It's now 2 incremental generations better than the original R5. The question on many minds is it double the price better?

It was an oversight on my end and will be more careful... and likely to pack 2 adapters in my bag in the future regardless of the assignment... our roles were not assigned so glad it worked out well ultimately...

R6 III is coming I think and that should be better... but not sure if it will be a BSI sensor... I got my R6II with a big discount....

As I use both R6 & R6II, I find that the R6II af is much more better in tracking and faster to lock AF.... used it for tracking walking subject and it worked great!! In a scene where the subject (human) is far away, it can lock onto the eyes/face, while the R6 may not be able to identify it as a head/face and lock onto the face as wanted.... It is also easier to switch between subject eye focus on the R6II too when there are multiple subjects....

There was a steep learning curve when I moved to R series, but it was worth it....

 

[Canon Rumors]

The 17-40/4 is notoriously weak in the corners at 17mm. But there were many people who loved it, because it was robust, produced great colours and stopped down or used at 20mm the resolution was good.
The 16-35/4 IS was the Gamechanger.

I cut my teeth on the 17-40 when I saved all my pennies for eons and got the EOS R5. I made some great images with it. I actually have one on my wall.

This was back when I could actually wake up in the morning in time for the good light.

 

[m4ndr4ke]

RF è¼ä¾¿æå®2.8ååæ¨æºè®ç¦é¡ ï½ Canon RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM 實測

Canon æ¨åº RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STMé¡èº«åªæ495gèä¸æé¡èº«é²éå ä¸æå®2.8 ååéåEOS R8 å¯ä»¥èªªé常é©åSpiral ig : spiral.ioMeme ig : ttt.memeWendy ig : wendycola1æå½±Channel æ ç«è£½ä½ç¤¾SP ï¼https...

www.youtube.com

I could understand most of the content using auto-translation

 

[ashmadux]

I wish they were so open about a 50mm 1.4, for chrissakes.

I want a modern version so bad, I'm willing to get a s52 with that nice 50mm 1.8 to compensate. Canon is giving me no choices there.

Anywho this looks good so far, we all want to see the final test charts and real-world samples. Minimum focus distance looks a bit long tho.

 

[Sporgon]

I cut my teeth on the 17-40 when I saved all my pennies for eons and got the EOS R5. I made some great images with it. I actually have one on my wall.

This was back when I could actually wake up in the morning in time for the good light.

You’ve clearly had an R5 on your mind for a very long time ! ;-)

 

[TwoWheeler]

Why is the 85 disappointing? I heard the optics is great but the AF is a little slow/noisy.

It’s not terrible, but as you have heard, the AF is slow, noisy and “hunts” a bit too much for my liking. Maybe it’s just my copy, but the IQ seems a bit mushy, too. (Or, it could be the operator….) It doesn’t feel like I got as much of a bargain as I did with the 100-400.

I just spent a weekend with a rented copy of the 100 macro - depending on what the shots look like, I may trade my 85.

 

[Del Paso]

While you are right about that, 1-1,5cm sometime makes all the difference, at least to me. The EF 16-35mm F4 L IS is 11.3 cm and the control ring adapter is 2,4cm. The RF 14-35mm F4 L is 10 cm. There is a difference of 3.7 cm (with adapter) or 1.3 cm (without adapter).

I used the Mindshiftgear Backlight backpack for quite a while and without the adapter the EF 16-35mm would fit in nicely. With the adapter on top, e.g. when I switched to the RF24-104mm or RF35mm f1.8 (my first two native RF lenses) I would leave the adapter on and I would have an uncomfortable dent in my backpack.

Using the Mindshiftgear Rotation 18 L is was even worse. The EF 16-35mm wouldn't fit with the adapter attached. Even without it, it was a close call... So, I had to take the adapter off every time I switched lenses although at that time I mostly used the RF 24-105mm.

So, for me, 1,5cm or 2.4 cm make a huge difference, especially when a lens is nearing or crossing the 10cm barrier. ! It´s the same on my PD everyday backpack.

The RF 28-70mm F2.8 compared to the RF 24-105mm F4 will save me an incredible 1.5 cm (irony) and about 200 gr. I will gladly take it. (Of course, I loose 35mm but I carry the 70-200mm F4 for that)

I chose the Rotation 34L, bigger lens/camera case. Plus, the possibility to carry not only long lenses (EF 100-400) in a top container, but also jackets, hydration etc...
This spring, mine held:
Leica M +18, 24, 28, 35, 90
5 DIV + 24 TSE, Leica R 60 macro, EF 100-400 and 1,4X extender
10X25 binos, 4 batteries, rain jacket, Camelbak 2 lit. hydration, cellphone etc...
Hiking poles
And it doesn't weigh much more (empty ), yet being much more practical than the smaller Rotation bags.

 

[neuroanatomist]

You’ve clearly had an R5 on your mind for a very long time ! ;-)

I was thinking Craig has a DeLorean retrofitted with a flux capacitor.

 

[Del Paso]

Why is the 85 disappointing? I heard the optics is great but the AF is a little slow/noisy.

I can only recommend the 85 f/2. Extremely sharp, even compared to Leica M lenses. Yes, the AF isn't that fast, but I don't care, it's fast enough for my photography. So, AF is no Ferrari, but cannot be described as being sluggish.
Since it is no L lens, I too was skeptical, sample variations could be a greater risk than with an L. Though I've had 2 bad L lenses too...
If you want one, test it, you'll most probably keep it!

 

[Sporgon]

I was thinking Craig has a DeLorean retrofitted with a flux capacitor.

@Canon Rumors Guy will no doubt be pleased to learn that he won’t be requiring the DeLorean to visit the Port Ellen distillery on Islay as its just been opened again after forty years of mothballing (and a huge refurbishment).

 

[stillviking]

"RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS II" coming soon, that will be more compact and lighter than the current version, and MFT chart that should be better than this 28-70mm F2.8 IS..... If not, this will not make sense......"

I was about to buy RF 24-70 in 2025 but I have no rush at all.

What are the real chances of a new RF 24-70 II in 2025??

 

[neuroanatomist]

What are the real chances of a new RF 24-70 II in 2025??

I’d say slim to none. 1) there are lots of other lenses they could prioritize and 2) what shortcomings of the current one would they address?

 

[Del Paso]

@Canon Rumors Guy will no doubt be pleased to learn that he won’t be requiring the DeLorean to visit the Port Ellen distillery on Islay as its just been opened again after forty years of mothballing (and a huge refurbishment).

Thank you for the wonderful news!

 

[koenkooi]

I’d say slim to none. 1) there are lots of other lenses they could prioritize and 2) what shortcomings of the current one would they address?

It doesn’t have enough distortion on the wide end for a proper modern lens

 

[Sporgon]

Thank you for the wonderful news!

You could always get a bottle from the original distillery. Curb your GAS for five years or so and this could be yours !!

https://www.thewhiskyexchange.com/p/80304/port-ellen-1978-44-year-old-gemini-set-original-cask-remnant-cask?g_acctid=734-378-4471&g_adgroupid=&g_adid=&g_adtype=none&g_campaign=UK+-+PMax+-+Scotch+Whisk

 

[stillviking]

I’d say slim to none. 1) there are lots of other lenses they could prioritize and 2) what shortcomings of the current one would they address?

I just read of a previous post "RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS II" coming soon, that will be more compact and lighter than the current version, and MFT chart that should be better than this 28-70mm F2.8 IS..... If not, this will not make sense......"

I also was not aware of it be a possibility, but there's always space for improvement.

 

[Walrus]

The Sigma 40mm f/1.4 Art still haunts me to this day. I had it at home for as little as 590€, from Amazon Warehouse, in mint condition. I can safely say that is the sharpest lens I ever tested in my life (and yes, I've tested the RF 50mm f/1.2)

That's why I still (still...well, I have it since less then 1 year!) hang on to it with the 40 and 105 on two bodies I can cover 95% of any wedding, yes the day after your arms and shoulders sores a little :-D (but with a Blackrapid double harness I recently solved most of the day-after-pain) but the pain it's worth!
The 40 is also beautiful for close up portraits while still showing a bit of the environment, without totally obliterating it and closing down too much like with the 105; I do plenty of people portraits, both indoor and outdoor, and the 40 is a very natural focal length for the way I shoot, being a perfect middle ground between a wider 35 and a tighter 50 (I had both focals and always going back and forth between them; with the 40mm I solved the "issue", selling the other two).

 

[m4ndr4ke]

the 40 is a very natural focal length for the way I shoot, being a perfect middle ground between a wider 35 and a tighter 50 (I had both focals and always going back and forth between them; with the 40mm I solved the "issue", selling the other two).

I love 40mm. I had the Sigmas 28, 35 and 50mm, plus the EF 40mm pancake. I never got used to the Sigma 35mm on full-frame (I had bought it several years before, back when I had APS-C cameras), and sold it after purchasing the 28mm.
I tried the Sigma 40mm and it blew my mind but, at 1.2Kg, and being such a big lens, I knew I wouldn't grab it many times, it would have been more of a gift to myself than true usefulness, specially considering that I was already using the R6, so I knew that every EF lenses I had would have to go away someday. So I ended-up returning it, but made myself the promise that, if I ever found it at a lower price, I would buy and keep it So far...that didn't happen.

In the meantime I bought the RF 35mm f/1.8, which is very different from the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art (the effective focal length is different, the Sigma is a lot wider from at least medium focusing distances to infinity, if not on the entire focus range), and I found this RF lens a lot easier to use. It seems one of the two is not a true 35mm (I think it's the Canon), so I guess that has been helping.

 

[Berowne]

I love 40mm. I had the Sigmas 28, 35 and 50mm, plus the EF 40mm pancake. I never got used to the Sigma 35mm on full-frame (I had bought it several years before, back when I had APS-C cameras), and sold it after purchasing the 28mm.
I tried the Sigma 40mm and it blew my mind but, at 1.2Kg, and being such a big lens, I knew I wouldn't grab it many times, it would have been more of a gift to myself than true usefulness, specially considering that I was already using the R6, so I knew that every EF lenses I had would have to go away someday. So I ended-up returning it, but made myself the promise that, if I ever found it at a lower price, I would buy and keep it So far...that didn't happen.

In the meantime I got the RF 35mm f/1.8, which is very different from the Sigma 35mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art (the effective focal length is different, the Sigma is a lot wider from at least medium focus distances to infinity, if not on the entire focus range), and I found this RF lens a lot easier to use. It seems one of the two is not a true 35mm (I think it's the Canon), so I guess that has been helping.

40mm is a very special focal lenght. This film 1917 was shot primarily with the 40 mm Arri Lens . Watch this for example: ARRI Interview: The immersive camera movement of “1917”

 

[Del Paso]

You could always get a bottle from the original distillery. Curb your GAS for five years or so and this could be yours !!

https://www.thewhiskyexchange.com/p/80304/port-ellen-1978-44-year-old-gemini-set-original-cask-remnant-cask?g_acctid=734-378-4471&g_adgroupid=&g_adid=&g_adtype=none&g_campaign=UK+-+PMax+-+Scotch+Whisk

If I buy 50 bottles, do I get a 3% discount?