Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8: My opinion may SURPRISE you (Real-world Review)

[@MichaelGazeley]

You are one of the very few photographic reviewers, who actually can, and does, take incredible photos, which frankly means that what you say, carries a lot of weight. Great videos.

[@VanessaJoy]

Aw thanks so much!

[@TheParadigmShiftTV]

Bought the R5 and this lens. Super happy with my choice. Photographing animals with the animal eye AF is exactly what I was waiting for. It works very well.

[@ethanroberts7719]

I had the EF version of this lens for less than a year before making the upgrade to the RF and am so glad I did for all the reasons you stated in your fun video. The main advantage is the loss of bulk and weight. My only regret was not buying the RF to begin with. Also and this is a very small complaint for some reason the EF comes with a much more solid bag than the RF. Come on Canon for the amount of $ these lenses cost, don't cheap out on a bag!

[@longliveclassicmusic]

Thanks for this review. I had no intention of upgrading my EF gen 3 until the R5s specs (which I was expecting already) leaked and I knew that is my next camera. It's been clear from the beginning these lenses were designed for way higher resolution mirrorless cameras, and that's proving true. Flange distance, better image stabilization that communicates with new IBIS, and faster focusing will prove crucial in capturing images sharp enough to satisfy a 90MP full-frame (high pixel density) sensor. So I'm upgrading. I was wanting an RF 85mm 1.2 DS, but alas, 70-200 is way more important for me. Your photos with it are STUNNING and so ridiculously sharp! I can't wait to see how my current EOS R makes use of it!

[@VanessaJoy]

so happy this was useful for you!

[@privatebydesign1808]

Just for fun, a nine sided polygon is a nonagon. Love the videos Vanessa especially as you are a photographer rather than a videographer or hybrid orientated shooter, thanks for your knowledgeable and experienced insight.

[@ale.giacobazzi]

That lens goes straight in my dream bag!

[@VanessaJoy]

Yup!!

[@tkarim]

The RF version is a tremendous optic (sharpness, color rendition, stabilization, etc.), however at almost $3k, I'd still opt for the EF version (better build quality, still a wonderful optic and used by professionals from Nat Geo to Esquire). Unless you have a 50+ megapixel sensor, I think the EF version will resolve anything coming out of an R6 or an R without issue. Thanks for sharing your thoughts Vanessa!

[@joejackson9986]

Are you kidding?

[@gerardferry3958]

i never thought i would move from ef lenses so quickly as i have so many but the compactness just wins out especially because of the adaptor

[@VanessaJoy]

Agreed

[@mushirrazaqureshi8381]

You & your photography, both are beautiful 👌❤️

[@albertoriva7122]

thanks for your review. Actually would you reccomend the 2.8 or f4 (always RF series of 70-200)

[@eleven24]

Odd seeing the accordion player in Central Park as every time I've seen him (I assume it's the same guy) there were so many people in and around the fountain. The small size of the RF 70-200 has had me taking it places I never would've considered in the past. Love it.

[@TheJuanramos]

This was wonderful. Thanks for the great video. Will be buying this because of you!

[@mgavina23]

I just bought one to shoot indoor sports. My daughter plays volleyball so hopefully i can start taking awesome action shots.

[@VanessaJoy]

Fun! Great use of this lens

[@MrIowahawks77]

I can’t wait to get this lens

[@VanessaJoy]

😃

[@JaredRibic]

At first I wasn't crazy about the fact that it extends, then I got over it. Then I wasn't crazy about the fact that you have to turn the zoom ring further in order to rack all the way from 70mm to 200mm compared to the EF version. I'm not over that (yet) so I'm hanging onto my EF version for now. Either I'll get over the extra "zoom twist" or I'll keep using my EF version until Canon comes out with a different RF version. - Thanks for the video!

[@VanessaJoy]

New muscle memory coming up!

[@JaredRibic]

@@VanessaJoy - True! I'm dealing with that and the R5 right now!

[@maxipadthai]

Agree, the longer focus throw is even a bigger deal breaker than the external zoom to me.

[@JaredRibic]

@@maxipadthai - Hopefully Canon will receive enough feedback requesting an RF version of the 70-200mm f/2.8 that's similar to the existing EF versions that we already love.

[@maxipadthai]

@@JaredRibic Either that or Sony releases a bigger body with integrated grip.

[@anonymouspdg6121]

I got this when I had the EOS R. I have to totally agree that like you Vanessa, since I had it, I hardly used the 24-105 F4L I already had as it is so fast and gives that extra range. I just purchased the R5 and combining this with the RF70-200 IS AMAZING!! It is an expensive lens but I was fortunate to buy it in April when Canon had 10% off plus a different offer so I paid £2245 and then, because I purchased the R5, will get another £255 cashback reward from canon. RESULT!! I'm not sure if the same offers that are in the UK are available elsewhere but I know the lens reward is now a permanent feature when buying certain Canon Cameras.

[@ashstonk]

You hold the rf lens Like it’s a coffee mug. Hahaha love it :)

[@VanessaJoy]

Lol I used to have one that looked like it!

[@taimoorkhanvlogs]

Can I use this lens on my Cannon 6D Mark II..?

[@sergioconceicao2774]

How is the Canon RF 70-200 f2.8 for astrophotography? Is the coma reduced? I'm torn between f2.8 and f4

[@diannegreene8840]

I am debating between this rf 70-200 f/2.8, the rf 24-70 f/2.8, and the rf 28-70 F/2.0. I mostly do outdoor family shoots (both posing and lifestyle) and I have a small home studio too. I currently have the R with prime lenses and looking to slowly upgrade to R5 and more pro-level lenses. I have watched all of your reviews and a lot of your videos, but I am still unsure. What would you recommend I get first?

[@VanessaJoy]

What do you currently have and do you like shooting below 2.8?

[@diannegreene8840]

@@VanessaJoy I sometimes shoot that wide open, but not that often. If I do it is single portraits. I want to do this once though as I grow as a photographer. I doesn’t have much. I have a ef 50mm f/1.4, ef 100mm f/2.8, and rf 35mm f/1.8. I struggle with kids’ quick movement and fixed apertures. I think zoom might be good for my style.

[@TheHamsterMaster]

I just literally bought this lens today for my Canon RP. Together with a 3 year warranty it cost me over $3,000. I sure as hell hope this thing is worth its price in both quality and longevity. Thank you for the awesome review.

[@TheHamsterMaster]

@@charliebingaman571 you make a good point my friend, I'm just an amateur but I definitely plan on upgrading the body.

[@TheHamsterMaster]

@@charliebingaman571 thank you my friend, same to you!

[@TheHamsterMaster]

@@charliebingaman571 yes I agree haha. What other camera do you use?

[@JasonYergin]

I need one. I'll probably end up with the F4 version but that's ok with the awesomeness of a mirrorless camera

[@VanessaJoy]

The f4 version is great!

[@JasonYergin]

@@VanessaJoy I bet there's a lot of us who would love to see you make a video with it. I'm just SO ready for them to ship!!

[@VanessaJoy]

@@JasonYergin I did :) just on another channel kzbin.info/www/bejne/nnzHqJqippVopa8

[@JasonYergin]

@@VanessaJoy Sweet!! I'm so ready for this lens I just can't get enough about it

[@phatcrayonz]

thanks. I have the r6 with the 70-200 ef III I am going to switch to the rf version soon.

[@PunjabiGymBeats]

RF lenses are amazing..

[@rmkunihiro]

So Vanessa. Just curious....why do you choose Adorama over B&H? Years ago, I had a person experience with Adorama who's tactics at one time were the "switch-n-bait". Are they better now?

[@nickschulman986]

Because they pay her.

[@SJoZig]

9 sides = nonagon 😉 I have the EF version but now that I have my R5 I’m drooling over the RF version 🤣

[@raimclaren1663]

I got this lens, it’s soooooo good! RF lenses are really nice lenses to use

[@pianofinger]

Rai McLaren I so agree. I have this one as well and picked up the 85 1.2 and the 28-70 yesterday. Quickly moving away from the ef lenses

[@raimclaren1663]

pianofinger oooh, 28-70 2.8 or 2.0? The 2.0 is a big lens! Canon got their launch strategy of mirrorless cameras right with designing the lenses first and having the staple lenses available almost immediately, it makes the switch for an professional an easy one with the trinity.

[@pianofinger]

Rai McLaren 2.0 and yes it’s big and heavy. I planned to use in studio yesterday but it felt way too heavy so I switched back to the 70-200 and the 85. I am headed out to do a shoot in the woods so I will give it one more shot. My plan for it was to be an all around lens but that weight is prohibitive for a skinny guy like me.

[@raimclaren1663]

pianofinger lol. Who knew being a photographer would mean having to go to the gym regularly 😂

[@VanessaJoy]

Haha same

[@Faithfps]

"It's a grower not a show-er" - I can say that when looking up lenses I didn't expect a dick joke lol.

[@VanessaJoy]

Lol is it that kind of joke tho? I just thought it was a funny rhyme

[@Faithfps]

@@VanessaJoy Yeah, unfortunately a lot of my life I've been asked if I'm a "grower or a show-er" in reference to the little guy down stairs. I still thought it was hilarious, but definitely unexpected haha.

[@VanessaJoy]

Faith 🤦🏻‍♀️

[@Faithfps]

@@VanessaJoy I wish I could laugh react haha. It's all good!

[@Boleskinebeatz]

Interesting video, thanks. Bought the R5 in the summer last year and although I like it, when I shot at London Fashion Week which I've done for over a decade the results at higher ISOs were really bad. Had it back to Canon to check and they think it might be the match ( or mismatch ) between my R5 and my EF L series 70-200ism MK2. If that is the case I might be looking at buying the RF 70-2-00mm so thanks for the review.

[@Mr09260]

Costs the same as my still to arrive 70-200 ..Looks like an awesome lens ..Great handling , small and light ..Vanessa ..you will enjoy it for weddings

[@headbang3r519]

I have used both and I tell you this; nobody gives a bag of crap about the extra 9th aperture blade, The fact is that the RF is slightly sharper in the centre but still suffers from a lack of sharpness around the corners. But that enternal zoom is quite annoying although it does have a faster AF but the internal zoom on the EF is priceless. I just can't stand that gimmicky external zoom on RF. That external zoom on the RF extends a lot and it really does. The zoom ring is also crap on it whereas the EF provides better and shorter zoom ring. It makes me a better photographer because I can zoom in and out much more accurately, ready to take a shot on cue. With the RF? Nope. I decided to cancel my quote on MPB and keep the EF after renting RF. This is why I Always rent before buying. The RF may be a little better performance wise but as a photographer, I perform much better with other EF everyday and twice on Sunday, Netween choosing either one the question should be: Do you want a slightly better-performing overpriced lens or do you prefer performing much better as a photographe ? I still prefer the EF to be honest.

[@Bailark]

I was wondering myself. nonagon A nonagon is a nine sided polygon and it is also called an Enneagon or 9-gon. In other words, a nonagon is a nine sided closed two dimensional figure.

[@PreveenRodrigo]

Does this RF have a third control ring on it too? What do you think of this third ring on RF lenses, is it turning out to be useful or are you just doing what you are used to and just using focus and zoom rings only?

[@SJHFoto]

How does it work for sports? That's what I primarily shoot. I bought the Canon R6, so that would be the body it would be mated to

[@VanessaJoy]

Pretty much meant for sports in a midrange focal length

[@JB-rm1oc]

Cracking up on the "Grower not a Shower" comment. Looking to upgrade from my R1 version of the EF lens at some point. After this video, it might be sooner rather than later. Then again, there is the potential upgrade of my EOS R to EOS R5. So many options....

[@michaelcarnes2087]

Vanessa will you or have you switched to the R5/R6 camera bodies from your DSLR's?

[@p.c.1346]

I love your Videos and I love my RF70-200/F2.8 on my R6.... Greetings from Berlin, Germany.

[@noelwhitman1788]

Are you going to replace your 135 F2 with this one. :)

[@VanessaJoy]

No but I’ll eventually replace the EF 70-200 with it!

[@dongordonphoto]

I bought the RP as a backup to the R5 when it ships (I'm in Canada - could be a while) so the RP was supposed to be backup (for time being) to my 1DX MKII - however, I haven't used my 1DX MKII much since I bought the RP and RF70-200 - LOVE that lens - Can't wait to use it on the R5

[@PantheraPhotoSafaris]

Love your videos! Do you think the money and size difference makes the F4 version worth it, or the 2.8 much better?

[@glynnpowell7864]

2.8 much better

[@dalegarman8393]

I started with the f4 and immediately recognized I miss the 2.8, and so am adding that. But that is the expensive way to go and will end up selling my f4.

[@mikel5094]

Hello Vanessa have you shot groups with the lens? And do you prefer RF 28-70 instead for portraits and weddings?

[@VanessaJoy]

I definitely prefer the 28 to 70 but they are too completely different lenses with very different use factors. I can’t say have shot a group with the 70-200 but there’s no reason why you couldn’t as long as you have enough room. In fact I’m a proponent for shooting groups with longer lens in general

[@mikel5094]

@@VanessaJoy thank you. I’m trying to make a decision which lens to get.

[@cash3612]

Thank you Vanessa, i purchased this lens last Saturday and couldn’t be happier. Although I do have the 85 1.2 for those special times especially in extremely low light, this lens is just my daily driver with it’s versatility and performance,at a manageable weight. I will also be purchasing the 28-70 f2 as well and for me, those will be my three main lenses for what I shoot. Let me know if you know someone who’s in need of a kidney, I’ll probably be selling one soon😊

[@Hubieee]

The RF is fast focussing, a tad faster than EF. It is lighter and more compact at 70 mm. That is basically the selling point. Talking about number of aperture blades has nothing to do with the reality of any photographer. Having 400g less weight is serious, you will pick that lens much more often.

[@VanessaJoy]

Lol clearly you don’t read KZbin comments, it’s amazing how people nitpick over things like aperture blades 😂

[@HeroShotz]

Everybody forgets about the lil ol RP thats got an rf mount too

[@VanessaJoy]

It does! But I’ve never played with that camera so I can’t show it :)

[@Seitenwerk]

It’s my main camera for events and wedding etc and it still rocks. I am of course thinking about an R5 in the future but raw files of up to 60-100mb is total overkill to work with.

[@matthew3352]

Why do you not use a lens hood? I keep seeing conflicting reasons.

[@VanessaJoy]

I don’t feel like it 🤷🏻‍♀️ personal preference

[@cindyanntrades]

Do you still recommend the EOS R?

[@josephryan5448]

Was wondering the same

[@dtibor5903]

Now kids, let's see how to find information on the internet. Type in youtube search: eos r review

[@VanessaJoy]

I use it still 🤷🏻‍♀️

[@cindyanntrades]

D Tibor if I wanted a dated review of when the product first came out, I would do that. And I have. However, if I find a current user, I like to see if they still like the product after long term use. Especially since she’s also tried newer models as well. 💁🏼‍♀️

[@sonicvboom]

Get the R6.

[@stargator4945]

Have you ever used a 1.4x teleconverter with the RF 70-200f2.8? Is the handling, sharpness and autofocus still mindblowing? Have you done short movie scenes and the IS did wobble the picture when going from left to right with a model?

[@paulhenry7]

It's not compatible with extenders.

[@stargator4945]

@@paulhenry7 You are right. only 100-500 and 100-400 can use it.

[@paulhenry7]

@@stargator4945 On the RF 100-500, only usable from 300-500. On the EF 70-20- f2.8 and f4 lenses, no restriction. I have and like very much my EF 70-200 f4 II on my R5. One very cute but capable lens.

[@PaulQuinones]

Great street pics.. You make me wish I was a Canon guy with these new lenses you show us.. :) great vid as always

[@rappalawolf2664]

Thanks for a great video. Keep up the good work

[@markg6841]

VJ: "It gotta be in my bag..." and mine too......

[@RickyJr46]

It moved around so easily in your hand that at first I thought it was a Canon coffee mug!

[@VanessaJoy]

haha

[@johnral390]

"It's a grower not a shower" : ) I'm dying.

[@VanessaJoy]

hehe

[@JuJuGrafiks]

I just rented this lens and I'm super frustrated! The Zoom Ring is SO STIFF on the RF version - nothing like the EF version (I have the EF 70-200 2.8 IS III). I have to catch movement and zoom in and out rapidly with sports and events - I do not see how this is going to work and be productive. The RF 28-70 has no issues with the zoom ring so I'm baffled as to why Canon has made the 70-200 less productive for photographers. I cannot buy this lens.

[@VanessaJoy]

I definitely didn’t have that experience. I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s hard to zoom because of it being mishandled as a rented lens. I suggest trying out a new one at a camera store to see if it has the same feel.

[@JuJuGrafiks]

@@VanessaJoythank you for the feedback! So your RF zoom ring moves as easily as the EF? I'll reach out to Borrow Lenses for sure tomorrow and see if they'll send another asap. I don't have a local camera shop near me or I would definitely do as suggested - I wish I did! ♡

[@VanessaJoy]

@@JuJuGrafiks I didn’t notice a difference at all. And I have picked up one and then the other. Who knows though, maybe our zoom speed methods are different:)

[@JuJuGrafiks]

@@VanessaJoyBL sent a new one today - will be here tomorrow. :-) I think it has been dropped (or misused as a rental like you were thinking). In looking closer, the tripod mount has paint missing off of it - so something isn't right. Fingers crossed the one that arrives tomorrow is in better shape...excited to see.

[@tinkshawins]

Thank you for all this lovely content

[@VanessaJoy]

My pleasure

[@samhartwig4640]

Amazing lens. Even faster with the R5

[@WojciechKalka]

Sadly it's junk because it can't be used with any teleconverter

[@samhartwig4640]

@@WojciechKalka junk are u serious. Well I guess I’ll just throw mines in the trash. 🤣

[@WojciechKalka]

@@samhartwig4640 well junk is a bit harsh but I am pretty disappointed that you can not use any teleconverter and the 100-500 is worse then then old 100-400 ..

[@jeffwisener1378]

Honestly, can't see wasting the money to upgrade if you already own the ef mount. I own an ef 70-200 f4, no stabilization and my friend owns the f2.8 with stabilization, raves how much better it is. I shot with his lens an entire day doing surf photography off a boat (that's my primary subject in photography). I shot over 1300 photos with the lens. The reality is I am perfectly find with my f4, see little difference between the two lens for what I use it for. Likewise, a friend owned the f4 500mm lens, I own the f5.6 400mm. We traded off, shot over 1000 photos each and then spent the entire night comparing quality, analyzing photos in fine detail. The synopses is we could hardly tell the difference. The 400mm is priced around $1200 vs $9000 for the 500mm. I always wanted the 500mm until I compared it to my "lesser" 400mm lens. In reality the 500mm is much bigger and heavier which is a big negative. When factoring in the price of the 500mm is 7.5 times the price, sharpness is about equal, and you gain 1 f stop in which a quick cropping can fix, it just doesn't make financial sense to me. I have shot at 6am on hazy/foggy mornings with my 400mm and never had a problem shooting at f5.6. My friend ended up dumping his 500mm lens, bought the 400mm and pocketed the extra money. We do production photography, shooting well over a 1000 photos a day. If the quality isn't there, people don't want our photos so I am not just stating a personal preference, I am stating what sells. The bottom line is know your equipment, know your needs. Spending money on gear doesn't necessarily make you a better photographer. These KZbin videos can be informative and I appreciate them but keep in mind that just like Canon whoosebusinessisto convinceyouto buy/upgrade equipment, many of these videos are produced with making money via viewership so having the latest, greatest isn't always a necessity.

[@nickschulman986]

Boomer

[@jeffwisener1378]

@@nickschulman986 logic + experience

[@rvboondocker2559]

Jeff Wisener All great points. Thanks. Too bad this vid didn’t address it.

[@ScottPrincePhotography]

Agree. I still use my old 7d mkii & 400mm 5.6L lens (purchased both used for $1600) and this rig produces amazing results. I do have the R6 now but I still favor the 7D when I need to nail the shot.

[@AndiHardman]

it will be interesting to compare it to the 3rd party lenses when they arrive, especially the Sigma offering as it will be a ART with a mount. Until then Canon can unfortunately charge as much as they like for these lenses, as they are a 'workhorse' of a lens

[@MrRalboi919]

Sony A1 !😁

[@stevemadrid6522]

So, I know this video is from 2 years ago, but you got me thinking. What is a 9-sided figure called? Turns out Google says it's called a nonagon. BTW: I totally want this lens!

[@VanessaJoy]

Haha 😂 mystery solved

[@kipmay5101]

Very helpful review.

[@dkooj]

I hit the like button when the baby said "Canon"! 🙂

[@VanessaJoy]

Haha

[@fromshadowlands]

I own both the RF 28-70 F2 L & RF 70-200 F2.8 L. I downloaded your Posing Inspiration Guide. I appreciate it. I appreciate your knowledge and assistance. Have a great weekend. BTW, I did subscribe. Boom!

[@VanessaJoy]

Yay thanks!

[@tylerHphoto]

That should be a new test. Is it so light a baby can hold it?

[@jose_m7711]

LOL... "Grower not a shower" cute saying. BTW, as always, great video

[@VanessaJoy]

Lol 😂

[@lrb05131963]

Dam ,your pictures are great

[@VanessaJoy]

Thx ☺️

[@02337755]

Hey Vanessa any ideas when the R6 will ship?

[@videowatcher398]

BH photo said August 27

[@02337755]

@@videowatcher398 Cool thanks!

[@alejandroortiz4565]

In video is good too with a canon r6?

[@VanessaJoy]

Depends on your needs but I enjoyed it. Made this vlog here with it: kzbin.info/www/bejne/rJzLmWitga-Vrs0

[@alejandroortiz4565]

@@VanessaJoy than you you so much is great.

[@stephenbryce]

Nanagon for 9 equally lengths sided shapes

[@josephatherley]

Nonagon

[@KrisKhunachak]

AYYY shoutout Asbury Park!!

[@VanessaJoy]

Yassss!!!

[@marksnellingphotography]

Nonagon is what you after... That what it should be called a RF 70-200mm Nonagon...

[@ivorottleymusic]

But you can't use any tele with it....so it is severely hindered.

[@VanessaJoy]

Huh?

[@ivorottleymusic]

@@VanessaJoy This lens does not work with a tele converter. A big part of my work flow, and many wildlife photographers, is to carry a long lens such as a 500 or 600mm f4 together with a 70-200 f2.8 and then use a 1.4x tele converter with both when needed. This particular 70-200 does not work with any Tele, including canons new RF converters......this is in my opinion a mistake, and an issue that is important to mention when talking about this particular lens.

[@VanessaJoy]

Ivor Ottley ah yeah that’s not something I would mention since I don’t work with teleconverters ever and wasn’t even a thought when I was testing the lens and filming this. I give reviews mostly based on my experience and use for weddings and portraits, not generic tell-all-specs reviews. PS your rude “I’ll repeat” is not appreciated. Is that how you normally speak to people?

[@ivorottleymusic]

@@VanessaJoy Hi Vanessa, I think we are at cross purposes here.... i just thought i had an important point to mention for any photographers out there that use the 70-200 and tele combination...... I'm English so maybe we are having an international language misunderstanding. I appreciate you are not a wildlife photographer and this may not be an issue for your workflow....but i found your site, so expect other non wedding photographers will see your reviews....I was just trying to be informative and helpful.....I'm all about sharing good and useful information, and am not by nature rude...though yes, i do have the classic English sence of irony.

[@VanessaJoy]

Ivor Ottley I appreciate you clarifying. :) and quite happy you weren’t trying to mansplain. I apologized that I jumped to that conclusion... comment trolls are not sparse so I’m used to the nastiness. It’s a good thing to mention, though there are a great deal of lenses that don’t work with teleconverters. It’d be my guess that this one doesn’t bc of the “grower not a shower” form and physics. But again, I don’t know much about them - literally have never put one on my camera. :)

[@chazM6116]

a nonagon or enneagon is a nine-sided polygon

[@VanessaJoy]

There are two words for it?? How did that happen?

[@wayneross843]

You went to John’s? And you didn’t bring us possible the best pizza in NYC?

[@PixrclicksPhotography]

I want this baby 🥺😭💖

[@tinkshawins]

Grower not a shower lol.

[@VanessaJoy]

Hehe

[@cejaay13]

@@VanessaJoy love

[@andrewkerns6777]

These lenses are insanely huge. I'm so glad I use Leica. So much better for travel and the image quality is execptional.

[@nickschulman986]

Cool story

[@andrewkerns6777]

Nick Schulman A little offended are we?

[@nickschulman986]

@@andrewkerns6777 hardly.. Vegans and Leica shooters always have to work in what makes them feel superior to any conversation -- even if it's as off-topic as commenting on a video about a 70-200 mm zoom for a camera system that isn't theirs... Offended, no. A desire to point out how cringy your comment is, yes.

[@videowatcher398]

Why didn't you mention the EF to RF adapter?

[@VanessaJoy]

Wasn’t really part of my thought process for this video because it was about the RF lens, not really about if you should just use your EF lens and adapt it

[@iosuser1174]

This Len’s has Worst build quality by canon ….

[@VanessaJoy]

Why’s that?

[@iosuser1174]

@@VanessaJoythey have compromised the quality making it light weighty and compactness .. I been suing for 2 yrs and it has to be handled with almost care .. twice focusing issue has raised and sharpness no good to Sony or Nikon … EF version was good which had better strong build quality ….

[@wazzedon]

Pentagon, hexagon, heptagon, octagon, NONAGON, decagon, hendecagon, dodecagon...

[@VanessaJoy]

I think I need to make flash cards 😉

[@ddesai1080]

which JPG viewer you was using?

[@VanessaJoy]

Photo mechanic. Love that program

[@esphilee]

How to pronounce bokeh: Bo ‘K’

[@VanessaJoy]

#nobodycares

[@arupian666]

3:43... I just call it a ninagon.

[@VanessaJoy]

😂

[@HeroShotz]

This lens is amaaaaazinggggg BUT i got an old sigma ex for $200 lol

[@VanessaJoy]

Yeah not quite apples to apples there 🍎

[@dtibor5903]

Haha, the same here, an old tamron 70-200 2.8, no IS. It's a bit soft, but the images with bokeh looks really dreamy and great. It's about the same weigth without tripod coller as the RF Lens but I never carry with me anywhere, it's just too much.

[@ezra8776]

I wanna kiss body

[@CHEF2178]

❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️😍😍😍😍😍

[@sandb1867]

My, that review was terribly impoverished of anything informative. Cute kid though.

[@DavidWilliams-wj4sc]

Your definitions like, "these two lenses are just different" and it's a "physics thing" are funny. Just say this isn't a comparison and stop before you say something silly. We know the EF version is different than the RF version. Also, it is likely possible for someone to make an adaptor for an RF lens to mount onto an EF body, altho it's focusing might be thrown off a bit as it's not designed to focus onto a sensor which would be farther away. But possible? yes. Thus there's no physics about it. At all. Again, just tell us it can't mount onto anything except full frame mirrorless cameras. Presto. You won't be eating your words when an adaptor comes out. So yeah, i stopped watching and started writing this after only about 1 min. Sad.

[@VanessaJoy]

Lol bless your heart.

[@stormvr1070]

only bad thing is to switch from ef 70 to 200 ii to rf 70 to 200 will cost me over $1700. Ugh.

[@VanessaJoy]

GAS is a beast