Canon RF 24-70mm F2.8L IS Definitive Review | 4K

[@NVIK5]

These definite reviews are your signature reviews, the most detailed and objective I have seen. Very impressed with the detail presented here.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you...and yes, they are my signature in that I'm not sure that others make videos quite like them.

[@mralexlex]

I have to say, your reviews are the most honest and detailed on YT, head and shoulders above those with far more subs. I wish Merry Christmas, Happy New Year and all the best to you and your family in 2021.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you very much! Merry Christmas to you, too!

[@czort123]

One of the best reviews I've ever watched. Thank you for your time and effort!

[@Soul_Visuals_Photography]

I’ve had this lens for about a year now. It’s fantastic. However I do have an EF 70-200 2.8 is ii and I find its a sharper lens than my RF 24-70. So ultimately when it comes to image. Quality I’m not overly impressed. It’s nothing that surprises me. Anytime I use my 70-200 or even my sigma 50 1.4 I’m often taken away by how beautiful my images are. I’m mostly a family photographer and I don’t run tests like you do but just thought I’d share my thoughts.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's interesting. Maybe it was the difference in the two copies I tested.

[@J_CtheEngineer]

Just found your channel when I was researching the R6 which I ended up getting. Really enjoy your definitive reviews, your delivery, and your attention to detail.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Welcome aboard! I'm glad the reviews have been helpful.

[@Sam1986E]

I waited to watch this review before ordering mine, thank you

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hope it helped.

[@julius4858]

Does anyone know about third party back caps that aren’t as stupid to put on?

[@gameshoes]

Really, I agree, the "one way" caps are pretty annoying!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a good question. I don't, but surely there's a market for that.

[@julius4858]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I’d pay money for that. I don’t even switch lenses that often but it’s still so annoying.

[@frostybe3r]

I've never had an issue with putting the caps on...

[@julius4858]

@@frostybe3r on EF or RF lenses?

[@kirannama]

Excellent review Dustin Abbot, I am just curious can we compare it with RF24-105 f4, other than just being a f2.8 - like image quality, autofocus speed, edge to edge sharpness etc.??

[@helloianzakharov]

Have the same question

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The F2.8 version is a bit sharper. Check out Bryan Carnathan's test charts: www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1415&Camera=1221&Sample=0&FLI=0&API=0&LensComp=1222&CameraComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=0 Not night and day, but sharper.

[@vaskoobscura_]

I like your definitive reviews but can you shop them up in to chapters? Sometimes I want to skip ahead to a specific part.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Most of the newer reviews are broken up like that, but unfortunately I just don't have the time to go back and do that to all of the legacy reviews. Maybe a job for an assistant in the future!

[@vaskoobscura_]

@@DustinAbbottTWI awesome. Keep up the great reviews. This is the place to be if you want to know all the details.

[@_SYDNA_]

Sold! Thank you. It takes time and study to assess camera lenses and I appreciate your work on this. I know making videos can be pretty tedious, thankless work. This video helped me work through a decision at a time when I had an immediate need for something in this range and the 24-70 was on sale. I used your link to B&H to, hopefully, pass some of that back to you. I don't decide things like this quickly, even though I've been looking at 24-70 options for a couple of years, so I appreciate your work on this. By the way, thank you for including some real world examples of the impact of IS on video. That's always been one of my imagined use cases for this range of lens, and has been one of the catch-points on a purchase decision. The AF speed has growng relevance as well. Thanks for that. In the end, I bought this new even though a used Tamron G2 had come on sale at a very good price. I will often use DXOmark as a final check, and did check their testing on this one after purchase. I notice that in their particular testing situation and camera, this lens resolves to even slightly better mpix and absorbs a little bit less light for a given f-stop than their EF 70-200 f.28L III -- a lens which I tend to use as a functional reference point for "lenses you're glad you bought." This generalized metric would support some of the more in-depth analysis you did for us here. Again, thanks for your help.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's great. Enjoy!

[@officialvisaural]

Funny, another comment here says their RF 24-70 is outresolved by the EF 70-200 II. Although at this level of sharpness one is likely going to notice lens rendering before beginning to worry about sharpness.

[@_SYDNA_]

@@officialvisaural Yep. My EF 70-200 III, mounted on RF sometimes seems to out resolve the 24-70, but you don't always have that stand back and compose distance to work with. These two are not really an apples to apples comparison but I have pulled some surprising clarity in a hurry, out of this lens, over the last few days.

[@damienrobertson349]

Great review, thanks for the video! I always enjoy watching and I don’t even use Canon’s R system.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a nice compliment.

[@paulbeckmann]

Brilliant review! Thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad you liked it!

[@jc5573]

In your opinion is 24mm wide enough for wide angle landscape shot? The rf 15-35mm f2.8 is wider at 15mm to 23mm. But the 24-70mm would give more range. Which lens (24-70mm f2.8 or 15-35mm) wouldyou choose to bring out to the mountains and as a walk around lens? Thank you.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would prefer 24-70mm as a walk around focal length. It is often wide enough

[@tangobase7]

Nice video. I am thinking of replacing my Tamron 24-70mm f2.8 G2 to Canon RF 24-70mm f2.8 on my canon R6 Mark ii. Please advise if this is a good idea?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The Canon is a nice lens, and you'll enjoy not having to use an adapter, but don't expect it to be radically better optically. The biggest difference will probably be in autofocus speed.

[@thomjanssens]

Hi Dustin, how would you compare the RF 24-70 2.8 to the RF 28-70 2.0 in terms of perfomance, IQ, general rendering? Tnx!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've had a hard time sourcing the 28-70. It is backordered. I haven't had a chance to spend any time with it yet.

[@julianeinwag7419]

Great review, as always. I frequently find myself wondering what Canon was thinking when they designed the RF rear caps.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Aren't they frustrating? Wow!

[@sergioconceicao2774]

what is better rf 24 70 or 24 105?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Better for what, exactly? That's a very open ended question.

[@sergioconceicao2774]

@@DustinAbbottTWI image quality

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The 24-70 is the sharper lens overall, though the 24-105 is fairly good, too.

[@ych8312]

You should do reviews for nikon Z mount lenses. Their 50mm is better than voigtlander apo 50mm f2 imo and they have basically the best 70-200 2.8 in the market.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don't have time, money, nor inclination to add another system.

[@ThePatrickmayr]

I just ordered this lens and I am pumped to get it 🤩 right now I am still using my old 24-105mm f4 which has a overall softness 😅

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This should be a nice upgrade.

[@kelb89]

What are your thoughts on the 28-70 2.0?

[@pianofinger]

It’s a great lens. It stays with me on most shoots. However I nicknamed it the bowling ball because it’s pretty hefty.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I hope to cover that in early 2021, but I haven't reviewed it yet.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

@@DustinAbbottTWI when that time comes it would be nice if you could do a comparison between the two in their shared focal lengths.

[@sandhumandeep81]

Great review. I have question, I mostly shoot indoor weddings, birthday parties (my own family and not professionally) and pictures of our kids (indoor and outdoors). I am debating between this lens and canon RF 24-105mm f4 L. Which one would you recommend?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you shoot a lot indoors, having the larger F2.8 aperture is handy. It allows you to keep your ISO down.

[@sandhumandeep81]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks Dustin. Mrs do shoot lot of indoors and I do outdoors. I guess this lens will fit the criteria. I stumbled upon your channel after getting into research rabbit hole and I am glad I found it. Your videos are very informative and looking forward to learn photography from your videos.

[@Vikram-wx4hg]

Thanks. Really useful review. Is this now the best IQ standard zoom across brands now?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It depends on how you quantify standard zooms. I would say that the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 G2 is probably optically superior (from both my experience and the MTF performance)

[@gilaxia]

Nice review Dustin! We will have to wait mark 2 version for non extending barrel.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's not really ever been a part of the design for these type lenses. An internally zooming 24-70mm F2.8 would be a very large lens.

[@lsikharulidze]

Hello Why didn't you do review rf 28-70 f2 ? and not compared to rf 24 70 f2. 8mm? Thank you

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't gotten to the 28-70 yet, but I will.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

Very nice n thorough as usual. Would you consider this RF 24-70 delivering a great improvement in IQ compared to the old EF 24-70 II (I appreciate the latter has no IS).

[@tomm7910]

+1 As a R5 user with an adapted EF 24-70 2.8 ii, I'd be curious if you think it's worth the upgrade. Thanks for all the great in depth reviews.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think calling it a major improvement would be overstating. It is better, but not by any kind of meaningful margin.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

@@DustinAbbottTWI tnx

[@tomm7910]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks!

[@meyowind5743]

Does this camera do well in videos?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Which camera? This is a lens review.

[@meyowind5743]

I meant the lens sorry. Can Rf 24 70 do well on videos?

[@martyn420]

Is the longitudinal chromatic aberration a problem?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Not that I saw.

[@martyn420]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks, I did see a review which explained that subjects taken at minimum focus distance with the aperture wide open can cause disco bokeh of a type which I thought Canon could eliminate with the BR optics.

[@dfpc8745]

Hi Dustin I have the R6. Should I get the cheaper EF 28 to 70 f2.8 or the RF 24 to 70 f2.8. The price difference is 860 dollars. Both are new lenses. Are the advantages afforded by the RF version worth 800 plus dollars since I do mainly indoor events and maybe a video once in a while?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a tough call. The EF lens is very good, and you have IBIS in your camera (making up for the lack of IS in the lens). Long term, however, you might get sick of using the adapter.

[@Jstnelson]

Great review as always! You think you'll review the RF 28-70 f2 anytime soon?

[@RS-Amsterdam]

Waiting for that lens to be reviewed too. It's a very promising lens !

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My hope is to do that early in 2021

[@creativegreatsvisuals]

@@DustinAbbottTWI never happened ?

[@TheCEPELE]

Good day, Sir. Which should I pick for the astrophotographu this one or 15-35?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would probably go with the 15-35mm. It's the better zoom range for astro scenes.

[@argmax11]

Hey Dustin , great review! I am looking to invest on a new lens! I shoot concerts , mostly small venues DJ-type gigs , but expanding towards other types of music. Curious if you would recommend this 24-70 f2.8 or a 70-200 f2.8 ? Thanks !

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That depends on what other lenses that you have. In smaller venues a 24-70mm may make more sense. If you want to go crazy, the 24-105mm F2.8 may be your best bet. bhpho.to/49W1mmV

[@billx4266]

Is this one more sharp then the 24-105?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Yes, at large apertures. You won't see much difference with them stopped down.

[@joshbeane151]

I primarily shoot outdoor natural light lifestyle portrait sessions with the 24-105 f4. would background separation and bokeh of this lens be worth the upgrade? or perhaps save a little more for 28-70 f2?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You would have more background separation at 70mm, obviously, though if you are shooting the 24-105 at 105mm, I don't think you'd see a significant difference. You might want to consider something like a prime lens to compliment your 24-105mm. An 85mm F1.4, for example. Even the 85mm F2 Macro produces lovely portrait results.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

For a general walk around lens in terms of IQ would you pick the RF24-70 f/2.8 L IS or the RF 24-105 f/4 L IS, or the EF 24-70 ii. The EF 24-70ii is lighter and similarly priced (if not cheaper in the used market) to the RF 24-105 f/4 L IS.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you don't mind using an adapter, the EF lens is probably the best value.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Tnx Dustin, I’ve been gravitating towards that one too and I appreciate your lights. UPDATE: after a lot of soul searching I placed an order a few days ago for the RF version. I went for the RF version cause I wanted a more compact kit and I felt that I would have to carry a spare adaptor if I went for the EF version (for peace of mind). So RF it was.

[@mma171]

I wonder if it would be worth upgrading from the RF 24-105 f4 to this RF 24-70 f2.8? Is the IQ different at f8 through f11?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I wouldn't do it if your priority is F8-F11.

[@mma171]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks Dustin.

[@mikaelhylander6321]

Hi, thanks for the video. Im at the point of choosing between the 24-105 and 24-70 . Mainly for Landscape. So i dont necessary need f2,8 but I rather have the sharpest of the 2, center as well as corner to corner. I actualy thougth the 24-70 was sharper , but after watching your two definitive reviews of these two leneses, I would say the 24-105 looks sharper at 4,0 than the 24-70 at 4,0. Not sure how they perform lens vs lens at f8-11 wich may be the most suiteble range for Landscape. If you had to choose between these two lenses (for Landscape) wich one would you go for ? Regards Mikael

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would say that the difference at landscape apertures is probably not significant enough to choose one lens over the other (though the 24-70mm is the sharper of the two lenses).

[@mikaelhylander6321]

@@DustinAbbottTWI ok thanks for the answer

[@TheLordCyberex]

Thank you for your work!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure!

[@NikosPer]

So nostalgic seeing old Greek drahmas on the test chart, nice review - expensive lens but that pop and quality are amazing.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've head that comment quite often!

[@mma171]

How close would you say the quality of the image is on this lens at F2.8 - F8 compared to the RF 50 1.2?

[@frostybe3r]

It's fairly close but you can definitely tell a prime compared to a zoom.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Sharpness isn't significantly different, but the bokeh and rendering definitely favor the 50L

[@mma171]

@@DustinAbbottTWI That’s what I wanted to know. I rented the 50 1.2 a couple of weeks ago and was blown away by it but it sounds like this zoom would be more to my needs. Thanks!

[@Productum]

Really great detailed review, thanks for sharing! :) Recently I bought one too and I'm very happy with it (it is an all-rounder lens

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@Yippeedee]

I have a canon R8 that doesn’t come with IBIS. Would you recommend the 28-70 f2.8 or the 28-70 f2? They are both a huge chunk of change but I’m really looking for a do it all lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you are doing some video work, you might want to go with the IS lens

[@sylvoniaa]

Hi Dustin, with the R6, would you recommend the RF28-70 f2 or is the RF24-70 f2.8 already enough for daily kids & pets photos? Thanks! Ps. I don’t have any other lens, and plan to only get 1 for my R6

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The 24-70mm is what 99% of people would buy in your situation. It's hard to justify the size, weight, and price of the 28-70 unless you are using it professionally.

[@thebrothers5871]

Make a comparison with rf 28 70 f2

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I probably won't be able to do a comparison, but I do plan to review the 28-70

[@wimvastiau]

Would this lens also be a good choice for shooting the night sky? I've got a canon R6. Btw love your reviews!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It does quite well.

[@pr1sm55]

Great video, I'm thinking to invest in a R system and this lens specifically. Is this lens with IS (versus horizontal IS on the 70-200mm) suitable for tracking fast moving cars such as rally cars, drift cars and other general motorsports? Or would I be better off getting the F2.0 without IS and get better images?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would think the autofocus is actually a little faster on this lens.

[@puredistancegolf]

Great job! Thanks.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for watching!

[@patlezinc]

Thanks for the review. Talking about the 70-200 RF, I just got mine. One blurry corner (bottom left). I changed it and the second copy had a blurry corner too (the same but less pronounced). All other 3 corners are very good and excellent from f4. So I think there is something on the manufacturing process with it. Anyway, I really love it, so small, you carry it everywhere. So sharp at 2.8 (but not really at small distances as you said). Bokeh is lovely. But hey, it is not the star today, let’s back to the 24-70 (I don’t own)

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That sounds pretty familiar. Good and sharp in the center and midframe, but corners leaving a bit to be desired. And yes, the compact size is great.

[@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]?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The challenge for me is that I typically use lenses for a few weeks and have to return them (like this one). I can't really comment on the long term dust resistance.

[@nakataara]

i am following your channel for years, can you please give me an advice if should I get r6 mark ii with 24-70 2.8 or 24 - 105 f4, i'm not professional but i take lots of portraits and landscapes, streets and sometimes night photography. many thanks 🙏

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There are pros and cons for both lenses. I own the 24-105L and find it useful (extra zoom range, lower price!), but the 24-70 gives you the faster maximum aperture and slightly better image quality. Neither is a bad choice, but neither is the standout better choice, either.

[@pauloandrefernandes]

I’m changing right now from a 80D to R6 and plan to buy a 24-70mm. The EF mark ii can be bought for 1400$ american dollars here at local Canon. The RF version would me cost the usual 2400$. That’s a big gap between prices and I know I’d had to use de adaptor. Would the EF version with the IBIS on the R6 be so different from the RF version on hand holding IQ? How many stops I’d get in stabilization?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would estimate you would get around 5 stops of stability, which is still a lot.

[@jbli19]

Hi Dustin, thank you very much for the detailed review. I just got into photography last year. Bought a Canon 850D/T8j and now upgraded to the EOS RP really liking it so far. I currently own the EF-S 24mm f2.8 and EF 50mm f1.8 lenses. Planning on trading them for the RF 24-70mm f2.8, as a all-rounder lens. Read a few forums, and people say it is not worth it, especially for the f1.8. I mainly shoot portraits, landscapes and street. Personally, do you think it is worth it?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Worth it in what way? It's a very good lens, though yes, it is very expensive. I would recommend trading for the RF version of the 50mm F1.8 at the lens, as it is a nice improvement in a few areas and will allow you to not have to use the adapter. You might try that and the 24-105mm F4L IS as a two lens kit.

[@jbli19]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Worth it as in sacrificing the f1.8 of the 50mm for a constant f2.8. Obviously, it all depends in usage and scenarios. But having a all rounder lens seems quite nice. For example not needing to worry about switching lenses etc.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Then go for it.

[@sydneyazadaar3534]

Awesome review dustin! Out of curiosity, would you personally pay the added premium over the price of EF24-70 mark ii? Would love to know what you would prefer?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don't think I would upgrade if I already had the 24-70L II, but if I was buying fresh and only shooting RF, I would pay the difference for the RF lens.

[@sydneyazadaar3534]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Awesome! Thanks mate! Always insightful!

[@kennethgnielsen]

Thanks for the RF 24-70 f/2.8 review. I feel like I know my lens better now and reassured that I bought a really top performing product. One thing I would have like to have seen expanded upon is the minimum focusing distances, which sound like they are quite close. In the United States we use inches and centimeters pretty much mean nothing without having a tape measure handy and also conversion formula to arrive at the inches that we are familiar with over here. You mention removing the lens hood... does it focus down that close? Anyway, I am still in the dark about minimum shooting distances and feel like there could be a separate video just giving a clear example of shooting 'close up' with this lens. I have even read one review that calls it a 'macro' and while I know it is not, it is still pretty capable at doing close-ups. I request that you do a review on this aspect of this lens please. Here is what I find for close focusing distance on this lens. Close Focus specifications top. At 24mm: 0.69 feet (0.21 meters or 8¼ inches) from the image plane; even closer to the front of the lens. At 70mm: 1.25 feet (0.38 meters or 15 inches) from the image plane; even closer to the front of the lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Those close minimum focus distances are why it can be helpful to remove the lens hood so that there is no shading of your subject.

[@StevieJ102]

Super informative. Thanks for the level of detail you put into all your reviews. I won’t buy a lens until you review it. Cheers!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

No pressure, right? :)

[@lighthunter1980]

Best lens reviewer on YT. Hands down.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I really appreciate that. I keep trying to tell my wife that I'm the best, but for some reason I just get eye rolls ;)

[@gc3964]

Hi Dustin, I have just bought it and found out that there is a little play on the zoom ring (it may be approx 1 mm) and produces a light clicking sound when zooming in/out. Any feedback on your end?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you are within your warranty period, you can ask Canon about it. It's probably fine, but you certainly don't want it to get worse.

[@gc3964]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks a lot for the feedback!

[@AnirudhPVlogs]

Every Canon Lens has the price point dilemma, is sigma coming out with RF mount lens ?

[@cohoonatube]

It looks like it! www.mirrorlessrumors.com/yes-it-will-happen-sigma-will-do-rf-z-x-mount-lenses-too/

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm glad to see that rumor, but it hasn't been confirmed by any of my Sigma contacts.

[@nemezote]

Could you please index and timestamp this video? Thank you!

[@zigmarskupriss7131]

What is going on on your jacket Dustin? Is that normal? I'm watching on a 4k TV. I don't see it when watching in my phone.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You'll have to be more specific, Zigmars. I'm not sure what you are referring to.

[@len.whistler]

I am waiting for the RF 50mm 1.4

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough...though I'm not sure there is wind of that yet.

[@seasterl]

As a subscriber, I’m very appreciative for your work and informative videos, so thanks very much for that. Question: when comparing this lens head-to-head with Canon’s 24-105 f/4 and comparing apples-to-apples using same settings (focal length, aperture, iso, composition, use of R5 body, etc.), which lens wins out in terms of in-camera corrected image quality? I’m particularly interested in sharpness, chromatic aberration, and vignetting). Thanks!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The 24-70mm has the smaller zoom range and thus has a more consistent image quality, though both are pretty good.

[@seasterl]

So would you give the edge to the 24-70 for best in-camera correction, or do both faithfully present equally-good corrected images (in-camera)?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Both of them correct optical defects well in camera for JPEGs.

[@njrivetelite]

The Tamron EF 24-70 2.8 G2 at 940g feels just as heavy as the RF 24-70 2.8 IS L. 8 stops is def a bit lofty.. 6 stops is still quite impressive. I'd still throw on a gimbal for video where I'm moving.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Agreed on the IS rating and that a gimbal is still worthwhile.

[@njrivetelite]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I use my Ronin S for Real Estate.. some short clips I'll do hand-held but it's never as smooth as with the gimbal.

[@norbelthomas]

Is it possible to see some direct comparison between the fantastic EF version with this lens? How would you choose between these 2 lens? BTW, it's interesting to see the old cash of my nation (Taiwan) in the image quality comparison chart.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid not. I don't have either lens on hand anymore.

[@frankforcher7318]

Does the R5 show the stabilization symbol with the „+“ (means the shaking hand and the „+ “)? I have a used 24-70 available which does not show the „+“ but only the shaking hand. Is this a fault?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Which 24-70, though?

[@frankforcher7318]

This one in your video: RF 24-70mm 2.8 L IS USM

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hmmm, I'm not quite sure about that. I think I saw the + symbol when I did my review, but I'm not 100% certain. A lot of gear goes through my hands!

[@frankforcher7318]

@@DustinAbbottTWI My hope was that you can still check this. Ok, thanx for your answer and the always helpful and informative videos.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

Does the R5 IBIS work with the EF 24-70 f/2.8 L ii or does the lens need to have IS for the R5 IBIS to work?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The IBIS will work fine with the adapted lens.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Tnx once again !!!

[@trippalhealicks]

Hi, Dustin! Thanks for another great video. The Canon R5 AF seems to be very competitive with Sony's best offerings. I understand you also own an a9. How would you say the R5 stacks up to Sony's top-of-the-line AF performer?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Their AF performance is similar for tracking (the R6 even more so). The R5 is better in lowlight, though, and a little more reliable for video face and eye tracking, so I would give the overall edge to the R5 (tracking is debatable and lens specific, obviously).

[@trippalhealicks]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for the detailed reply. I'm waiting very impatiently on Sony's next camera. Be it the a9III or a9x or a7IV, I'm very interested. I'm hoping Sony comes with some significant tracking AF improvements, because that R5 has me really considering a system switch for that one feature alone, not to mention the better ergos, 1.2 lenses, better menus, (subjectively) favorable colors, etc.

[@patlezinc]

Trippalhealicks you just have to choose when jumping, as big manufacturers will never stop undertaking each others. The R5 is a beast and I doubt many poeple will exploite it at 100% 😉

[@tkermi]

Thanks for the detailed (and trustworthy) info and merry Christmas! Maybe it's just me but I have always wanted somewhat more reach from a multipurpose zoom. When photographing events, portraits and "wider-angle wildlife" having ~100mm would be nice. But then again I need at least 35mm on the wide end (so 70-200mm doesn't work). So I would like to have a RF 28-105mm f/2,8. This is a hard lens to build, but with modern tech high quality should be possible based on the performance of RF 28-70mm f/2. I estimate that if based on similar design than the RF 28-70mm f/2 a 28-105mm f/2,8 would need that same 95mm glass and weigh 1,3-1,4kg... So that's quite a lot. But a 35-105mm f/2,8 might be possible to make with a 86mm glass and weight close to 1kg - so more manageable. But having that 28mm option would be more practical 🤔.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Yeah, I do think that's a buildable lens. Tamron's 28-200mm is actually optically sound, and it is F4.5 by 105mm. That's a compact lens, so with a reduced focal range I don't see why you couldn't build that lens even if it is double in size to the Tamron.

[@tkermi]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the info. I actually found out that Tamron has ones made a 28-105mm f/2,8 lens. But that was back in 1997 and the lens didn't perform that admirably. Obviously having a "f/2,8" doesn't mean much if you almost always have to stop it down to get good enough quality. But still intriguing design, here is a link to Christopher's review if interested: kzbin.info/www/bejne/h2SpY6qlnK6Hj8U

[@doohanlim1225]

@tkermi you called it !!

[@petercruz1993]

Honestly what’s the point in mirrorless of the lenses are bigger

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

At this stage there are many, many mirrorless advantages that have nothing to do with size, including vastly improved AF (that requires no fine tuning), IBIS, and more.

[@danielson_9211]

Let my friend borrow this to go to fuji ugh it didn't survive errr, He just got his taxes back and paid me so debating the 2.8 or the 24-105, love the 2.8 but the extra reach would be nice, but since I'm shooting inside churches (guest speakers and events) and museums all the time not sure the f4 will cut it with the R5.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a tough choice, as it comes down to the debate between the larger aperture or the longer reach. The only good solution is a two lens solution, unfortunately.

[@Rocky_KO]

Is Canon not sending you the 28-70 F2? 😉

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Canon Canada has actually not been very good to work with, period. Fortunately a retailer called Camera Canada has supplied me with a lot of my recent Canon loaners. Unfortunately the 28-70mm F2 has been a very hard lens to get in Canada due to supply chain issues. I may try again in late summer when I've got a little more time.

[@cohoonatube]

As excellent as expected Dustin, thanks! Really comes down to overall price-point with Canon. If Canon created an EOS R 6.5 with more 30+ MP, $2000 price-tag, and Tammy brought their 28-200 to the RF mount, it would truly give the A7R's a run for their fan base.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I suspect you will see an EOS R6 Mark II in the future. And yes, Sigma and Tamron lenses on RF will open the system right up.

[@robertcudlipp3426]

I have had a non IS, couldn't afford, on my 6D for many years. Was less third party choice then. Appreciate we are looking at slightly different camera mounts , the IQ of my 24-70 2.8 has been superb. Canon just seems to have lost the marketing plot on the pricing of the RF glass. Ok ,am not a pro, but non pros would have difficulty with purchasing several of these quality RF L series lens. No argument from me as to potential top IQ, but naturally wonder how far behind the Sigma Art and Tamron competition will be?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I doubt that Sigma or Tamron would be far behind if they get a chance to develop on this platform. But yes, Canon's pricing on RF is pretty onerous. We need the third party development to bring some reasonably priced alternatives.

[@pauloandrefernandes]

Hi Dustin. Love your reviews. What about EF24-70mm II (with adpator in a mirrorless IBIS camera) vs RF 24-70mm IS lens? Considering cost and imagem quality ?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you already own the EF lens *and don't mind using an adapter, keep that lens. The RF version is the new version to buy, though.

[@acouragefann]

Looking forward to 2+ decades of fiddling with these new rear caps as well?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm really not, actually.

[@terryhastings1695]

They are a disaster. Millions in lens development and 2 cents on the end cap that could really screw up gaskets

[@terryhastings1695]

Very good Dustin - Just wish the UK price would fall. If you need to clear some space in your lens cabinet - I can email you my despatch address. Happy Christmas. Just hiring the EF24mm 1.4 at the moment. Wow!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I agree, Terry. Oh, and by the way, I don't own this lens either. It was just a loaner.

[@terryhastings1695]

@@DustinAbbottTWI I think I am settling on this as my first RF purchase. I was going 28-70, but the extra weight and no IS with the R is for later If I go R6 later. You mentioned kinda average for RF15.35 and rf70.200 2.8, so would you recommend staying with EF mk3 70.200 2.8IS?

[@Sanam4KProduction]

Sir Rf 24.70 Rs in $?

[@tkermi]

Come On, Man! 😅. 💡 Just use some online currency converter, like google. If you missed the part where Dustin told the price in USD, click the links in the description box 🙂👍🏻.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You'll have to explore the price in your local market.

[@ParikshitBhujbal]

Canon : makes great lenses but cripples their cameras!

[@frostybe3r]

What have they crippled about the EOS R5?

[@ParikshitBhujbal]

@@frostybe3r No 120p FHD & bad thermal management (overheating )

[@frostybe3r]

@@ParikshitBhujbal I think you need to buy the camera before you spout more bullshit. :) Also FHD is old AF.

[@ParikshitBhujbal]

@@frostybe3r Why so salty?

[@frostybe3r]

@@ParikshitBhujbal Do you even own the camera? I've experienced no issues with 'overheating' in 8K raw mode.

[@Technologyadvisor1]

Hello would you consider being interviewed and contribute to a tribute video to matt ballard from art of the image. What I would like to do is a video highlighting some of matts content and having a few people say a few words about him on camera please let me know your thoughts if you would like to contribute I am reaching out to any one who knew him or followed him for many years if you would like to get involved. please get in touch contact me on my channel if your interested regards Paul.

[@IMGDirect]

Most complaints about lenses could be fixed by making them heavier. The things that fix the problems will add weight most likely. Heavier the better💪🏼💪🏼

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Wow...I couldn't disagree more.

[@IMGDirect]

@@DustinAbbottTWI maybe you need to get in the gym 😉

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

@@IMGDirect I work out six days a week, so I'm not sure that's the problem :)

[@IMGDirect]

@@DustinAbbottTWI just playing around. Hell yeah💪🏼💪🏼same

[@liverdetox84]

The kit lens sucks puppy toes!!! The R6 is great

[@liverdetox84]

Yeah.... just buy a prim Lens

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There's definitely a big gap between the cheap Canon lenses and the L lenses.

[@terryhastings1695]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Absolutely! They should rebrand themselves to Canyon!!

[@gloriarios4533]

I don't see a ring on your finger. Are you married??

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Yes I am (24 years). I just don't wear a ring

[@sniperv]

The new Canon Caps are ANNOYING!!!!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Yes they are.