Canon RF 70-200 2.8 vs RF 70-200 f4 Portrait Comparison (Free RAW Files)

[@K9malinois_dog_love]

I can definitely see a huge difference between the 2.8 and the F4 and most of it is on the price.

[@dr_squirrel]

Haha, nice 😂

[@Kevon420]

The size and price are the biggest difference for sure.

[@DCWilliam24]

Haha true, in these conditions there is going to be less of a difference. However, this lens is frequently used for event photography with less than ideal lighting that you don’t control.

[@kevinle9418]

Awesome comment 😂

[@jolas12]

Widać różnicę Rf 70 200 f4 obraz jest płaski, nie ma głębi.

[@basilbcf]

I debated (not for long) about whether to get the 70-200 f/4 or pay $1100 more for the f/2.8. If I were a professional making money with portrait shots, I "might" consider the f/2.8/ However, since I would be shooting 80% landscapes and only about 20% portraits (family and grand kids), I decided the lighter, smaller f/4 made more sense for me. It's very easy to toss in a backpack and go hiking with then f/4 as a second lens. As this comparison demonstrates, the differences are real, but at longer focal lengths, not very noticeable. With the money I saved getting the f/4 over the 2.8, I also bought the RF 85 f2 refurbished and still have money left over. As this comparison shows at around 5:40, the 85 f/2 obliterates the background much better than the 70-200 f/2.8 and isn't really too far off from the 85 f/1.2 - for a fraction of the cost. (Personally I think the RF 85 f2 is a killer deal! ). If I need a longer focal length with better bokeh that the 70-200 f/4, I also have an EF 135 f/2 which is an amazing lens. For all these reasons, I bought the 70-200 f/4 and have been extremely happy with that decision.

[@adrian5841]

Just got the refurbished 85mm f2. Such a great deal and love the lens

[@mrki4937]

Exactly what I considered. I do have the EF 85 f/1.8 and this is perfect for adding blurred background for the lower end of the focal range.

[@sterling68]

One of the best comparisons i've seen for these lenses!! Super in depth and having photos side by side at every step was so good to be able to pause the video and have a real good look at the differences. Great shots too well done and thanks.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you Jamie!

[@RQL-ol7sn]

You are building an impressive library of thorough, informative reviews. Keep up the good work. It will only be a matter of time before more and more viewers discover your quality content.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much! I really appreciate the kind words.

[@mihugong3153]

I so agree. These comparisons are so well done.

[@JamesReader]

@@mihugong3153 Thank you Michu, that means a lot!

[@browniepinoy]

I just love your comparison videos. Thanks for also putting the 85 f1.2 in here, too. I didn’t realize the unique swirling bokeh effect at 200mm f2.8 until you mentioned it.

[@dayeah765caoni3]

EF 135 f2 shares similar bokeh

[@josecarlosr6317]

James I want to thank you for making these videos. No one compares lenses as best a you do. You have helped me made some good decisions that I have not regretted when choosing lenses. Every time a new lens comes out. I look forward to watch your video first

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much Jose, that means a lot and is really encouraging 🙏 I really appreciate the kind words.

[@hunglemed]

but f2.8 photos have beautiful sun light on model, a bit unfair for f4 :D

[@drchtct]

Yeah he speaks about a „prime like pop on the 2.8“, in other words, he means the beautiful 3d pop generated by the sun patches on her and the background. not the lens

[@anthonyavila1814]

I absolutely noticed the same thing. Almost in every photo on the 2.8 had that nice ray of sunshine.

[@joelad84]

Great video thank you, it’s helped me no end. Recently bought an R7 and trying to decide which glass lineup to go for. The f4 being much cheaper means I can get another lens to compliment it, whereas the f2.8 takes all the budget.

[@ops4758]

C'est la deuxième vidéo de test d'objectif que je regarde sur votre chaîne et je adore. Merci

[@mystikmeg]

Brilliant video. The differences are so subtle for portraits in good light.

[@SatWizz]

Always, amazing comparisons with side-by-side images as the hallmark !! Thank You James

[@f0t0b0y]

Absolutely love your comparison videos because who doesn’t wanna see the differences when considering weight and price and size but I noticed your mid length shots the 2.8 you had really pretty dappled sun but you’re f/4 we’re cloudy, making the color and image look completely different. That was a little bit of a bummer. Either way, love the videos.

[@jdpst20]

Awesome Comparison... I'm debating to add the 70-200 either 2.8 or 4 to the bag for the R5c... .however I already have and LOVE the 24-105mm f4 as it lives on the camera... I also have the nifty fifty 1.8 and honestly for the price I'm completely happy with this set up. I would honestly go with the 70-200mm F4 mainly for the price and size however it has a pretty decent focal overlap. I'm almost contemplating to just going with the 100-500mm, then picking up say a 135mm 1.8 and be done with my set up. Between the 2 lenses I would cover 24-500mm and have the 135 for those super portraits. Also, I'm not always looking to alliterate the background, esp environmental portraits.... I want some of the scene to help tell a story... So I don't mind shooting at F4 or 5.6. At 5:42 I almost prefer the 70-200 F4 out of the 85mm and the 2.8.... because the background feels still soft but natural... where as the 85mm at 1.2 is almost like added blur.

[@amirjafarian]

Thank you James. I was going to order 2.8 version but after watching this video and checking the raw files going for F4. I already have 28-70 F2 for indoor and bokeh.

[@lobofilmmaker]

First really good comparison I see between an f2.8 and f4 lens. I am in a different ecosystem (Panasonic) but the difference will basically be the same. You definitely convinced me to get the f4 version for my camera. Great to see the portrait capability with this f4 lens 👍 keep up the great work

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for the kind words! I've just picked up a Panasonic my self, their lenses are fantastic

[@TheRicsser]

@@JamesReader Same here. with Panasonic S ecosystem. Maybe the f2.8 is not worth an extra 500g in weight, also about 800$ diff in price.

[@ivorhooper]

Great pic's. Nice to see Beninborough Hall on the video - it's a great place to visit.

[@frederickmcdonald6636]

I found it hard to discern as to which lens I preferred, but at 8:15 in the video the image with Rachel I liked the hands better with the f 4 lens. I sometimes think that there is too much emphasis made on bokeh as I like less of this and more of the details of the model and where the model is. BTW - Rachel is beautiful and such a good model! A very good video all around.....

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for the kind words and thank you for watching Frederick. She’s the best!

[@alexgeorge1535]

Agreed. There are many situations where I prefered the F4 images even if they weren't as soft

[@michaelmurray7496]

Thanks for this review, really helped me in choosing the F4. Personally love the fact that at F4 I can get a razor sharp image with the whole face in focus and at the same time obliterate the background. Then for landscape photos I can stop all the way down to F16 and with IS get some great panoramas. Even the video is great, nice and smooth hand held. I really appreciate the most that you provide RAW files as I can actually load them into Lightroom and see for myself the quality at full resolution. Makes all the difference when deciding on a lens. Thanks James

[@pkmexplorers]

Really great video. Easy choice for me / f4 ... Sometimes they really look very similar and I do agree with all you said who need f 2.8 vs f4 Great shoot and really mazing work to shows differences . Thanks 👌

[@AugmentedGravity]

85 1.2 is just pure insanity. The best prime portrait lens probably ever made. The DS version too.

[@joachimreiner7924]

Same as the EF 85 f/1.2 II is.

[@Gerlae81]

I must say this is a more comprehensive break down and the photo sharing to edit and see for yourself is awesome. I also like that the setting on camera are shared to kinda help a amateur shooter like myself connect the dot with audio and video points... Thank You...

[@mariavanschie7946]

The RF 70-200 2.8 images from 4:30 at 100mm and 135mm (2.8) look like 50mm 1.2 prime lens images to me, in terms of rendering and bokeh. They have that typical 50mm look. In my opinion it is better to have the 135mm prime lens 2.0 or 1.8 which gives a totally different look at 135.

[@VMLenin]

Thanks for the great comparison video I just needed. I might need the f2.8 at extreme low light situations or best 70-200 portraits, but I’m gonna let my 85mm do it and use f4. Its image quality is good enough and the lightness is just unbelieveable. I might be able to handle some low light situations with the IS, and most importantly it’s much cheaper! It’s a perfect 70-200 for travelers like me.

[@rafafit1904]

Perfect comment. Im too have the 85 1.2, 50 1.2 and 200 f2. The rf 70-200mm f4 it ia just perfect for travel photography

[@giuseppe1000]

One of the most useful and well made videos about the RF 70-200 lenses! It would be awesome to have a comparison between RF 24-105 F4 and RF 24-70 F2.8

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much! I definitely plan on comparing those zooms in the future!

[@Maxence13480]

always love your videos, often answers my questions and the quality is out of control, thanks a lot !

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much!

[@ahmedLibyan]

In situation with low light you wish you had the 2.8. I tried both and there is definitely a huge different. The shots used in this video were in perfect lighting...

[@cash3612]

I just bought the f2.8 version today new for $2499 US and am glad I finally did. It was a hard decision between the two but I figured it’s better to have that extra stop of light than not. However i appreciate the ergonomics of the F4 version a little better.

[@rtisticshotz9879]

I can see an extreme difference in the brightness level and sharpness. Going for the 2.8. The price difference is nothing when doing what you love. You find a way to make it happen. What is the music in the background during your Headshot comparison in the beginning? Very well and thorough comparison

[@kifley19]

The 2.8 has more 3d pop and is a little sharper. Outside in great lighting it's hard to tell. The benefit of the 2.8 will be the better quality but also will benefit more in lowlight. The benefit of the f4 is the size and shorter zoom throw and cheaper price.

[@NyreeCPhotography]

Great Video! Thanks so much! I never really considered the F4 version until I saw this video. The F2.8 comes with a heavy duty price tag and can't justify the cost no matter how hard I try, so I feel sooo much better going with the F4 version. Time to see if there are any Cyber Monday deals :-)

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching! You’ll love the f4 version! It’s an amazing lens

[@jakr1880]

Thank you for the excellent comparison. I saw this after I had already purchased the F4 and was very surprised by the relatively modest differences between lens performance (at least for my needs, based off your comparison) than I had expected. Picked up a refurb RF70-200F4 from Canon for US$1099 over the holidays. Hope you were able to get one too. It was too good of deal to pass up. Very happy with the lens, and it's a great all around piece of glass to use, even on a lowly RP.. Not quite as sharp as my pro M43 gear, but considering it has a much harder job, I'm very impressed with it. And it packs smaller than some of my M43 glass.

[@JamesReader]

@@jakr1880 That's a steal! If I didn't have the 2.8 I would have jumped on that deal. Really glad to hear you are enjoying the lens.

[@rafaellimon1393]

What a great Comparison, and made me notice some general details on the lenses that I never thought they will be there.

[@ningju7924]

what details?

[@plush18]

Hurts me to find this video after i went and got the 70-200 2.8 after so many years of wanting this lens. I thought the 2.8 vs the 4.0 would make such a huge difference, i wish it was as small and compact as the F4 lens, also that price tag i paid, I'm hurt man! nice video

[@darrylstubbs4245]

Bought thr 2.8 version yesterday and have a shoot on tuesday,super exited.

[@JamesReader]

Awesome! You'll love it. Let me know how you get on with it!

[@petercreagh8797]

I have the EF f2.8 and I would be interested to see a comparison with the RF one. If you were on a budget and you could not afford the RF f2.8 you could get the f4 and the Canon RF 85mm f2 for low light and save a lot of money. The 85mm f2 I don't think would focus fast enough for commercial use though

[@TCinSoCal]

Thank you.. I think, for me, the main thing I don’t see is over $1,000 in difference. Picked the RF 70-200 f4 up today with a rebate. Loving it already.

[@KatieF307]

Great analysis and very helpful in figuring out which lens to go with.

[@chennytango9298]

honestly I barely noticed much of real difference and in fact I prefer some of the shot and color on the f4 lens. i went with the f4 lens for much lighter and small travel lens. and the saved money I put in an 85 1.2L lens. never regretted.

[@atvjavi]

Muchas gracias por el vídeo, me ha ayudado a ver un poco más de cerca las diferencias entre las dos lentes, aunque creo que las condiciones de luz en la primera parte, con ese sol suave han favorecido a la lente 2.8, luego la luz era más uniforme y se han podido comparar mejor. Me ha sorprendido un poco el f4, gratamente, y lo valoro sobre todo por la diferencia económica que supone. Gracias de nuevo por el esfuerzo. Recibe mis mejores deseos. Un abrazo.

[@greggScutum]

Great real world comparison and stunning model!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much Grzegorz!

[@bobbybrown5180]

Thanks for comparing and sharing samples - great job 👊

[@JamesReader]

Thank you!

[@esoxhu]

Nice comparison video. It helped me a lot to decide which one is fit in my set & budget.

[@JamesReader]

Glad it was helpful! Thank you!

[@TheDudeSpeaketh]

Excellent job. Great comparisons. Beautiful images. THANK YOU!!!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you!

[@brendallsterling4117]

Cost was a big factor since both are prime lenses. I purchased the rf F4 to shoot outdoors and face shots

[@tajemniczydziaacz9966]

What a quality. You deserve a big subscription!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you!

[@richardbarclay9095]

Fantastic real world review... great work.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you Richard!

[@joakimlinde5236]

fantastic comparison! Thanks for bringing the important differences and ignoring the specs that most other videos tend to focus on. Keep it up!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much!

[@impopio4987]

​@@JamesReaderdo u have a video comparion between 24-105mm f4 & f2.8 lens?

[@rd_rae]

The closer zoom ring on the F4 seems way more comfortable and intuitive to use than the outfront zoom ring on the F2.8

[@carsencityphotography]

Something I learned the hard way was f2.8 is absolutely useless when shooting more than one person. Especially a family with kids. I had to shoot at f4 to keep all faces in focus making the f2.8 an unnecessary expense.

[@The_hermit_kama]

Best comparison I've seen so far. Thank you.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you!!

[@tomidanko855]

I watch a lot of photographer youtuber but i think you are the best! Focus only what i need! Thanks

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much Tomi!

[@patozols7747]

Your videos are great. I think I’m gonna buy the 70-200 f4 for my first zoom lens as I love how it looks here and I want to get more into shooting concerts. The 85mm 1.2 is my dream lens. 💰

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching! You’ll really like the 70-200 f4. It’s an amazing lens.

[@tjcai212]

Hi James! Excellent comparisons! I do love your color grading so much, these photos' color are all look so comfortable, could you make a video to talk about your post production workflow, I will appreciate it.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you! I will definitely be putting a video together on editing soon!

[@andrewphillips2520]

such an impressive and comprehensive comparison, especially for including the rf 85 1.2, thank you!!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you Andrew!

[@paultokeley]

Excellent video, trying to make up my mind between the 2 lenses myself.

[@JamesReader]

You can’t go wrong with either! Wish I could keep both.

[@tom_k_d]

Thanks for yet another excellent lens review! I did choose the 2.8, too - apart from better bokeh and better rendering: I used this lens several times now in settings were 2.8 saved me from having to double my ISO. Imho it can be easily handheld when paired with the R6, no big difference to the 50mm 1.2. The 2.8 also shares the 50mm 1.2 77mm filter thread. And the 50mm 1.2 hood fits the 70-200mmm 2.8, too: this combo looks a little more low key then with the original monster hood - good for situations were the photographer doesn't want to scream for attention...

[@JamesReader]

Thank you Tom! Good tip about the hood, I often don’t pack the original 70-200 hood because it takes up so much space.

[@tom_k_d]

@@JamesReader Same with me, I did never like the original hood with this silly door. But sometimes I'm clumsy, so I prefer to have a hood as a bumper - the EF 85mm 1.4L hood (also with 77mm filter thread) works, too btw, and is even smaller.

[@vimalneha]

Very well made comparison. Quite helpful.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you for watching!

[@PossiblyKeai]

Thank you for the video. Best comparison so far. For amateurs like me who mainly shoot family photos, I need a lens providing good image quality and is easy to carry. This video gives me confidence to go with the F4.

[@chuck7415]

I went with the 2.8 as to have no regrets, and would suggest the same to anyone who can afford it.

[@JamesReader]

It’s an amazing lens. Thank you for watching Chuck.

[@Georgeinthejungle]

Any idea why her skin tones and face is almost always rendered darker with the f4? Different conditions? Different settings?

[@tiemji]

Many thanks for this detailed comparison

[@BrentODell]

It's interesting that the 2.8 has the ring layout that it does. As far as I can tell, starting at the lens mount, zoom-focus-control is the RF standard, with the exception of the 100-500 which is focus-control-zoom, and this 2.8, which is control-focus-zoom. I don't have either, but I feel like that would mess with muscle memory a bit.

[@JamesReader]

It certainly does! It’s the only lens I have with this layout. Luckily I don’t really use it often anyway. Thank you for watching Brent.

[@matthewmorgan4910]

Amazing content as usual! Thank you so much!

[@JamesReader]

Thank you Matthew!

[@nicolaschallenor1120]

Great video as always, If only the 2.8 version wasn't so expensive. I would love to replace my EF Mark III version, as the lighter weight would be such an improvement, not to mention the all important minimum focus distance benefit of the RF version, which is almost half closer than the EF.

[@rafafit1904]

Really nice video. You are the best !

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much!

[@All-the-gear-no-idea-uk]

Thank you for sharing your images it has helped me a great deal I've just downloaded the photos and the one where you were standing quite far back at 200 mm photo length with the F4 lens I've just cropped in to the Model eye just to see how far I could crop in and get a small image how to do a little bit of sharpening on it after cropping in so far but what it told me was that the R5 camera is the one for me

[@JamesReader]

No problem at all, I’m really glad the images helped. You’re gonna love the R5

[@shakirmanzoor5553]

What if one has to decide b/w 85 1.2 vs 70-200 2.8 vs 85 1.4Lis when shooting wedding and interviews ?

[@Benferno]

How come the sun always seems to be out for the f2.8, but behind a cloud for the f4?

[@sacharya5691]

Great comparison. Any idea whether there will be similar differences for the sony/sigma lineup on sony camera? The difference is not so stark between 70-200 f2.8 & f4, it seems. Comments welcome.

[@bigrobotnewstoday1436]

For indoor weddings have you found a issue with f4 and auto focus? Also later at weddings one the dance floor they turn down the lights have you found a issue with f4 auto focus? Thank you.

[@RahulKumar-pf2us]

RF 18-150 kit lens zoomed at 120mm on a crop sensor camera to match the 200mm on an RF 70-200mm L 2.8 on a full frame camera. will i get the same facial and background compression? (not talking about background blur) (Consider same shooting situation for both)

[@JamesReader]

Yes you will get the same background and facial compression as you’ll be stood at the same distance from your subject as you would be with the 200mm.

[@AugmentedGravity]

What a lens and what a model.

[@balubalaji9956]

5:03 background behind model is not same. not fair comparison

[@mahiraksoy86]

What I don't understand is why there are sun rays on the model with 2.8 but not with f4, is this a defect of the lens or was it taken when the sun was out? 🤨

[@danphilipf.hernandez9977]

Awesome review!

[@diwang7402]

Great video. But it's a pity that the lighting conditions are a little different... obviously F2.8 gets more sunlight, maybe that's why F4 is a little cooler

[@novainvicta]

After having the EF 70-200mm f2.8L MKII for a few years and mainly using the lens in the studio I knew I didn’t really need f2.8 so bought the RF 70-200mm f4L. I’ve no regrets it works flawlessly in the studio and on the occasions I take it out for landscape it’s weight & size saving really shine through without sacrificing image quality.

[@JamesReader]

It's one of the best RF lenses in my opinion, Canon really nailed all the zooms really. Thanks for watching Jeff!

[@tacaoart]

Great review! The f4 is an incredible lens and by your video I can see it's worthy.

[@morningtidefilms]

Hey mate, this is one of the best comparison videos I've ever seen put together on KZbin, and as a professional I've seen a lot of them over the past decade+. Thanks for doing such an excellent job. Your model is incredible, I hope she's doing a lot of great work. I did notice that most of your 2.8 images had more dappled light, whereas the 4.0 images did not; thus there seems to be cooler tones in the 4.0 overall. As you noted below, you stated using this mostly for video, which I do as well. For video alone, I wonder if you'd go with the 4.0 instead of the 2.8?

[@JamesReader]

Thank you so much! Yep definitely had flatter lighting with the f4 lens. Sun was in and out of the clouds through the comparison. I think the f4 version is perfect for video especially on full frame. I use the C70 a lot so the 2.8 comes in handy there, otherwise I really like the F4 versions of all the RF zooms. Thank you for watching!

[@morningtidefilms]

@@JamesReader I just came back from England so I know the challenge with the clouds, though it makes for far more interesting lighting than where I live with the constant deep blue sky. I hadn't thought about the F4 working better on a full frame sensor vs Super 35mm for video. Great point. I wonder how much more light sensitivity you get, maybe a half stop, in comparison between the two? Keep the videos coming, and thanks for sharing the images and data with us, that's really generous. I'm going to look at your archives for portrait touchup videos as I love your post work.

[@pontbwo7417]

@@JamesReader 那么，只是拍照，用F4还是2.8？

[@manfredcheung9314]

Your model is super pretty.

[@Vaquero_interestelar]

I must honestly say that I didn't find any big differences between them. There are, but they are less than I thought. I like the look of the F4. Now if it is to have that beautiful bohek, in that case I prefer the 85mm 1.2. It is unique and unbeatable. Thanks for the video, as always, the best there is on the web. Greetings from Chile.

[@xFulcrum1313x]

thank you for this review it helped me a lot and i think the F4 might just do well for its signifacant cheaper price. But there is one question: I want to buy a lens for an Canon R6 for dog photography, would you go with the 70-200 F4 RF or with the 70-200 F2.8 EF with the Adapter ? The price is of both is quite equal on the Used market and im not sure which one to go for, do you have any advice ?

[@JamesReader]

That's a tough one, if you are okay with the added bulk and weight of adapting the EF 2.8 I think that is a great option. The only thing to consider with your use case is auto focus performance, I don't know for sure but I would suspect the RF 70-200 F4 is the better performer in terms of auto focus which I imagine is critical when photographing fast moving dogs.

[@xFulcrum1313x]

@@JamesReader thats exactly the point why i´m not sure which one to choose, but i think it might be the smarter option to go with the new RF one in this case beacause its might be more futureproof and because of the AF. I think the AF will be more Important than the little bit of Bokeh, because most of the Time i will Shoot with the full length of 200mm

[@JamesReader]

@@xFulcrum1313x Totally agree. Honestly the 70-200 F4 is one of my favourite lenses on RF mount, I think you'll love it.

[@xFulcrum1313x]

@@JamesReader thank you very much for your fast answers and yes i also think i will love it, I´m kind of a beginner and for me its so much money but i dont want to buy twice so its hard to make a decision but i think this will be the right one.

[@robertbohnaker9898]

Hi James. I can’t seem to find your comparison of Image Stabilization between the 2. One better than the other ? Thanks 😊

[@JamesReader]

Hi Robert. Didn’t see any noticeable difference in stabilisation between the two. Both are great! Thanks for watching.

[@canilalphahusky795]

Hello Ames, I'm Brazilian, I've never seen a review so app like yours. I'm going to buy the RF 85 1.2. but I'm in doubt about buying the RF 70 200 2.8 or 70 200 f4. this zoom would be to photograph my pets outdoors. which would make sense to take the 2.8 or f4 ??????

[@JamesReader]

That’s a tough one! If you already have the 85mm 1.2 I would probably suggest the 70-200 f4. You have the 85mm for maximum bokeh. For most outdoor shoots f4 is more than enough to keep the shutter speed high enough for fast moving dogs!

[@lisawilliams1750]

Awesome review! Thank you.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you Lisa!

[@alexramos786]

As a photographer I don't see much difference and I've seen something that Canon hasn't made much change in these lenses, that's why I use my Canon R with EF lenses and adapter and the photos are very beautiful, the RF lenses are too expensive

[@sammyh9542]

I noticed the AF hunts while in video. Did you notice an issue? I am having the same problem with my R6 but my Sony a7siii is great.

[@JamesReader]

With the RF 70-200? I’ve found it to be one of the best focusing lenses for photo and video.

[@sammyh9542]

@@JamesReader I was talking in general. I don’t have the 70-200 but on the STM 35 1.8 it hunts a lot. Thanks for the reply.

[@JamesReader]

@@sammyh9542 to be fair the RF 35 is one of the slower focusers but I’ve never had any issues with it hunting and find it quite reliable. If you have checked through all your settings and you are on the latest firmware it could potentially be an issue specific to your copy of the lens maybe.

[@AlSo-Fotografie]

big thanks for all your comparisons 15-35/ 70-200. Got both of them in the 2.8 version. Your video to the 24-70/ 28-70 is also very helpful !! its my next purchase for weddings/events...but i cant decide which one haha.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you! That’s a very hard choice, I know you will be very happy with either, both amazing lenses.

[@DreadinNY]

Do you shoot with and ND's on the front of the f/2? I am curious with it bringing in so much light. I guess the same would be for the 85. I have the 10-200 F2, thinking about the 85, but curious to see that 135

[@JamesReader]

For photo I don't usually need an ND, I just raise the shutter speed. Shooting at 1.2 in bright sunlight can sometimes be an issue though. For video I use ND all the time.

[@Manueldeva]

Muchas gracias

[@andersistbesser]

As i shoot my boudoir stuff at 5.6-f8 the f4 would be it for me. I want to have more than one eye in focus🤣 i tried faster lenses and to me it looks ridiculous if only one eye is in focus and this is what happens if you shoot wide open

[@Sky_Pixelz]

F4 it is, thanks for this🙏

[@joeltam7079]

I also have the lens Canon of EF 70-200 mm 2.8 of new generation.

[@rcouchh]

Really good comparison. Makes me feel much better about my purchase of the F4. I just upgraded to an R6 from an old 70d, and I'm just starting to build out my photo business. The $1100 I saved was spent towards an RF 24-70 f2.8, and the two are an amazing duo. I don't think these small differences are a big deal for me as a new pro using L glass for the first time. One question for you - I'm looking to complete my kit with a 3rd lens being an RF prime. I do car photography and people/pet portraits. Would you recommend the 50mm 1.2, 85mm 1.2 or the 135mm 1.8 to finish my kit?

[@JamesReader]

I have to recommend the 50 1.2! If you’re gonna have just one prime, it’s probably the most useful and versatile. It has you covered for group shots, head shots, establishing shots, everything. It’s my most used lens.

[@jammyjackson4434]

Hi there! Did you shooot f2.8 on sunny day and f4 on cloudy day? Because 2.8 background always looked nicer as if it’s sunny day. Stuck between don’t know which one to buy

[@JamesReader]

It was a cloudy day and the sun did come out for some of the 2.8 shots so don’t let that be a deciding factor. If light is the same they both produce the same results, other than the 2.8 being slightly warmer.

[@loudandclearmedia]

Great comparison. I've recently migrated over to Canon after shooting Sony for many years. Previous experience with the 70-200 2.8GM makes me now opt for the f4 Canon variant. The GM is a fantastic lens, but it's not a very heavily used lens in my loadout, and when I do use it I pretty much never do wide open. I'm just not a huge fan of the obliterated background look. So, is the RF 2.8 optically better at F4 than the native F4 lens is at F4? Heck it better be for that price difference. Does it matter to me though?...nope. Not nearly as much as the savings on size, weight, and price. These two lenses really are very close in performance, and I think your conclusion is spot-on that it really just depends on how much ambient light you typically shoot in. For indoor sports I wouldn't touch the F4, but for pretty much everything else it's the one I'd rather have. EDIT: Here's one more thing to consider as well...which other lenses do you have that overlap this focal range. For instance, I have the big choady 28-70f2. So, if at 70mm I already have a faster, sharper zoom, and if the 70-200 variants perform increasingly similarly as they approach the tele end...not much sense in the 2.8, for me anyway.

[@JamesReader]

Totally agree with you. The F4 is such a fantastic lens. Any optical differences are so minor and totally outweighed by the build and handling of the lens. Canon did a great job with all their f4 zooms, some do the best lenses on the RF Mount.

[@bobbeanbags]

Both are awesome lenses . I’m gonna go with the F4 trinity. 14-35, 24-105, 70-200 all F4.

[@JamesReader]

Great choice! Some of Canons best lenses in my opinion

[@beau__]

It seems like you shot the f2.8 in way better lighting. On the f2.8 the sunlight is peaking through the trees and on the model. Whereas the f4 looks like it was shot in the shade.

[@JamesReader]

That’s true. Sun was in and out of the clouds, we did wait for better light but due to time constraints had to move on. Luckily for the purpose of sharpness and background separation I think they serve their purpose, the shots later in the video also have more identical lighting. I still think the f4 tends to render a bit cooler, I find the same with the 14-35 f4. Thank you for watching!

[@catalyst_6]

Another great comparison.

[@JamesReader]

Thank you!

[@ifilmic]

Great review.

[@perprzem]

Thx a lot for this review. Now I know that I can sell my f2.8 version of EF lens and without a doubt buy a f4 RF version.

[@JamesReader]

Really glad to of helped!