Canon RF 24-70mm f/2.8 IS USM lens review with samples

[@RFGfotografie]

In my eyes you deserve to have a "free" lens of this price category, as your the best reviewer on KZbin.

[@kyokuten]

Your reviews are the pinnacle of how reviews can be, carry on Sir, respect

[@bird271828]

Chris, thank you for your review. If I had money, I would have bought two 24-70mm lenses. One for you, one for me.

[@jxmai7687]

If I had money, I would have bought three 24-70mm lenses. One for you, one for me，one for Chris

[@mohsenalfaraj207]

If i had money, i would buy four 24-70mm lenses. One for me, one for chris, one for you, one for Michael Mai...

[@PetervanderPijll]

If I had money, I would change my name to Christopher Frost and give everyone 24-70 lenses.

[@SuperLaosman]

if l have no money, l will sale rf 24-70 lense sheaply for everyone except you alls below.

[@rehedi3056]

If I had money, I would make a Lens producing company and name it Chris and give everybody free 23-71mm IS STM lens.

[@zipopc]

I use this lens with a Canon R6 3 months now and i can say that it is trully amazing. It performs perefctly in every regard. Excellent review. I am not buying any lens the last 5 years unless you have tested them first.

[@asierardines3864]

I love the fact that your reviews are totally unbiased, very straight to the point and covering both technical and creative aspects, keep up the good work!!!

[@blanked3]

Thank you for the review, I find it reassuring how even RF version isn't that much an improvement over the previous EF version, this makes me very happy with my EF 24-70mm f2.8 mk ii 😊

[@pavendax]

this is prob the most relaxing and accurate also the best lens review channel on the youtube

[@craigcarlson4022]

Chris, A great review as always. The only thing i would ask about is how you wrap up your conclusion of this lens. Hearing all that you describe, it sounds like an impressive lens. But then when considering the very high cost, shouldn't we have been able to expect more on dimensions contrast at closest focus distance, lens flare and color distortions at large apertures? For this kind of money, i feel it should actually be doing better on those measures. As a long time Canon user who is considering getting one of the new R6 or R5, i do feel like we are being led into a pricey dilemma...with the exception of the 35mm f1.8, we either pay VERY big bucks to get the very good but maybe quite over priced high end RF lenses, or we put up with adapting EF lenses. (The new RF variable aperture lenses all seem pretty unremarkable). A not entirely desirable situation.

[@oldtechnology]

There is really no perfect lens. And price is reasonable. I bought Sigma 16 1.4 apsc prime lens with no IS for 1/5 of price of this lens and that lens isn't perfect either. Here you have few primes covered plus all other benefits. So price isn't that bad.

[@borism68]

Great review, I guess Its on the "Too expensive" list for now. I wish Tamron port their fast zoom from Sony to the Canon RF or maybe Sigma brings an affordable fast zoom line to the RF Canon club for us the more budget oriented

[@intj.369]

Thank you for your consistency in all of your reviews.

[@ED-on8to]

1:55 I think this shows quite well, that Canon is overselling their equipment sometimes. Compared to the Canon RF 35mm F1.8 IS Macro. Whey are the other lenses worth so much more? (Apart from the fact that Canon made the more or less clever move to block third-party lenses.)

[@TOMMYBOY6969]

It would be great if you can make a side by side comparison with its EF counterpart lens.Thanks

[@HoratiusXXL]

there is a chinese guy, who has done that in every detail. Search for ef vs rf 24-70

[@chadj.w.anderson5473]

Great Canon lens review, well put together with real info, real samples and specs. Thank you and God bless.

[@ElBoyoElectronico]

Your video made me reconsider getting this lens over the RF 28-70. Since I want to shoot video too, the focus breathing of the RF 28-70 unfortunately makes it unusable, while the RF 24-70 seems to do a good job in that regard.

[@MacPhantom]

Great review, and brilliant lens! I recently bought an EOS R and swayed a little about whether I should get this lens. In the end I went for the RF 24-105 f/4 L, and I couldn't be happier about it; also the body. Canon really shines these days, and this year seems to be exciting too. I couldn't care less about things like in-body IS… It's other things that count for me, and the EOS R combo delivers them all.

[@sonicvboom]

Good for you. To each, its own.

[@IsaacEllison]

“Red Ring my own addition :-)” I’m glad I’m not the only OCD one who wants to do that to the 35mm

[@oscarshen6855]

This perfect, but out of reach for most people. RF system can really use some cheaper and still decent (and compact) third party options. That's what draws people to SONY system.

[@oscarshen6855]

I really hope that Sigma 28-70 lens make its way to RF mount, but I don't know if it's possible because E-mount is much smaller, optical design specifcly for E-mount may not be able to transfer to RF mount.

[@estoylisto]

@@oscarshen6855 the main thing is the flange distance...and Sony has the longest which mean sigma can use the same design for the RF and Z mount with only changing the mount (after getting the AF protocols) ... Also bigger mount diameter is better... If a Lens is designed for RF then it might not be adapted to Sony E (either because the flange distance or the diameter) however the other way (Sony to Canon/Nikon) can be done

[@markec123]

Sonys E mount was closed for longer than RF is for now.

[@bala1000mina]

Hi Christopher, Thank you so much for the great and clear explanation. Very useful and informative! God bless you!

[@seansiquig]

thanks for the review :) watched this video over 6 times probably and just purchased the lens finally after months of waiting!!

[@cosmonaut1961]

And what do you think about the lens? Did reality meet expectations?

[@HoratiusXXL]

Hey Christopher, I needed six weeks to decide between the RF 28-70 2.0 and this 24-70 2.8 with IS. For me, the 28-70 renders like a Zeiss Otus (for example), with a special, noble look to it. In the end, I kept the 28-70 and am quite happy with it. BUT I still hope for IBIS in a next R-Body, as this setup is quite heavy after some time. I sold my Sigma 35mm 1.4 Art and EF 24-70 for it. Kept the EF 85 1.8 for a lightweight Portrait setup. Thank you very much for your awesome reviews. Keep it up! Greetings from Germany, Andi.

[@dandan1364]

Love your taste in apologetics. Would also love to hear how this compares to the modern EF equivalents...

[@cagatota]

Great job as usual! Thank you a lot, blessings from Colombia 🇨🇴

[@jeffreyfleming4016]

Great review, I found it thoroughly informative. Wonderful!😊

[@aviator201]

Hello, I really like this review. Have you done any comparisons with this lens against the RF 24-105?

[@PTUsher]

I’m invested in the RF system but boy do we need some smaller lighter lenses! Great review as always, I rent this lens for £20/day on Fat Llama but I wouldn’t buy it at this price. your views are bang on, thanks for all your good work - my fave channel :)

[@christopherfrost]

According to the rumor mill Canon are working on those smaller, lighter lenses right now :-)

[@PTUsher]

Christopher Frost Photography aww bless you for replying, that’s made my day :) Looking forward to your reviews of those lenses!

[@xkben90]

Smaller, lighter lenses would be nice, but for the wide angle lens specifically, I like where the 15-35 stands in terms of size and weight because of the IS that is included. It’s truly a remarkable lens (assuming you know its limitations due to its nature of being a wide angle lens).

[@PTUsher]

Ben Chung agree it’s a great lens. Zooms will be larger by nature, so I accept that. I’m thinking more about compact primes. And would also love to see more EFS-sized lenses for the R’s crop mode (I can dream)

[@xkben90]

FILM 2.0 haha I understand. I’ve heard great things about the RF 35 mm, so if they can make a handful of lenses with a similar build and size(with IS) that would be amazing.

[@RFGfotografie]

The image stabilisation of these lenses are perfection.

[@lewcehjitl3282]

hi Chris would you recommend this lens over the 24-105? I shoot video and photos 50/50 thanks appreciate God bless!

[@jaypainespotter]

I'm not Christopher obviously. I would say unless you need that extra stop of light, the F4 24-105 is an awesome photo/video lens.

[@dzulk9]

I think the price range is almost similar with the G Master lens at the same focal length? That was a great lens on A7III... An all purpose lens is very useful on a trip...

[@ivillious7573]

bought the lens 2 months ago and i am in love with it super sharp

[@jack47H]

Thank you, your explanation is very nice , no one explains the same way as you 👏🏼

[@69teddypanada]

Chris, How it compare to EF 24-70 f2.8 II?

[@AugmentedGravity]

Better.

[@olegasphoto]

Same. Ef 24-70 ii is already perfect.

[@michaellekas27]

From what I heard is that the rf version is slightly sharper at the corners but centre same or very slightly to the ef. The rf has is but the new canon bodies coming out will have ibis so great if u have the ef version

[@BLEEJazz]

I think I am going to stick with Tamon 24 70 G2. I had no problem with it for last 2 years and I still got 8 years of warranty left. But...RF 50mm is tempting lol

[@tangobase7]

I am thinking of replacing my Tamron SP 24-70 mm F2.8 g2 with a canon RF 24-70mm f2.8 on my canon r6 mark ii. Do you have any tips or advice, please?

[@vladimirboevvisuals8032]

Chris, thank you for your review!!! You are amazing man! Is a review expected on RF 70-200? If yes, then when?

[@christopherfrost]

When the lens hire company decides to stock it. Hopefully in the next couple of months

[@khaledalqhtani8332]

He did it!

[@PAD32]

I'm still waiting for Tamron to release their affordable standard zoom lens on RF mount :-|

[@PAD32]

@SwitchRich Tamron said they are working on it according to canonwatch, but it was almost a year ago, and still nothing. I was considering buying the EF version, but it's quite big on top of an adapter. I hope to see it this year. And also I hope that they will keep image stabilisation in their lenses, because the future EOS R bodies have IBIS, it could be a pretext for them to copy their Sony lenses and just put an RF mount on it (like the 28-75mm).

[@JamesClark1991]

You'll be waiting a while...

[@PAD32]

@@JamesClark1991 What make you think that, do you have any informations, or you just throw random thoughts? I don't have official numbers, but I wouldn't be surprised if half of Tamron's lenses were sold for Canon cameras. Of course the mirrorless market is small yet, since Canon just started to sell those mirrorless cameras, that's probably why we don't see Tamron RF lenses at the moment, but with the new Canon bodies coming this year (including pro bodies and IBIS which a lot of people are waiting before jumping into the mirrorless world), Tamron would be crazy if they don't come with a few RF lenses this year

[@AugmentedGravity]

Sigma superior.

[@AlSo-Fotografie]

of course sigma AND tamron will develop rf-lensen! why should they focus on only one mount? the target group is too big to ignore them;)

[@sonicvboom]

How is the dust sealing on this particular RF lens? I've heard photographers having a nightmare with Tamron and Sigma's current 24-70 due to dust getting sucked in to the lens due to poor sealing on the extending lens barrel. To your knowledge, does the RF F2.8 24-70mm L have a filter between the extending barrel and the main barrel to prevent dust from getting sucked into the lens? Or in your extensive use of the lens, have you detected any issues with dust [long term use]?

[@EddySawaya8637]

Tamron SP lenses are actually some of the best lenses when it comes to weather sealing. They have better sealing than the token weather sealing you find on Sigmas, and as many seal points throughout the lens body when compared to an L series lens if not more. They also have a metallic build whereas Canons are usually platic these days. I own a number of tamron lenses and they haven't posed any issue, I do hear complaints related to Sigma lenses quite often though and not just with dust getting in.

[@SeeJayNet]

Dear Canon, Give this man a free 24-70. Sincerely, The entire Internet

[@calenbolo]

Same

[@Akshattii]

Hi, thank you for you review its great, I like the red ring on the 35mm where you got it ? And how you fixed it ?

[@jiajianhou426]

0:43 is that the same place as in BOCW Miami map??

[@lemonking3644]

QUESTION: this is only for mirrorless? Would it not work for my canon 90D

[@SenXu]

Is this one of very few still lenses that don't suffer significantly from focus breathing? That's quite a big feature since all cine lens cost much higher price mainly for that feature (+maybe declicking and physical features such as non-protruding and same focus ring). In that case 2k+ is a good deal for a close-to-cine lens. What other lenses that you have tested that don't suffer from focus breathing?

[@detectivejonesw]

Almost all the Nikon Z lenses have very little or none focus breathing

[@ushirogeri8085]

When you present lens stabilisation, it would be good to include information on whether IBIS is also enabled on the camera or not.

[@atselykovskiy]

There was no Canon camera with IBIS before R5 and R6 release

[@YurkFilmm]

i was giving up on the eos r for video purposes .. but since the digitl stablization exist .. im happy now.

[@mimi_climbingcalm]

SO helpful! Thank you really great review and really useful examples too!

[@kevindiaz3459]

Brilliant review Christopher, always love your work. Looks like this might be the best 24-70mm f2.8 ever made. Canon is nailing it with these new lenses going forward. It does suck they are so pricey though. Question, does this lens use nanoUSM? I didn't recall you mentioning it.

[@karolykrausz5534]

It does yes. Unfortunately for my money..

[@pieterdewit5335]

Hi Christopher, I’m really curious how it performs on a R7 ! Could you test that as well ?

[@martyn420]

Great review. Is the disco bokeh fringing a dealbreaker? It does seem to be a worrying flaw as some photographers would like to shoot wide open at 70mm. I'm looking for a lens to complement the 15-35, maybe the RF 24-70 or 50mm

[@TheRealLink]

Was linked this from friends as I am considering looking at the EOS R5 coming out in a bit. But great to see this lens review and characteristics. Would you know if there is any adapter for the regular EF lenses to mount to the mirrorless cameras or is it just better to go with the R-series? Thanks and subbed!

[@michaelkress84]

Would love to hear your thoughts on the 24-105 f/2.8 that just came out

[@popopo1976]

Informative. Time 2:54, pls tell me the name of this beautiful town.

[@KuruGDI]

I really wish they would build this lens for my EF mount camera :( I know there is the EF 24-70mm f/2.8L II USM, but I really would love to have that image stabilisation.

[@mofi3641]

great review, as always! but i think it does not make that much sense for comparison to activate the auto corrections. it makes sense for knowing what you get, but keep in mind, that the lens isn't maybe that good as it looks.

[@Crakmonkey691]

Chris I have the tamron 24-70mm G2 F2.8 Lens....but when I get the new canon eos R5 I want upgrade to this lens....would u do a comparison video between both of these lens.

[@efferoconsultingabprojects3500]

How does this lens compare (sharpness) to the new Sigma 24-70 for Sony?

[@coltoncyr2283]

effero consulting AB Projects He did that Sigma review, in short words, it looks awesome. If Sigma made a Nikon Z version I'd get that in a heart beat. That's my thoughts.

[@efferoconsultingabprojects3500]

@@coltoncyr2283 Thank you Colton. Yes I saw that review I was wondering how he would compare them since he has seen the result up close. I have the new Sigma and it's a fantastic lens. I have always shot with primes, but this lens is now more or less fixed to the camera.

[@coltoncyr2283]

effero consulting AB Projects I have some Nikon lenses.. but I'm gettin sick of Nikons incompetence. I want to see how the new a7iv is. Im considering switching in the future and getting sigma/Tamron lenses for Sony. Nikon won't release their Z mount, pathetic in my view.

[@samphillips5254]

Hi Chris, another great review. Thank you! Where did you buy the red ring for your RF 35mm? I’d like to get one myself? 👍🏻

[@messylaura]

@Chris, are you going to do a review on the three new sigma ef-m lenses?

[@dragonpower974]

Can you get the blurry background in video with this type of lens?

[@mihugong3153]

Thanks for the review! "Decent quality plastic" is quite sobering considering the very high price tag of the lense, don't you think?

[@christopherfrost]

It's a shame. But I've resigned myself to the fact that that's the direction Canon are going in with their L lenses (and they are of course a bit lighter as a result)

[@mihugong3153]

@@christopherfrost Thanks for your reply! One can only wonder why they'd do that.

[@saadazzahrani]

@@mihugong3153 Because plastic acts as a better shock-absorbing material than metal. It's also lighter and easier to manufacture.

[@mihugong3153]

@@saadazzahrani That sounds plausible. Cheers!

[@frederiquerijsdijk]

Great review! Great voice too.

[@Suzzallo]

Thank you, your review is very helpful

[@chacmool2581]

Leaving the IS aside, how much better is it, is it indeed optically better than the EF analogue?

[@mdz4525]

Chris how you put the red ring on the rf 35mm

[@RFGfotografie]

I want this one :P Awesome review video

[@Alexey0901]

Thanks , Chris , for great review

[@MrJustwatchin9]

I think I’ll pass on buying this one. I have a first gen ef. I’m just waiting for it to be available. In the meantime I’m renting a 28-70 f2 and I’m in love 😍

[@RFGfotografie]

How does it compare to the Tamron 28-70 2,8 V2?

[@VegasHyruler]

Christopher, I do quite enjoy your reviews and I've made purchasing decisions based in part on your reviews alone, but I genuinely think you need a better, more crisp test image than the one you use. It often looks a little soft, though you'll say the image is "razor sharp" at the same time. I don't doubt the root image--that we've all seen so many times--looks exactly as it should, but I don't think it's the best example you could have to truly demonstrate sharpness. Just my two cents (USD :P).

[@FamilyonStandby]

That is a sexy lens. We have the EF version and love it so much. Maybe one day we'll switch RF...

[@flocco2542]

How did you get that red ring on the 35mm 1.8?

[@christopherfrost]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/sH3Gk354nbZgg5I

[@ManuelKahana]

I own the RF "holly trinity", and this one's my favorite. It should have been a boring lens, but it has some "character", excellent contrast and the best IS I've seen so far. I now wonder when will you finish the series and check the RF 70-200 (I have some opinions about it, I wonder if you will notice the same issues).

[@lukmie2769]

Manuel Kahana how about that chromatic abberation? I haven’t seen something as radical as this in a long time.

[@EddySawaya8637]

​@Luk Mie Yeah sadly, the new trinity of lenses from canon have some improvements but their EF counter parts are actually sharper. The rendering is arguably better on the RF lenses, but I'm not convinced by the amount of CA we have seen in this review. That should not be there on a modern lens.

[@uncivil_engineer8013]

Any chance that you have a review of the Samyang 21mm f/1.4 for mirrorless APS-C cameras in the pipeline? After buying it and taking some test shots on my Canon M5, I'm definitely going to be hanging onto it, but I'm curious how it looks on your test chart. I think it's the first lens I've bought without watching you review it first!

[@christopherfrost]

I don't have any plans to right now but maybe sometime in the future :-)

[@crawfish91]

Great, thank you again for your review

[@dotta4763]

Can you buy it and adapt on a EF mount camera? I’m planning to replace my ESLR at some point and I was wonder if ta worth going for the RF

[@marcoblondus3204]

no.

[@pawel-951]

Hi Chris. Is there any reason you dont review nikon lenses?

[@sosomelodies659]

Maybe Canon should also release a non-stabalized version for ....$1,200? If Tamron makes a 28-75mm for Canon it'll go for $999.

[@RichFreeman]

I'm sure we'll eventually see both of those options. The mount is just very new and they want to try to get as many as they can go fork out the extra $1k before they offer cheaper options.

[@kapilesh14]

This lens is awesome but the chromatic abberation is extra ordinarily poor. You cannot sacrifice good CA performance for sharpness.

[@EddySawaya8637]

In many cases, the CA in high contrast scenes will cause the image to fall apart, especially when shooting backlit shots.

[@ikusanjay]

What about comparison between this one to the tamron ef 24-70 mm 2.8 g2? Does it outperform or better in image quality and sharpness to tamron's?

[@PAD32]

The Canon is superior, but the Tamron remains excellent. The Tamron is a MUCH better value, but if you have money to spend, go with the Canon

[@EddySawaya8637]

​@@PAD32 Not necessarily. The canon really is just slightly sharper wide open, but I suspect the Tamron is sharper starting F4. The canon has a control ring, but some people view that as an annoyance. The tamron has no chromatic aberrations issues, while the effect is surprisingly wild on the canon. The tamron has also impressive rendering of out of focus areas. So for less than half the price, the tamron is a no brainer.

[@PartisanZoya1941]

Thanks for the review of the RF 24-70 mm f 2.8. I was surprised that an L series lens relies so much on in camera correction for distortions. Need to stop down to f 5.6 for better sharpness. And there's the weight and cost issue. I think I'll go for the consumer grade RF 28-70 f 2.8 as a smaller , cheaper, acceptable quality lens with this focal length.

[@tomcrookes5689]

I have the opportunity to buy this lens nearly new for £1550, would you recommend it over the RF 24-105 F4 for the extra money and loss of the extra 35mm range? I shoot landscape, portraits and the occasional event (wedding / birthdays).

[@christopherfrost]

That's a reasonably good deal. The f/2.8 lens will be better for weddings, that's for sure

[@sonicvboom]

@@christopherfrost Just for an extra stop of light...? Really?

[@ED-on8to]

What an amazing lens!

[@lsagidullin]

I love the lens and it works fantastically on my r6-2. However, after checking Sigma 24-70 vs Sigma 28-70 vs Tamron 28-75mm video on this channel I 100% I would just buy sigma 24-70 and save money for another lens with zero regrets.

[@SuperBuickregal]

Thanks again Christopher!

[@CaptainSisko1972]

Can it be used on my R7.?

[@AlSo-Fotografie]

thats the quality (very good to perfect sharpness in center and corner) i expect on this price-level:)

[@NYC.J]

Would this lens work good with my Canon R10?

[@withezel2817]

Is it compatible for canon 5d mark4?

[@four-kings]

15-35 vs 24-70 vs 70-200 which one is sharper？

[@sonicvboom]

Why do you care which one is *sharper* ? Each of those lens have a very different range for very different looks. The question you should be asking is: Which lens should you be buying first out of the three.

[@four-kings]

@@sonicvboom because ef lenses with same focal length are much more cheaper.

[@arnaudontrack499]

Is it good on R7 ?

[@RobKaczmark]

How did you put the red ring on the 35mm?

[@christopherfrost]

Red pin stripe tape

[@RobKaczmark]

@@christopherfrost That's awesome! Love it.

[@f0t0b0y]

My brian exploded with your red ring hack. 🤣

[@Rexxthespecialist]

Wait... so which one you recommend is I can only have one, this one or the RF 28-70 2.0? For the best quality in low light situation? I already own the RF 28-70 2.0. But the lighter weight and sizes make me think about selling this one and get the RF 24-70 2.8 specially cus it cover a little bit more range, although I don’t need much the wider 24mm honestly for what I do. Thanks and advance! Always looking forward for you next videos 😁

[@christopherfrost]

It's up to you, really - both are fantastic and similar so you can't go far wrong whatever you decide

[@GallicGarlic]

If I were the lucky owner of an RF 28-70 F2.. I would not ask myself too many questions.. Lucky you.. Enjoy your magnificent lens

[@sonicvboom]

@@GallicGarlic lul

[@ronnietj8010]

Hi! Just wanna ask if this lens fit to 1Dx ii camera?

[@christopherfrost]

No. You need the EF version of the lens

[@ronnietj8010]

Christopher Frost Photography ok! Thank you.

[@WeddingStoriesByRakesh]

Can't wait for RF 28-70 & RF 85 DS

[@arip6242]

please do a review of the Nikon Z 24-70 f2.8S

[@AugmentedGravity]

All RF lenses are just flipping fantastic.

[@EddySawaya8637]

Prime RF lenses are great yeah. The zoom lenses don't seem to be carrying out much of advantage on the canon mirrorless circle. This 24-70 has some serious issues chromatic aberrations that are often not found in modern lenses. The flare control is not great too. The 70-200 RF version is also a little softer compared to its EF counterparts. As for the RF 15-35, it's also not as sharp as the previous 16-35mm EF and has even more distortion and vignetting. What about the RF 14-35 which has completely dark corners due to mechanical vignetting? Not saying these lenses are bad, they're quite good. But marketing tricks and KZbin sponsors will have you believe that these lenses are the new gold standard. Actual reviewers like Chris and Dustin Abbott will reveal that these zoom lenses are actually flawed in some ways especially when put against the competition. Truth of the matter is, you'll probably be just as happy if not happier by adapting the older EF lenses or by using equivalent third party offerings for a lesser price. Their only truly accomplished new zoom lens at this moment is their 28-70mm F2.

[@AugmentedGravity]

@@EddySawaya8637 no?

[@EddySawaya8637]

@@AugmentedGravity Sadly yes. The only thing that is more with these RF zooms is the price, and inexplicably so considering how little (if anything) has improved optically and with the autofocus over the EF lenses. I am planning to upgrade to mirrorless son, but will not be changing any of my current lenses. True reviewers out there will help you understand that the last generation of EF zoom lenses was so good to begin with that it would have been hard to top it so soon anyway. These will remain competitive for quite some years and will cost more than the equivalent mirrorless options. If you care about price yet also about performance, I don't see how one could go wrong.

[@AugmentedGravity]

@@EddySawaya8637 no.

[@EddySawaya8637]

@AugmentedGravity that's the most sound argument I have ever come across. Thanks for shedding light on that. I will be now selling all my gear and live my life in the mountains as a hermit.

[@maxr394]

Does anyone know a video stabiliser (gimbal) that works with EOSR+ RF 24-70 ? I am struggling to find that...

[@christopherfrost]

Most large gimbals should handle it although they will have different levels of electronic integration with the camera

[@dangernba]

Great review of an impressive lens. What camera and lenses do you take with you on vacations? Greetings from Brazil.

[@KamilFaisal]

How do you put red ring on 35mm?

[@christopherfrost]

Using red pinstripe tape

[@KamilFaisal]

@@christopherfrost where can i get those?

[@christopherfrost]

@@KamilFaisal ebay

[@KamilFaisal]

@@christopherfrost tq👍

[@tdolz]

So, to sum up, an IS 24-70 f/2.8 lens from Canon is only available for the "new hire" camera body while the bodies with senority get IS only at f/4.

[@christopherfrost]

Mirrorless is the future, I'm afraid

[@pedroprietolopez330]

Compare to Canon RF 24-105f:4 IS ? Wich one is better?

[@christopherfrost]

Take a look at my review of that lens

[@pedroprietolopez330]

@@christopherfrost I I will