CANON RF 28-70: Good for Event Photography??

[@DragonEye1911]

Just a few comments from a Canon RP user with a 28-70 f/2: The camera is bearable to lug around with a Peak Slide strap, with one anchor on the side and the other at the tripod socket. This makes carrying the camera in such a way that the big lens is pointing to the ground. It’s surprisingly comfortable plus the added bonus of gripping the camera instantly when ready to shoot. I’ve shot a 2.5 hours outdoor procession with minimal fatigue. When holding the camera, I alternate between resting the camera on my shoulder (lens pointing up) or I use my left hand to cradle the lens. I decided early on I’ll save my right wrist by doing this lest I introduce camera shake due to a fatigued wrist towards the middle of a shoot. Overall I am happy with it. It’s like having 4-5 primes without having to hunch over a camera bag and fiddling for a lens change.

[@KeeganRobin]

It's nice hearing this from an owner of the lens. I think if I was able to spend a little more time with it than 1 event, I might have been able to find its stronger points and see the worth in it. Thanks for your insight!

[@KeeganRobin]

If you found this video helpful, could you help a buddy out with a big ol' LIKE and SUB?? See you in the next vid

[@RWAquariumPages]

great video and love the detailed feedback about this lens. I mainly shoot candid photos of my sons and i'm considering a standard zoom, so it's 28-70/2 or the 24-105/4, but like you've mentioned a prime at f1.2 will bokeh more than f2. ah, first world problems, great video!

[@NicoleArrage]

You really gotta get out of your comfort zone to film these kinds of events :O The more this video progresses, the more I notice it, but you handle it super well and it doesn't seem to affect you at all, which is amazing!!

[@KeeganRobin]

Thanks! Yeah it was a little weird in the beginning but Arian and I got really used to it after a bit.

[@NicoleArrage]

@@KeeganRobin That's the beauty of vlogging (& photography haha), really gets you to go out there and work on focusing on what you're doing minus the distractions + looks. Can't wait to get back at it!

[@justmattgray]

I’m glad you praised the 35mm. It’s my only lens and I find it fits most my needs. Considering the 24-70 or 70-200 next

[@chuiwyjustin]

I have the lens and it's worth every dollar of that $3000 price tag :)

[@estogaza1]

This is true REAL LIFE review

[@kingofpresets8437]

The picture at 10:50 yes you could of blurred out the background more with a 1.4 but at what cost ? 1.4 is super shallow the other person would of been noticeably blurred so i think that lens is perfect

[@KeeganRobin]

You make a good point. Maybe 1.8 max. Not that big of a deal though

[@jsleger3404]

@@KeeganRobin You also could have zoomed more to get more bokeh and separation and better composition. You were at 48

[@jsleger3404]

I switched from Sony (A7III) and got an R6 just to have this lens :) Can't wait for the RF 70-135 F2!!

[@KeeganRobin]

That 70-135 will be brilliant!!

[@JohnCastillo]

Awesome review! Wouldn't it be tiring to have multiple prime lenses for this type of event, instead of just having one fast sharp zoom lens? Different type of tiring I guess. I'm just scared I'd miss shot opportunities while switching out lenses.

[@KeeganRobin]

Thanks John. If you're a pro, can afford the $3k and will use the 28-70 then by all means do it! Because it's amazing. But for someone like me, I can't afford the f2 AND more lenses. I'd rather stick with a few primes to have more possibilities in other areas of photography for the same price or less.

[@priamdavid4827]

Very informative. I appreciate the info!

[@KeeganRobin]

Thanks brother!

[@ajbid805]

Great video. What other reasons did you switch from Sony for? I've always been with Sony and have no real interest in switching but I am interested to see what things I could be missing. But they would have to be huge things I'm missing . Anyways just curious.

[@KeeganRobin]

Thanks AJ. I switched because of color, video bitrate and the RF glass, among a few other reasons. I think I will make a video on why I switched soon, keep an eye out.

[@Kaisolostudio]

Kafala how do the Nikon & Sony’s ergonomics compare? :)

[@joeyreda1694]

LOL at the light turning off. Cool vid bro, u a pro

[@KeeganRobin]

Google home is both a blessing and a curse

[@LucasPassmore]

Good stuff man- thanks for the ride-along! And they DO like those soft balls! 😅

[@kdw75]

I am really torn. I am looking for my first RF lens to go with my R5 and I am trying to decide between the RF35, RF50L and the 28-70L. I already have an EF24-70L and 100-300L, but want something better for low light photos at family parties and get togethers.

[@KeeganRobin]

If you really want good low light the 35 and 50 will be amazing. The 28-70 may be sharper but I'm not sure if it's worth having both a 24-70 and 28-70

[@monkeywizard77]

I got mine for under $2400. Figure that was enough of a discount, so I took the plunge! Now just waiting for my R5!

[@KeeganRobin]

Wow. Now that's totally worth it!

[@markmatook]

Thank you for this truly real world review, Keegan! Great insight and detail. If you don’t mind: Cam and lens of your camera operator? Thanks (: trying to figure out my next move as someone who shoots photo and video

[@KeeganRobin]

He was shooting with an EOS R and a sigma 35mm EF 1.4. looked pretty good eh? Especially the outside shots

[@markmatook]

Keegan Boulineau I thought it was a canon + a 35mm! :) I figured it was an RF 35mm 1.8 IS (highly recommend) it’s so sharp, super versatile with the macro and IS, and a great light option. All that said, yes! Came out great. All together, a really great review man. Also really like your candor during your event coverage. You have a supporter here :)

[@KeeganRobin]

@@markmatook thanks mark! Since that video I now own the RF 35 and I can definitely say it's a great option too. I appreciate the support!

[@markmatook]

Keegan Boulineau absolutely (: yea, the look wide open during the day reminds me of my medium format film cameras - and video is great of course. Took it to Disney on a family trip and was blown away by image quality at night on the RP.

[@bangtao6593]

Great review. I just order that lens. It will replace my old EF 24-105/4 is, my 35/1.4, my 50/1.8 (almost never use that why I sticked with that cheap lens) and my 85/1.8. I shoot a lot of event on the beach or on a boat... It will be usefull. And finaly it will be lighter that 2 cameras with primes or not.

[@KeeganRobin]

Great! Seems like this lens will be useful for you. Enjoy!

[@bangtao6593]

@@KeeganRobin Thank you. I won't miss anymore any actions/moments because I just mounted the 85 haha

[@guyphoto9437]

This type of photography is called "spray and pray". It's usually done because a "photographer" doesn't know how to time their shots and get meaningful images. They shoot a ton of photos and pray that one or two of them will be ok. During the days of film, photographers didn't do this, they would go broke buying film and getting it processed. Unfortunately the advent of digital has brought these commandos out of the woodwork and now we have less and less real skilled photographers.

[@bangtao6593]

Oh yeah it was better before :p

[@afrank3029]

Omg, sit down please.....!

[@thebluebooklife]

Wow dude really? You sound like one of those photographers who’s been shooting for years and thinks he knows it all 🙄 What a tool🤨

[@guyphoto9437]

@@thebluebooklife You're right on one count I have been shooting for years. I'm self taught, and have shot large format, medium format and 35mm film before making the switch to digital. I taught myself by reading books, and taking workshops from master photographers at the time like Art Ketchum, Don Blair, Monte Zucker, Hansen Fong just to name a few. I did this prior to getting a business license and shooting for a living. I wanted to be a professional from the start not learn on the job. I began by shooting documentary work, then as I made connections I was hired as a photojournalist, ended up doing that for a number of years, which included making images for the AP. I taught photojournalism, which included teaching darkroom techniques, as a part time faculty member at a college while at the same time I was opening a studio. Shortly after opening my studio I was hired as the personal photographer for the Governor of a State which I did for about 4 years. I shot with large format film, medium format film, and 35mm film. I had a personal darkroom in addition to the ones I had at work. Ultimately I ended up opening and working out of 4 studios, individually not at the same time. My personal work consisted of documentary work, event photography, weddings then I branched off into model photography, graduating senior photography, glamour, fashion, boudoir and portrait work. I made the switch to digital when it was in it's infancy mainly because it eliminated using a lab which at times was frustrating. Again, I was self taught in photoshop because when digital was in it's infancy nobody knew how to use photoshop or how to print it correctly. And there were no books on the subject. Finally the pro labs and the paper and profiles caught up with the cameras and printing was no longer an issue. Your wrong on the second score. I don't think I know it all. No one does. Learning to see light is something someone is born with. That's why not everyone can be a really good photographer. I've spent my entire life learning how to do that and I do it very well. But I also know that I had a knack for it. It came easy for me, I understood light and shadows and all the compositional aspects almost intuitively. I've taught hundreds of workshops and within a few classes I can tell you which people will "get" photography and which people will only be snap shooters. Who will make an image or who will simply take a picture. I can teach most anyone the basic techniques of photography but I can't give them an "eye" for making an image. I stand my what I said about digital photography creating "spray and pray" people who own a camera and who seem to be for the most part "You Tube" certified. A good professional photographer doesn't have to shoot hundreds of images for a portrait, or thousands of images for a wedding. That tells me they don't know what they're doing. They don't have the "eye." I'm partially retired now, I only shoot for long standing clients that I've shot for before, but I'm not a spray and pray person, I'm a professional who's paid his dues. I'm older so I'm not "woke" as you younger people so I tend to speak my mind rather than BS you. If I look at your work I want to see a print, not a backlit 2"x3" or smaller image. If I see a print that is good, I'll tell you why I think it's good, it I see one that is lousy, I'll tell you why I think it's lousy. And I think shooting thousands of an image at a wedding or event is lousy.

[@thaipepperlasvegas6693]

@@guyphoto9437 You have a very impressive background. I shoot a lot of events like this and understand totally what you're talking about because I had done it since the film days and yes, I don't like the "spray and pray" thing either. Every shots should have a meanings of its own. However, I tend to shoot more and more photos in an event ever since switching to digital because there's no more limitation like films. Anyhow, what the reviewer did here was more like candid and he just tried to show what it's like to use a very unique lens like the 28-70 f2. I can see that it's heavy for a standard zoom(look at the size of the darn thing!!) and anyone who hold it for hours should get tired. I also shoot low light a lot so I can see why he would prefer an f1. 4 lens over this. All in all, I can see his points. It's just an opinion of someone who had tried the lenses and thought it wasn't for him but that still doesn't change the fact that this is one of the most interesting lenses of all times.

[@YanFries]

Would you prefer 85 1.8 for more portraits or if you had only one lens 70f2 would be good enough with the added benefit of being more versatile? 24-70 2.8 IS would be a contender

[@KeeganRobin]

I would go with the 85 f1.8 because let's face it, its like $2.75k cheaper, and I like having more reach. If anything I would still pick the 24-70 2.8 and a prime to start. IS is very useful to have especially for filmmaking. the 28-70 is sooo sharp... but not worth $3000+tax sharp. Also, it's seriously hell to lug that thing around, even in your bag. 85 1.8 is so easy to take everywhere. I'd consider the 28-70 only if you're a full out pro and making serious bank from photography.

[@YanFries]

Keegan Boulineau thanks for the reply! Only problem is waiting for canon to release an RF 85 1.8! I’ve currently just got the rf 35 1.8 so thinking of selling it to fund a zoom for versatility in my work, I only take photos with very little video. Might go with a 15-35 f4 (when it comes out) 35 1.8, and rf 85 1.8 as a well-rounded kit.. hmm decisions 🤔

[@KeeganRobin]

I feel like Canon has some big plans for 2020. I'm sure we'll see a lot more lenses. I would love to try that 35mm sometime (haven't yet). Especially for the macro. I agree, those 3 lenses would totally be a kit I would go for. Might add a 135 in there too.

[@YanFries]

Keegan Boulineau or 15-35 2.8, 85 1.8 and 70-200 😉. Choices!

[@Kaisolostudio]

Nathan Yan Im in the Fuji system, but I think a kit comprised of the 15-35 F2.8 / 50mm 1.2 / 70-200 F2.8, would be amazing!!!

[@HTommy2133]

Hi Keegan, could you please help me to find the focus setting for full frame focus you had at 4:58 when shooting from outside? I cannot find it on R6 and it’s killing me. Thanks.

[@KeeganRobin]

I think I was using the basic detection autofocus. No specific point or centre AF it’s just the setting that includes face and eye autofocus.

[@HTommy2133]

@@KeeganRobin will check. Thanks

[@HTommy2133]

@@KeeganRobin and found it. Thanks again.

[@bmtango05]

I would be worried about snapping my wrist if I accidentally dropped the camera with that behemoth! Nice review, you saved me some $$ as I was debating this lens over the 24-70 2.8 which has IS and is lighter. Not worth the extra coin imo for f2 but that's just me.

[@KeeganRobin]

Agreed. I'd rather go with the 24-70. It's a little more versatile to me.

[@derbagger22]

Speaking so close to the food is skeeving me out during Corona! LOL. But I've been thinking about this lens a lot. Thanks!

[@KeeganRobin]

😅

[@Tudorguy-zw1ik]

Hi what’s the best lens for both video and photo?

[@KeeganRobin]

Best, not the most expensive: 24-105 f4. There really is no "best". The best lens is the one that fits the situation. A wide zoom like the 15-35 f2.8 is a very popular lens for video and photo

[@timlevy1857]

I used to shoot events with EF 70-200 f2.8mk2 (very similar weight to RF28-70) Add a 600ex flash (500g) This combined weight of getting close to 3kg is way too taxing for a normal human being to carry for more than 1 hour. Since switching to RF70-200 (just slightly heavier than RF24-70) - it's incredible how just 500g can make a difference to holding a camera set up for hours. 28-70 is a brilliant lens - but shooting a wedding for 7 hours... urgh

[@frostybe3r]

Go to the gym.

[@maz1980s]

I bought this lens and boy that was a huge mistake. I'm only a hobbyist. Should have gone with primes or 15-35mm.

[@KeeganRobin]

oh yeah, for hobbyists it's way to expensive. i'd go for primes like the 35mm

[@pokokdekkaula]

It look really close at 2:04...

[@eliotopian]

I hate my tiny sony grips. I want a canon a9, lol

[@KeeganRobin]

I'm sure they'll make an EOS R1 at some point