One of the things I appreciate most about this review is the collection of images featured to illustrate how diverse this lens actually is. While lighting, posing, and composition (and editing) no doubt make the images, this lens definitely produces beautiful results at both ends of its focal spectrum. It IS somewhat cost prohibitive, but it’s almost worth saving and trading up for. Great video!
TY for this one. After your review I sold my 24-70 f2.8 and bought this one. My go to lens for weddings and events. I don’t know if it’s micro contrast but it has that Classic prime character. My 35, 50, and 85 primes stay home now. Put the 135 f2 on the other body and call it a day. TY. Never looked back.
The 28-70 is what in the day was the 24-70. A monster tool for serious shooters. I don't own it yet, but tried and I absolutely agree with all you said. The new RF lenses are really made for a new level of sensors. Just need to be patient and don't abandon ship to Sony. :)
I tried the 50 1.2 rf and with that price you're better off saving up a bit more to get a bunch of primes in 1 lens with this lens. Reminds me of the sigma 18-35 and 50-100 1.8.
My go-to lens is the Nikon 24-120 f. 4. It does a good job and I often use the full range. I usually don't need a fast lens, so f.4 is OK for me. It is heavy, but it's not a problem. I got used to it.
I currently own a Sony tamron 28-75 and I’m not missing the extra 4mm of width. Because at 24mm you still end up wanting more width when going wide. So when I switch back to canon this will probably be the first rf lens I’ll buy before I get the 15-35. My r6 arrives tomorrow and until then I’ll use my EF24-70
This lens is a monster. Ive been experimenting with product photography with it at 70mm and damn. Still sharp. When it comes to stabilization, i am frustrated with canon not including it in rf lenses. However, i believe they will be shifting towards in body stabilization in the future. So i think we’ll be okay.
@@DanielFazzari yeah... i mean, sigma made a great 35 1.2 for sony, i suppose canon will do it too... Even though the most i ever use in aperture is f2... bokeh addicts clearly look more at the blurr in the background than their subjects :/
I have played a bit with the 28-70mm f/2 and I completely agree...that lens is UNFAIR!!! Once I do move on to Canon mirrorless, it will be the first (if not only) lens I will buy.
By the time I can come up with the $$ for this lens and an RF body, the MK II with IS will be out lol. I was hoping to hate on this RF lens and the new mirrorless body, but you sold it so well that I want one now 😢
this video can’t push the market of that lens. supersoft at f2. not cheap. not usable a f2 aperture in that ‘normal range’ (28/70). even not in star photography (too soff at f2). not for lowlight condifion (f2 dof separation is bad, a sort of bad compromise from the beautiful flatten widelens and the hard separation of medium long tele). the focal lenght? one of the best and most used wide is the 24mm. this zoom simply is not enough. I can’t shoot with a medium range zoom without a 24!!! come on!!! everyone could demonstrate this with lihjtroom: thake your 24/70 shoots. the most used focal lenght is at 24mm. this lens is not a game changer
You did a great job at convincing us to purchase this lens. Your shots were great and your enthusiasm sold me. I’d love to shoot with you someday, I just bought two Profoto B10’s, an A1x and a bunch of modifiers. Do you have any events coming up or classes?
Had this lens a few months now on my R and R5....Pye is right...the lens is absolute perfection and super sharp wide open. Glorious image quality and no stop start changing out lenses and carrying a bag as well as your cameras just in case. Although its heavy, its super convenient and you just get used to it, I also have a battery grip with two batteries and a flash trigger on mine for a lot of the time so my advice is get yourself a decent strap like a Holdfast MoneyMaker if you shoot two bodies or Solo strap and you're good to go. 👍
As per usual an informative, entertaining, and overall great video review guys. Thanks for sharing and Happy Father's Day to Pye and the rest of the SLR Lounge community. PS I'd love to see you review some of the older lenses such and how they stack up to their current counterparts.
there are good reasons (at least for me) not to go for the 28-70 - instead purchased after careful test and evaluation the RF 24-70 2.8 . Why? 4mm plus on ww, the minimal focus distance on the 24-70 is closer, the 28-70 has no IS, weight and price. And there is hardly anything i can not accomplish comfortably and receive with and by the 24-70 2.8. By the amount of reviews of the 28-70 i am under the impression, that canon has a first class marketing department.
I have wanted this lens because of this video since before I got my EOS R…A YEAR AGO NEXT MONTH. The example pictures in this video have always wowed me. I've gone on to get the RF 70-200 2.8, and the color was just so insanely improved over the latest EF that it really made me start to question my 24-105 as well. I was planning on getting an 85 1.2 DS first, but I just keep going back to the fact that I want the same detail, color, and even wide aperture capabilities of my new RF 70-200 2.8 on the wider end too. And since I plan to get an R5s, I want to be ready with lenses that can feed it the detail necessary to satisfy 90MP on a FF camera. Been out of stock for months. Finally Canon put some up on their website at Black Friday. Zero discount, but at least they have them. I managed to grab one CANON REFURBISHED saving almost $400 after tax compared to what new would cost me on B&H without tax. To say I'm excited for its delivery in a week or two is an understatement!
Yes 🙌🏼 I got this lens and it has a very distinct look and character which makes all its compromises worth compromising 😅 next lens might be the RF 85mm1.2 or 70-200 2.8
Thanks. Now that the RF 24-70mm IS L 2.8 is available, what would you recommend between the two excluding prices? I own the RF 15-35mm IS L 2.8 and ordered the RF 70-200mm IS L 2.8. Thanks, Stefano
I am watching this after I bought his lens and had a few shoots. I would have bought it even quicker if I had seen your video. Everything you say is true. I don't care about the IS b/c for video I'll probably use a gimbal anyway, but at wide angle and the digital stablization you can easily handhold usable sequences of video not to mention you can use warp stabilizer in post.
7:03 canon says that the ibis on the R5/R6 gives this lense 8 stops of image stabilisation. 1 stop more then with the RF 15-35 WITH IS (7 stops) or the RF 24-70 IS e.g. so the 28-70 IS just a incredible :D if u dont use an R or RP...
As a wedding photographer and videographer, I'm looking for an all-round lens and I have a feeling that it could be RF 28-70, but I need to test it first because the R5 has an ibis and it could be a good option for video as well. Do you have any video recording experience with this lens and if what are your thoughts?
To give an idea on how heavy and pricey the RF 28-70 is, Tamron FE 17-28 + 28-75 combined weights less than 1kg and still costs $1300 less than this 28-70 alone.
man so much whining in this video lol, oh i wish it has IS, well canon built the IS in the body didnt they? Oh I wish it could go to 20mm, why didnt you wish it could go from 14-85? lol in order to make it f2 Canon has to compensate something for it and thats the 4mm on the wide end. You think they wouldnt make a lens that amazing if they really could? They can't the technology only allow them to push so far and it's in your hand. Oh its so heavy, dude man, im a smaller size person than you are and I lug around super telephoto all day for an event, a 3lb lens like that is literally paper weight lol. You want 9 blade aperture, you want f2, you want it to be wider, you even want IS but you expect the lens to be what? 1 pound? lol
7:46 My counter argument. When I have my camera one lens and a satchel with three separate lenses so technically you’re carrying more weight with prime lenses on your shoulder as well as your camera with the current lens you’re using. Checkmate. 😉
3 grand? What could it possibly cost Canon to make this lens from a little amount of plastic and a tiny amount of glass? 300 or thereabouts maybe. Why does Canon insist they deserve to make toooooooooo much profit?
Wages of the people who "Handmake" it, (just some word thrown 'round to increase a products price) and more notably, the R&D costs, not only for this lens, but also for the rest of the RF lineup. The super duper high end stuff in tech always has higher margins to help pay for development of other stuff
@Phil Jones65 Sadly, photography's getting to be all about the stats these days. Ridiculous. Classic example of 'just because you can doesn't mean you should.' Seriously, who would enjoy shooting with this all day?
Can't argue with IQ results, but it is clear that this lens was never intended for optimization with existing R bodies. Consumer: "Why no image stabilization with the R?" Canon: "It's not necessary because our lenses have optical stabilization." Releases a $3k general purpose pro lens for the R mount without image stabilization. Check the Canon lens map. They probably have a 14-28 f2 in the works. For another 2.5-3lbs and $2.5-3k.
The most versatile lens I can't do without is my Nikon 24-120 mm f.4. 70mm is often too short. And, the 24-120 is razor sharp with great clarity as well.
You nailed it. The 28-70mm f2 is the lens that had me considering switching to Eos R. With that lens alone I could do almost anything. But there´s the price and the size and the weight...you just can´t have it all, I guess..:)
Genti Zarari thanks for the reply， but I realised I don’t use the widest aperture all the time, especially shooting event, I tend to use 4-5.6 to play save
@@devilalwayscry thanks, I guess i will wait for the better body to come out and switch my system. meanwhile I don't have much faith in those plastic like bodies. Lens size wise... i understood, but seeing so many people using those Otus lens for better quality, its kind tempting, Lol
Such a great lens for its price. Occasionally I get the desire to upgrade to the canon version but then I have a moment of clarity and realise that for the extra money I won’t be getting anything besides for a little more sharpness which in the real world doesn’t mean anything to my style of shooting.
im definitely thinking on getting this lens for real at f2 i normally shoot that i wanted to get me a 24 .14 and a 85 1.2 but with this i see no need for the rest, i already got the 50 1.2 i shoot mostly primes and the 70-200 is also my go to lens for the big shots.
I guess this lens will somehow force those who love shooting wide to think twice because 24-28 is very much respectable. 20-70 would be just absolutely mind blowing!
6:50 lol, because of the way in-lens stabilization works, you have to make image quality compromises, that's why it's not in this lens probably. You are meant to pair it with a camera body that already has built-in image stabilization, like the EOS R5.
Everyone is talking about these RF glasses and as a Nikon shooter I’m getting jealous 🤨 If Canon can come up with a great mirrorless at an affordable price, I might consider myself switching
My choice of lens should be a wide angle and a mini tele...I go for Canon 24-105mm, it should be able to cover a wide angle view and a close up shot, great for wedding photography and outdoor activities.
kinda dumb how much you’re bagging the 24-70 2.8. it’s an excellent lens with great quality. And you’re like “I don’t like 24-70 as a focal length” 😂😂 the most common focal length in the world
I could never ever work without a 70-200 Almost all my portraits are done with that lens. You can’t beat compression at 200mm. I hate the 24-70 range. Hate!!!! I use it all the time for family portraits in tight spots and as a walk around lens during dancing but I hate using it.
A minimum focal length of 28mm for a trinity-wannabe does not cut it. The weight and price are both highly excessive. Two light f/1.4 primes of 24mm and 35mm would be much better alternatives for truly low light situations and would produce equally sharp results. Noted also is the poor corner sharpness of this lens at wider apertures. A light 24-70mm f/2.8, provides more than enough light gathering to replicate all of the photos that were shown in this video. Your statements about "character" sounded contrived and an unrealistic attempt to justify the need for this lens in this digital age were compactness and lightness are an emphasis. On a positive note, your photos are quite excellent.
@@slrlounge I don't even have an ef 70-200 yet. I got a 40d and a 28-135 which works pretty good. If I was to get some newer gear I'm thinking a future r body and that lens would be the one to wait for.
After reading this article I have finally decided to purchase one myself! It's Beautiful - , can I ask though, Is it normal for the zoom ring on the lens to be rather stiff when turning it with one hand? Kind Regards, Josh
PyeJirsa You never know Canon might just have an 18-28mm F2 in the works!. It would explain the reason this lens started at 28mm, maybe a new trinity lineup is coming!.
I realised you never held a micro four thirds gear before but just for fun, maybe you want to play around with the upcoming Panasonic lens with equivalent 20-50mm constant f/1.7 Would really love to see how you feel about the setup, paired maybe to a Lumix G9. Really... I really want to see that.
24 - 70 f2 would have been fine to me, but it is a terrible high price. I once worked for an american company that thought we could cure a failing turnover, by raising the prices. It didn´t work! I am fully aware that it is very expensive to develop new high end lenses, but I wonder if Canon is trying the same, or if it is so expensive to manufacture these lenses. I switched to Sony 4 month ago.
So i know this video is a bit old and i really hope i can get a reply because its a very serious question. Im debating on the 24-70 or the 28-70 both rf lenses. One is the 2.8 and the other, the 2.0. My question is, for videography and recording what would be best? In my situation i would be exploring abandoned places so it will be more on the darker side of lighting. Im very stuck on which one to get, I have enough for just one lense, so its either the 3k lens or the 2.4k. The f2.8 24-70, Im more leaning twords this one because of the Image Stabilization and the 28-70 f2.0 does NOT have it. And that is a very big deal. But i also love the low light functionality of the 2.0. Also, the 2.0 has a massive thread size and cannot find a decent ND filter as for the 2.8 i can. So please, Thank you for reading this comment. I really hope i get a reply from someone or anyone, Google has not given me really the answers im looking for.
Hi Pye, I hope you would really consider trying out an upcoming lens with equivalent 20-50mm at constant f/1.7 I am of course referring to the Panasonic 10-20mm due to be available soon. I have never seen you touch or mention micro four thirds in all your video before (are you allergic to MFT?) but I think it will be very interesting to hear your thought on it, maybe paired to a Lumix G9. I hope you can make some time to at least try it.
I'm writing this at 3:00 into the video. Very interesting but what's the deal with all the background music whilst you talk. So i missed the last 7:30, sorry.
I have a 200-70 sigma lens and I need to know how I can calibrate this zoom lens, because, I can do the first part for calibration , but, I can't continued calibrate the whole lens, I don't know how I can do it. If you have a video show how I am able to do it I will appreciate it, thank you.
@@NestorZaharopoulos Not a typo. O found out you can change ISO to minimum 50 in the ISO menu. Go to ISO speed change . touch the minimum iso box with 100 in and you can toggle the arrow to take it lower to L(50)!
Are those examples all shot off a tripod or hand held? I'm just worried that as a heavy lens, and no IS, it's going to be limited (for me) on hand held shooting.
With an external light source it will not get blurry. Otherwise the Auto-ISO is configurable, shutter speed being 2x the focal length (for instance 1/160 for 70mm) works well for 30MP but it can be hand-held lower with care or maybe using the electronic shutter to eliminate any vibrations in the body.
Wow man, I love your video. I've received as a gift a Nikon P1000 (huge zoom) camera. I've started to feel passionate about photography. What lens and camera can be a replacement for my P1000 to get more Pro results? I'm planning a trip to Costa Rica to photograph animals in nature. Any advice will be welcome. Thanks!
I would be very surprised if they do lol. Back when Minolta Came up with IBIS, Canon said that lens stabilization was superior to IBIS!! If they put IBIS on their bodies they will have to eat Crow.
@@renaissancephoto haha, it's just a better version of the lens. I'll keep the 24-70 for other uses in the studio for a bit, but I have a feeling that soon (next year or so) most everyone in the studio will be switching over.
Great review!!! Could you touch on the difference between the old school viewfinder and the new viewfinders.. specifically on the EOS R. I recently (February) purchased new canon primes and mrk IV’s considered the EOSR but there’s a lag .. how do you deal/find that with respect to wedding/event photography. New lens tech is cool but that viewfinder seems artificial.. Thanks Pye..
I have been taking pictures for 20 years, after I got the canon mirrorless body, I never used the viewfinder again. This new tech is great for finding the best angel without bending your self!!!
See more sample images and more of my thoughts in the full article review: www.slrlounge.com/canon-28-70/
Send me the lense.. ☺️
I was seriously thinking about buying this lens, after your review I knew I was totally in.
I finally got this DREAM Lens...this thing is amazing.
One of the things I appreciate most about this review is the collection of images featured to illustrate how diverse this lens actually is. While lighting, posing, and composition (and editing) no doubt make the images, this lens definitely produces beautiful results at both ends of its focal spectrum. It IS somewhat cost prohibitive, but it’s almost worth saving and trading up for. Great video!
Thanks for watching, Sean!
TY for this one. After your review I sold my 24-70 f2.8 and bought this one. My go to lens for weddings and events. I don’t know if it’s micro contrast but it has that Classic prime character. My 35, 50, and 85 primes stay home now. Put the 135 f2 on the other body and call it a day. TY. Never looked back.
I have the EOS RP and I've paired it with this lens. It's the best pairing ever to be perfectly honest.
The 28-70 is what in the day was the 24-70. A monster tool for serious shooters. I don't own it yet, but tried and I absolutely agree with all you said. The new RF lenses are really made for a new level of sensors. Just need to be patient and don't abandon ship to Sony. :)
Thanks for watching, and glad you agree. This bodes well for the future of Canon mirrorless!
true.
I tried the 50 1.2 rf and with that price you're better off saving up a bit more to get a bunch of primes in 1 lens with this lens. Reminds me of the sigma 18-35 and 50-100 1.8.
My go-to lens is the Nikon 24-120 f. 4. It does a good job and I often use the full range. I usually don't need a fast lens, so f.4 is OK for me. It is heavy, but it's not a problem. I got used to it.
I currently own a Sony tamron 28-75 and I’m not missing the extra 4mm of width. Because at 24mm you still end up wanting more width when going wide. So when I switch back to canon this will probably be the first rf lens I’ll buy before I get the 15-35. My r6 arrives tomorrow and until then I’ll use my EF24-70
This lens is a monster. Ive been experimenting with product photography with it at 70mm and damn. Still sharp.
When it comes to stabilization, i am frustrated with canon not including it in rf lenses. However, i believe they will be shifting towards in body stabilization in the future. So i think we’ll be okay.
Amazing photos and a great review! This lens on the Canon R5 with IBIS seems to be a nice combo!
Hard to resist. But the RF 35mm F1.2 prime lens is the holy grail lens combo with the R5.
CoolhandLukeSkywalkr : that lens does not exist.
@@MrDonuts10 That's why he said Holy Grail. However, it's rumored it will be made.
@@DanielFazzari yeah... i mean, sigma made a great 35 1.2 for sony, i suppose canon will do it too...
Even though the most i ever use in aperture is f2... bokeh addicts clearly look more at the blurr in the background than their subjects :/
I have played a bit with the 28-70mm f/2 and I completely agree...that lens is UNFAIR!!! Once I do move on to Canon mirrorless, it will be the first (if not only) lens I will buy.
By the time I can come up with the $$ for this lens and an RF body, the MK II with IS will be out lol. I was hoping to hate on this RF lens and the new mirrorless body, but you sold it so well that I want one now 😢
Your picture at 5:16 is mind blowing !! Big fan of ur skills...it just amazing keep it up !..
Appreciate it Singh!
What is the aim of shooting this at f20 ? Is it to obtain a slow shutter?
@@graham68ktm24 yep.
20-70 would literally be the most epic lens!!! :( We may never see the day though. Even a 28-85 would be great!
I currently only have one lens and that's the Canon ef nifty fifty 1.8 ii. LOVE that lens.
Adifah S. Definitely a great lens!
@@danzbeard Thanks. I enjoy the results.
I just got this lens. It never came off my body the whole time I shot a wedding
Chrono Cross no IBIs in the body nor the lens what was your keeper rate?
I just got one how are you liking it?
Love the lens and never really used any of my other lenses but unfortunately I am going to sell it so I can buy the Canon R5.
@@chronocross85 that's fucked up since this lense will be so much better on r5 ( ibis )
@@chronocross85 Lmfao, just sell your R.
this video can’t push the market of that lens. supersoft at f2. not cheap. not usable a f2 aperture in that ‘normal range’ (28/70). even not in star photography (too soff
at f2). not for lowlight condifion (f2 dof separation is bad, a sort of bad compromise from the beautiful flatten widelens and the hard separation of medium long tele). the focal lenght? one of
the best and most used
wide is the 24mm. this zoom simply is not enough. I can’t shoot with a medium range zoom without a 24!!! come on!!! everyone could demonstrate this with lihjtroom: thake your 24/70 shoots. the most used focal lenght is at 24mm. this lens is not a game changer
You did a great job at convincing us to purchase this lens. Your shots were great and your enthusiasm sold me. I’d love to shoot with you someday, I just bought two Profoto B10’s, an A1x and a bunch of modifiers. Do you have any events coming up or classes?
No events as of yet but follow us on social to be up to date!
Had this lens a few months now on my R and R5....Pye is right...the lens is absolute perfection and super sharp wide open. Glorious image quality and no stop start changing out lenses and carrying a bag as well as your cameras just in case. Although its heavy, its super convenient and you just get used to it, I also have a battery grip with two batteries and a flash trigger on mine for a lot of the time so my advice is get yourself a decent strap like a Holdfast MoneyMaker if you shoot two bodies or Solo strap and you're good to go. 👍
Really want this lens. It looks like a winner.
BTW, thank you for pronouncing bokeh properly :)
Epic farewell of 24-70 😂
As per usual an informative, entertaining, and overall great video review guys. Thanks for sharing and Happy Father's Day to Pye and the rest of the SLR Lounge community. PS I'd love to see you review some of the older lenses such and how they stack up to their current counterparts.
That's a great idea! Thanks for watching!! Glad you enjoyed it :)
there are good reasons (at least for me) not to go for the 28-70 - instead purchased after careful test and evaluation the RF 24-70 2.8 . Why? 4mm plus on ww, the minimal focus distance on the 24-70 is closer, the 28-70 has no IS, weight and price. And there is hardly anything i can not accomplish comfortably and receive with and by the 24-70 2.8. By the amount of reviews of the 28-70 i am under the impression, that canon has a first class marketing department.
I have wanted this lens because of this video since before I got my EOS R…A YEAR AGO NEXT MONTH. The example pictures in this video have always wowed me. I've gone on to get the RF 70-200 2.8, and the color was just so insanely improved over the latest EF that it really made me start to question my 24-105 as well. I was planning on getting an 85 1.2 DS first, but I just keep going back to the fact that I want the same detail, color, and even wide aperture capabilities of my new RF 70-200 2.8 on the wider end too. And since I plan to get an R5s, I want to be ready with lenses that can feed it the detail necessary to satisfy 90MP on a FF camera.
Been out of stock for months. Finally Canon put some up on their website at Black Friday. Zero discount, but at least they have them. I managed to grab one CANON REFURBISHED saving almost $400 after tax compared to what new would cost me on B&H without tax. To say I'm excited for its delivery in a week or two is an understatement!
I'm excited to see your take on the Canon RF 24-70 F2.8L IS!!
Yes 🙌🏼 I got this lens and it has a very distinct look and character which makes all its compromises worth compromising 😅 next lens might be the RF 85mm1.2 or 70-200 2.8
It would have been interesting to see a comparison with the RF 24-70 f2.8 IS.
Thanks. Now that the RF 24-70mm IS L 2.8 is available, what would you recommend between the two excluding prices? I own the RF 15-35mm IS L 2.8 and ordered the RF 70-200mm IS L 2.8. Thanks, Stefano
This vs the RF24-70 ?
Kudos for great photos Pye! Honestly stellar photographs to showcase what this lens does. Great lens but more than anything great photographer!
Your review is what I rate highly. I will wait for IS version with F2, say for a year, till then Nikon is fine.
I am watching this after I bought his lens and had a few shoots. I would have bought it even quicker if I had seen your video. Everything you say is true. I don't care about the IS b/c for video I'll probably use a gimbal anyway, but at wide angle and the digital stablization you can easily handhold usable sequences of video not to mention you can use warp stabilizer in post.
I can't wait until they release the 70-200 and its 10 lbs and 6 inches in diameter
7:03 canon says that the ibis on the R5/R6 gives this lense 8 stops of image stabilisation. 1 stop more then with the RF 15-35 WITH IS (7 stops) or the RF 24-70 IS e.g.
so the 28-70 IS just a incredible :D
if u dont use an R or RP...
As a wedding photographer and videographer, I'm looking for an all-round lens and I have a feeling that it could be RF 28-70, but I need to test it first because the R5 has an ibis and it could be a good option for video as well. Do you have any video recording experience with this lens and if what are your thoughts?
To give an idea on how heavy and pricey the RF 28-70 is, Tamron FE 17-28 + 28-75 combined weights less than 1kg and still costs $1300 less than this 28-70 alone.
man so much whining in this video lol, oh i wish it has IS, well canon built the IS in the body didnt they? Oh I wish it could go to 20mm, why didnt you wish it could go from 14-85? lol in order to make it f2 Canon has to compensate something for it and thats the 4mm on the wide end. You think they wouldnt make a lens that amazing if they really could? They can't the technology only allow them to push so far and it's in your hand. Oh its so heavy, dude man, im a smaller size person than you are and I lug around super telephoto all day for an event, a 3lb lens like that is literally paper weight lol. You want 9 blade aperture, you want f2, you want it to be wider, you even want IS but you expect the lens to be what? 1 pound? lol
7:46 My counter argument. When I have my camera one lens and a satchel with three separate lenses so technically you’re carrying more weight with prime lenses on your shoulder as well as your camera with the current lens you’re using. Checkmate. 😉
for me it's the 24-105 - great for video too
A lot of people have said that is their go-to. A solid choice :)
Finally found a review with awesome photos
As much as you want to sale it for Canon, I thank you for providing pro vs con. Notice that 90% of the images where not at F2.
3 grand? What could it possibly cost Canon to make this lens from a little amount of plastic and a tiny amount of glass? 300 or thereabouts maybe. Why does Canon insist they deserve to make toooooooooo much profit?
Wages of the people who "Handmake" it, (just some word thrown 'round to increase a products price) and more notably, the R&D costs, not only for this lens, but also for the rest of the RF lineup. The super duper high end stuff in tech always has higher margins to help pay for development of other stuff
You Killed this lens , No ibis , over priced , heavy, no wide enough, bulky.
@Phil Jones65 Sadly, photography's getting to be all about the stats these days. Ridiculous. Classic example of 'just because you can doesn't mean you should.' Seriously, who would enjoy shooting with this all day?
I've never liked the 24-70 because of its lack of character.
I've always seen it as a lens that gives you 7/10 images. 8/10 at best.
Agreed, this lens, however, is changing the game.
anDrew R You won’t understand. Cheers.
SLR Lounge | Photography Tutorials True. This is a serious lens.
Can't argue with IQ results, but it is clear that this lens was never intended for optimization with existing R bodies.
Consumer: "Why no image stabilization with the R?"
Canon: "It's not necessary because our lenses have optical stabilization." Releases a $3k general purpose pro lens for the R mount without image stabilization.
Check the Canon lens map. They probably have a 14-28 f2 in the works. For another 2.5-3lbs and $2.5-3k.
The most versatile lens I can't do without is my Nikon 24-120 mm f.4. 70mm is often too short. And, the 24-120 is razor sharp with great clarity as well.
You nailed it. The 28-70mm f2 is the lens that had me considering switching to Eos R. With that lens alone I could do almost anything. But there´s the price and the size and the weight...you just can´t have it all, I guess..:)
True my friend, you can't have it all. Thanks for watching!
Would you go for the new RF 24-70 IS 2.8 instead of this 28-70?
2 stops of light are better than ois. You dont need to lower the shutter speed when you have a wider aperture :)
Genti Zarari thanks for the reply， but I realised I don’t use the widest aperture all the time, especially shooting event, I tend to use 4-5.6 to play save
2.8 IS is more sensible, even make more sense if video is part of your thing. And look at that size..
@@devilalwayscry thanks, I guess i will wait for the better body to come out and switch my system. meanwhile I don't have much faith in those plastic like bodies. Lens size wise... i understood, but seeing so many people using those Otus lens for better quality, its kind tempting, Lol
Great lens, but way out of my price point. I'll stick with my Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 WITH IS.
Such a great lens for its price. Occasionally I get the desire to upgrade to the canon version but then I have a moment of clarity and realise that for the extra money I won’t be getting anything besides for a little more sharpness which in the real world doesn’t mean anything to my style of shooting.
im definitely thinking on getting this lens for real at f2 i normally shoot that i wanted to get me a 24 .14 and a 85 1.2 but with this i see no need for the rest, i already got the 50 1.2 i shoot mostly primes and the 70-200 is also my go to lens for the big shots.
A terrific review! Thank you very much!!
Does the r5 have better AF than the r5c? I heard that it isn't even comparable.
I guess this lens will somehow force those who love shooting wide to think twice because 24-28 is very much respectable. 20-70 would be just absolutely mind blowing!
6:50 lol, because of the way in-lens stabilization works, you have to make image quality compromises, that's why it's not in this lens probably. You are meant to pair it with a camera body that already has built-in image stabilization, like the EOS R5.
Everyone is talking about these RF glasses and as a Nikon shooter I’m getting jealous 🤨
If Canon can come up with a great mirrorless at an affordable price, I might consider myself switching
My choice of lens should be a wide angle and a mini tele...I go for Canon 24-105mm, it should be able to cover a wide angle view and a close up shot, great for wedding photography and outdoor activities.
kinda dumb how much you’re bagging the 24-70 2.8. it’s an excellent lens with great quality. And you’re like “I don’t like 24-70 as a focal length” 😂😂 the most common focal length in the world
Going forward would you still purchase EF glass? I'm thinking of picking up a 16-35 f/2.8 USM III
For what it's worth, I sold all my Ef lenses and standardized exclusively on RF
I was thinking the same. Since I am planning on using my "old technology" Canon DSLR for many many years to come, I think I'll buy it.
If you can afford RF, go RF. I bought an EF 24-70 & 70-200 a while back because I couldn't afford this... But that will soon be changing.
I could never ever work without a 70-200 Almost all my portraits are done with that lens. You can’t beat compression at 200mm. I hate the 24-70 range. Hate!!!! I use it all the time for family portraits in tight spots and as a walk around lens during dancing but I hate using it.
A minimum focal length of 28mm for a trinity-wannabe does not cut it. The weight and price are both highly excessive. Two light f/1.4 primes of 24mm and 35mm would be much better alternatives for truly low light situations and would produce equally sharp results. Noted also is the poor corner sharpness of this lens at wider apertures. A light 24-70mm f/2.8, provides more than enough light gathering to replicate all of the photos that were shown in this video. Your statements about "character" sounded contrived and an unrealistic attempt to justify the need for this lens in this digital age were compactness and lightness are an emphasis. On a positive note, your photos are quite excellent.
The big one to look for is the rf 70-200 that is half the size of the ef..
We can't wait to get our hands on that!
@@slrlounge I don't even have an ef 70-200 yet. I got a 40d and a 28-135 which works pretty good. If I was to get some newer gear I'm thinking a future r body and that lens would be the one to wait for.
After reading this article I have finally decided to purchase one myself! It's Beautiful - , can I ask though, Is it normal for the zoom ring on the lens to be rather stiff when turning it with one hand?
Kind Regards,
Josh
Great video. Thx for making it clear for me to buy the 28-70! Lol
I dream of Canon releasing a cinema camera with RF mount so I can combine it with this lens. Surely it has to be in the works.
4:24 Bad Phil ... LMAO :D
Great lens, but I prefer the 24-105rf.
Also a solid lens choice, especially with that focal range. Thanks for watching!
The extra length is nice, but f/2 tho
PyeJirsa You never know Canon might just have an 18-28mm F2 in the works!. It would explain the reason this lens started at 28mm, maybe a new trinity lineup is coming!.
I realised you never held a micro four thirds gear before but just for fun, maybe you want to play around with the upcoming Panasonic lens with equivalent 20-50mm constant f/1.7
Would really love to see how you feel about the setup, paired maybe to a Lumix G9. Really... I really want to see that.
So it has been 16 months, is this lens still #1 for you?
24 - 70 f2 would have been fine to me, but it is a terrible high price. I once worked for an american company that thought we could cure a failing turnover, by raising the prices.
It didn´t work! I am fully aware that it is very expensive to develop new high end lenses, but I wonder if Canon is trying the same, or if it is so expensive to manufacture these
lenses. I switched to Sony 4 month ago.
So i know this video is a bit old and i really hope i can get a reply because its a very serious question. Im debating on the 24-70 or the 28-70 both rf lenses. One is the 2.8 and the other, the 2.0. My question is, for videography and recording what would be best? In my situation i would be exploring abandoned places so it will be more on the darker side of lighting. Im very stuck on which one to get, I have enough for just one lense, so its either the 3k lens or the 2.4k. The f2.8 24-70, Im more leaning twords this one because of the Image Stabilization and the 28-70 f2.0 does NOT have it. And that is a very big deal. But i also love the low light functionality of the 2.0. Also, the 2.0 has a massive thread size and cannot find a decent ND filter as for the 2.8 i can. So please, Thank you for reading this comment. I really hope i get a reply from someone or anyone, Google has not given me really the answers im looking for.
AMAZING !: It goes from "wide to zoom" Wouw! I'd take it even if its widest aperture was 64 !
I understand all your praise but I have to wonder if you used a 5DSR + 24-70 would the pictures actually be all that different on a computer screen?
Can I have your old lens please?
I have it. It's my Nikkor 24-120 mm f4; Bokrh id over rated. I don't worry about it.
I just got one I can’t wait to use it and break it in
Hi Pye, I hope you would really consider trying out an upcoming lens with equivalent 20-50mm at constant f/1.7
I am of course referring to the Panasonic 10-20mm due to be available soon. I have never seen you touch or mention micro four thirds in all your video before (are you allergic to MFT?) but I think it will be very interesting to hear your thought on it, maybe paired to a Lumix G9. I hope you can make some time to at least try it.
Pye, has your opinion changed ? I can’t wait to get the R6 and this lens !!
I'm writing this at 3:00 into the video. Very interesting but what's the deal with all the background music whilst you talk. So i missed the last 7:30, sorry.
I have a 200-70 sigma lens and I need to know how I can calibrate this zoom lens, because, I can do the first part for calibration , but, I can't continued calibrate the whole lens, I don't know how I can do it. If you have a video show how I am able to do it I will appreciate it, thank you.
Hope this article helps you out: www.slrlounge.com/calibrate-lenses-simple-fix-blurry-images
@@slrlounge thank you , you are the best
How did you get your EOS R to 50 ISO? I can't seem to find a way to do that on mine.
thought and commented the same, must be typo
@@NestorZaharopoulos Not a typo. O found out you can change ISO to minimum 50 in the ISO menu. Go to ISO speed change . touch the minimum iso box with 100 in and you can toggle the arrow to take it lower to L(50)!
so EOSR CAN SHOOT AT ISO 50.
you cant use this with any canon camera? Only the mirrorless one?
That lens is insane
I’ll wait for 2.8 IS version
Overview: Hate the 24-70, but just wish this 28-70 could just go 4 mm wider and it would be perfect.
Are those examples all shot off a tripod or hand held? I'm just worried that as a heavy lens, and no IS, it's going to be limited (for me) on hand held shooting.
With an external light source it will not get blurry. Otherwise the Auto-ISO is configurable, shutter speed being 2x the focal length (for instance 1/160 for 70mm) works well for 30MP but it can be hand-held lower with care or maybe using the electronic shutter to eliminate any vibrations in the body.
Wow man, I love your video. I've received as a gift a Nikon P1000 (huge zoom) camera. I've started to feel passionate about photography. What lens and camera can be a replacement for my P1000 to get more Pro results? I'm planning a trip to Costa Rica to photograph animals in nature. Any advice will be welcome. Thanks!
will this 28 / 70 fit on canon m50 does this has stabilastion
Can you send me your retired lens and the DSLRs.? :). Great review.
Give me the despised 24-70 2.8 please…?
Count me in
How do you set the iso on 50? I cant find it on my r
I just checked. You go into the ISO range in the menu and then you can take it below 100 to L50
I’d be very surprised if canon don’t release an rf body with built in stabilisation, which would solve the issue of no lens IS
I would be very surprised if they do lol. Back when Minolta Came up with IBIS, Canon said that lens stabilization was superior to IBIS!! If they put IBIS on their bodies they will have to eat Crow.
Great content as always!! Please can you review the 85mm EF 1.8 vs 85mm EF 1.4 IS? For portraits.. Or versus any other nice portrait lens you have...
Sigma Art 85mm 1.4 is the way to go bro
dolan_trump Let me check the reviews on that! Thanks a lot bro!
www.slrlounge.com/sigma-85mm-f1-4-art-review-the-beauty-of-this-beast/
Champ! Come on! Its almost a 3x f2 FF zoom, which for me is an amazing feat of science and engineering. But you want more? Lol.
I won't be pleased until we get a FF 12-400mm f/1.2 with corner to corner sharpness and great colours in a 300g pancake body.
I will buy your 24-70 I live in Garden Grove California I need some good Len's
Haha, I am needing to sell it probably in the next few months. I'll be posting to FB when I do!
@@payamjirsa You'll be ditching your fav lens in the whole world just weeks after buying it??? Fickle!
@@renaissancephoto haha, it's just a better version of the lens. I'll keep the 24-70 for other uses in the studio for a bit, but I have a feeling that soon (next year or so) most everyone in the studio will be switching over.
Ok I always am looking on Facebook marketplace
But neither Canon’s bodies nor this lens is stabilised, so what you get with an extra stop you lose with having to up the shutter speed
not now the Eos r5 has come out.
Great review!!! Could you touch on the difference between the old school viewfinder and the new viewfinders.. specifically on the EOS R. I recently (February) purchased new canon primes and mrk IV’s considered the EOSR but there’s a lag .. how do you deal/find that with respect to wedding/event photography. New lens tech is cool but that viewfinder seems artificial.. Thanks Pye..
I have been taking pictures for 20 years, after I got the canon mirrorless body, I never used the viewfinder again. This new tech is great for finding the best angel without bending your self!!!
Let me ask you... If you paired this lens (RF28-70 F2) with an EOS camera as R5 or R6 the IBIS system is working or NOT?
Thank you!
Yes, the lens itself does not have IS but you can use the R5/R6 IBIS with this lens.
It would be the only one because after it, I wouldn't be able to afford anything else 🤣
Now I want one
Thanks
Hopefully Canon's next "pro" mirrorless body will have IBIS and remove that one con off your negative list.