Why we didn't buy the RF 70-200 2.8 and bought the EF version instead!

[@thecommish80]

I think the best thing about rf glass is that it brings down the price of ef glass.

[@damiencooper]

has it though? I think the EF 70-200 has been solid when it comes to pricing!

[@Soul_Visuals_Photography]

I disagree. Hasent.

[@thecommish80]

Monkeypixels Maybe not for new lenses but I feel like there are better deals on the used market now. Or maybe its just wishful thinking on my part.

[@jameskeener7251]

Nice.

[@doorsx111x]

A lot of other reviewers just blab how much better the RF is since they want Canon to send them stuff

[@the1trueluigi581]

I prefer the EF version as well for one reason...I prefer internal focusing! It's more reassuring.

[@asherdavidson4635]

Thank you so much! The reason was given by YOU I never heard from somebody else. And because I'm looking for a lens for concert shooting - your opinion of zooming functionality made sense to me.

[@GriffinConway]

The walk and talk vibe of this video was cool Damien! I agree with you on the versatility + zoom throw of the 70-200. Thanks for sharing bro!

[@thefilmpoets]

EF f/4 IS makes me happy. Small and beautiful.

[@mg3media]

What do you mainly use it for?

[@thefilmpoets]

@@mg3media We do weddings, so it's a good ceremony lens. But I really love it for travel along with a 16-36mm for wides.

[@mg3media]

@@thefilmpoets have you had any problems with it in low light?

[@thefilmpoets]

@@mg3media not really, but it's not a low light lens and the 2.8 isn't either. I'd rather bust out an 85mm 1.4 and 135 f/2. Or for travel just carry a small 50mm prime

[@oracleofvalerius]

Thanks. I got the EF version due to its versatility, I was tempted by the RF coolness but could never justify that 3K cost when just starting out. I did stump for the 2.8 version as everyone was telling me it’s sharp as hell and my god they’re right. Gorgeous and love the feel of the focus wheel that I can spin from 70 to 200 in a heart beat. Keep up the good work, counting the seconds till we’re out of lockdown and I can visit a zoo with this bad boy. All the best.

[@AustinRoss]

This was the deciding factor I have been looking for guys. Thanks!

[@QuayandChristine]

dude as your channel grows your production for your video also is going to the next level. keep it up man! looking forward to the next one

[@damiencooper]

Just wait until I can do only KZbin 😂

[@77dris]

Here I am in 2022 and considering getting an R6 but the RF glass is stupidly priced and there are no third party lenses anymore. I had the EF 70-200 II for a while and it was mind blowingly good. I can't imagine the RF being much better thought the form factor is fantastic. I can't afford $4000 for a lens though when I can get an EF MkIII version for half that price.

[@77dris]

Update: December 2022 I got the R6 Mark II and the EF 70-200 2.8 III and WOW! To say this combo is phenomenal for hockey is an understatement! It also cost $1300 cdn less than the RF version.

[@yaelvelazquez9898]

​@@77drisHi friend, how has the performance been with the autofocus on your face and eyes? I'm also thinking of getting the same combo to work on weddings!

[@michaeloeser]

As someone who also shoots weddings the weight and size of the RF makes it the goto lens for me.

[@damiencooper]

Oh I bet it’s amazing for weddings

[@njrivetelite]

I have the R5 & EOS-R I also went with the EF version of the 70-200 2.8 IS III It's a solid lens and will serve me for many years. I don't regret buying it over the RF version. Sure I like compact & light.. But.. I just really like the Tank of the EF version.. it a beautiful lens that works phenomenal

[@stubones]

I’ve had a ef mkii version for many years. It’s still brilliant. Razor sharp wide open and focuses incredibly quickly and accurately on both my mirrorless bodies.

[@EugeneMaynard]

Excellent! You have confirmed my doubts without question!🙏🏾

[@udo794]

is that Kurtinig (South Tyrol, Italy) in the background at 0:25? :-D

[@damiencooper]

Egna south tyrol ;) Good Eye

[@Soul_Visuals_Photography]

I recently got the RF. MY GOD ITS AMAZING.

[@Soul_Visuals_Photography]

I do agree the RF Is more difficult to rotate the zoom ring but a minor set back. I had the ef version and definitely don’t mis it

[@damiencooper]

absolutely agree. Unfortunately for us it wasn't just a minor inconvenience

[@B7RAIN_STUDIOS]

Same RF is much better lighter smaller just much better for my workflow because i use it on my R5 and red komodo which are RF so i don't need the EF.

[@ElBoyoElectronico]

I love the RF version too, it is my favorite lens by far :)

[@michaelballinger6419]

I'm actually buying the RF 70-200 F4 because it's so small and light. Weights a big deal for me though.

[@TizOnly1]

Great video. Production wise. Really like the style. The bike going through the alley while you were talking was a really dope shot. I already decided on EF over RF for basically everything for me at this point (I shoot R5/C70+Speedbooster), but still stuck around on the video bc it looked nice.

[@damiencooper]

haha, really surprised so many like the production quality so much as it was just pretty much last minute improvides :D But the scooter shot was cool!

[@chuck7415]

The vortex pattern in the two photos you showed in the beginning - that's from the lens correction. Use masking and color noise reduction to get rid of it, or just turn off correction if that's not a big deal to you. Sorry I only noticed because upon recently buying and using this lens (RF 2.8) and editing in post, I have noticed this happens a lot. So it's very fresh in my mind haha. Great video!

[@meibing4912]

Makes sense. Got the RF myself and am happy with my purchase. Biggest drawback for me is that the EF takes extenders while the RF does not.

[@santanistic]

Similar to you switching between EF & RF systems, the EF lens appeal more to me. The other benefit to EOS R & R5 is the ability to use the drop-in filter adapter allowing for a really coinvent spot when adjusting exposure via the ND.

[@RockyMaiviaMiami]

The biggest for me to ef glass in general is that canons adapters only work on ef glass. ND, Speedbooster, polarizer. Given the cost effective cameras from canon will be super 35. It is the way.

[@damiencooper]

also good point. That's what I meant with the RF mount not really being an advantage

[@mikewinburn]

Excellent presentation. Loved the blocking and location for m addition to the exposure choices.The lens info was equally well presented.

[@spelunkerd]

The main issue I have with my old EF glass is the noise of autofocus motors. It means you can't run and gun with mic on the camera.

[@rabinkarki2690]

indeed needed video. I have EF version and I am happy with it. Great content as usual.

[@damiencooper]

It's an amazing lens!

[@samuell.hodgesjr.1577]

I just purchased the EF model. I didn't realize that the RF model would be cumbersome in keeping the subject in focus. I think that is a big factor when shooting sports and moving subjects.

[@dennist132]

Few years late but had the same issue with the RF. I shoot my zooms for moving subjects. Way easier on the ef. Bought the EFiii again.

[@mothaphoto]

The ef 70-200 ii is nearly identical to the iii and can be had for around 1k used at the moment. That’s what I would get.

[@damiencooper]

Yeah I had that one for the longest time

[@TheVoyagerFilm]

@@damiencooper Hi guys! I argued with my DOP: tell me, please, what lens-ND did you use on the street? Thank you :)

[@damiencooper]

@@TheVoyagerFilm 28-70 at 2.0 with a 2-5 stop ND

[@paulgibbings9553]

@@damiencooper I was thinking about the version ii, as my 20 year old Sigma can't keep up with my EOS R6, looking at reviews everyone seems to moan about it's performance when shooting into the light. I'm presently thinking the Sigma sport version presents the most bang for the buck, but it does seem rather heavy. I'm waiting for stock in the UK at the moment as no camera shop appears to have any at the moment. At less than half the price of the RF version it does seem a (relative) bargain.

[@jamescarlos8642]

As ef 70-200mm f2.8 lens Is there any difference between mark ii vs mark iii version

[@sambowks]

I was eager to replace my EF with the RF 70-200 until I realised that it doesn’t work the the RF 2x extender. That is a huge problem. I hope a 2x extender is released that works with this lens.

[@jameskeener7251]

I'm enjoying shooting with the R5. My EF 70-200 f/2.8 L III arrived four hours ago. And I just saw your video. It's nice to have my reasoning confirmed. Another factor for me is the dearth of RF glass between 200mm-400mm. The EF lenses in that range were some of the best telephotos for any system: 300mm f/4, 400mm f/5.6, 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/2.8, 200-400mm f/4 with TC f/5.6, 400mm f/4 II DO (my favorite). I chose the EF lens because TCs can't be used with the RF 70-200 f/2.8, and there is nothing that can get me the extra stretch the EF system offers/offered that I want to use. Thanks for your very useful video. /s/A New Subscriber.

The difference between RF and EF is considerable. RF is a bit sharper, lighter and most importantly smaller. The price is $ 500 higher, but buying the EF version plus the adapter doesn't pay much. Larger size, weight and then the price is almost the same. The EF version is good for someone who already has it. For example, the RF 70-200mm F / 4 is incredibly luxurious.

[@lilku6090]

Love the quality of this video. After watching this video I have decided to buy the the rf version, don’t like the short travel zoom ring with the Ef version I have, I prefer more precision while zooming. Also the size difference is huge I don’t bring my ef version out more than twice a year due to the size, and it seems the rf version have better corner sharpness and AF speed and stabilisation

[@damiencooper]

Good point. One reason I sold the EF version was I never brought it with me due to size

[@Waywardastronaut]

Went with the ef on account of being able to use the 1.4/2x ef extender, rf -rf doesn’t pair up with the 70-200 for the extra reach. The extra turn on the rf is definitely a muscle memory learning curve.

[@lovemycity420]

I’m hoping that I made the right decision, I just sold my ef F/4 usm II, for the Rf F/4! Great video and perspective! The throw was so smooth on the ef version

[@damiencooper]

haven't tested it yet. But it would be a concern. The lens is a lot smaller though

[@bigrobotnewstoday1436]

This is why Canon made the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Z Lens. To fix the zooming.

[@MattBlakPhoto]

Thanks for this review.

[@Lamidnightsss]

So lenses aside. This was a beautifully aesthetic video

[@royottaway9434]

Totally agree , I much prefer EF version tracking a subject and keeping in frame with my thumb .

[@hefter-film]

Thank you happy with my EF. Now more! 😉👍🏻

[@gappo1301]

Just got myself 70-200 Ef IS version:)

[@JaredHoyman]

Thoughts on the 70-200 f4 RF version?

[@RogerZoul]

Thanks for the video. A lot of people swear right and left that RF glass is way better than EF glass but you just sited one meaningful example where that is definitely not true. Of course, there are many who will see the weight savings and small size of the RF as big advantages and they would be correct also. It just depends, but it is not a complete washout.

[@vincenzoiacovoni]

not to mention the dirt that sucks in the RF version , another problem for those who use it for sports in outdoor places

[@khanmahmood2690]

Really appreciated your review Monkeypixels of the EF vs RF 70-200mm f2.8. What I liked most is that you did not go with the heard mentality, that is a shinny new toy is better than old one. Anyone into cars would tell you that a non-turbo Ferrari V8 is far superior than than newer turbo V8 version because of the character of the non-turbo engine. Canon has produced some amazing lenses over the years and it is difficult to deliver improved performance whilst reducing the size, weight and keep cost manageable, especially during supply shortage of chips. I use a R6 but continue to use some of the best EF lenses because each lens has its own character that very few people know. My favourite lens is EF 85mm f1.2 L USM Mark II, EF 16-35mm f4 L IS USM and RF 28-70mm f2 L USM lens. Photography is not about taking the most sharpest picture with beautiful colour and bohkeh. You can do that using CGI. Photography is each individual's creative art, like Van Gough. No one is looking whether every brush stroke is perfect on the canvas but the elure the painting/photography leaves you behind that they hold in their memory for ever. Thanks.

[@edgarberber5556]

Been using the ef version for years. Weight has never been an issue.

[@Lubo54]

👍👍👍 DAMIEN, YOU SAVED ME A LOT OF EUROS. I HAVE A NEW R6 Mark II AND EF 70-200/2.8 L IS AND ADAPTER. I WANTED TO SELL THE LENS. YOUR VIDEO CONVINCED ME TO KEEP IT. SORRY I'M USING A TRANSLATOR. THANKS 👍👍👍

[@PINACI]

WoW, thanks. I was thinking of selling my EF version to buy the RF version but think I will just stick with my EF lens until canon decide to make a better RF lens.

[@quagmire321able]

I thought the RF version was a great design initially until I found out how Canon shrunk its length... a lens that telescopes when it zooms or focuses is always cumbersome, most of all if its a telephoto lens. I would have chosen the EF version too if I used telephoto zooms. Let me add one more advantage of using the EF version, you *can* use it on other bodies too in case if you have multiple systems or decide to... "move" to some other brand in the future, there are good adapters for EF to nearly anything now. ;-)

[@joseregino5170]

Thank you for your insights. Its nice to have a real world opinion instead of an "influencer" trying to sell you something.

[@rvboondocker2559]

It’s size and weight for me. Traveling is much easier. I can bring an extra lens. I don’t like the opening and closing. Eventually that constant vacuum will bring in dirt.

[@GHOST-ig6bi]

What’s the point in an extra aperture blade with the RF which hardly makes any difference almost at all (9 v 8) as a selling point with portability if your performance is compromised ??? Go with the EF. Old is gold

[@loudandclearmedia]

Great points, Damian, especially since you articulated your specific use case so well into your decision. IMO that's really the biggest factor is how you will be using it. For me, it's rare that I use a 70-200 anyway, but when I do need it that's the only lens that will do. So, I'll always have one, and for me the RF version is the right choice just for the compactness of storage. It spends most of its time stored in the van anyway...might as well take up less space while it's doing that.

[@dimitrimoonlight]

It's also lack of ND filter adapter for video shooter, EF ver is better.

[@m11kan]

Good points but i would go with RF version just because mirror cameras will be history and RF version keeps its value much better.. also it is sharper as well.

[@CanoeToNewOrleans]

I shoot rodeos and there's a lot of dust. I don't want that dust in the lens. The internal focus of the EF is better in that regard.

[@robertbohnaker9898]

Hi. Informative video. I’m coming to the same conclusion re: the Sony 200-600 . Internal zoom and extremely short throw between 200-600 for birding. That’s helps me thanks. 😊

[@Ebaggeronline]

Completely agree, the throw is way to long and takes to much effort instead of being able with two fingers to easily do every zoom possible and not missing anything

[@kurtissutley1485]

Precisely. I use both an R5 and DSLRs in my photography. EF only for me.

[@icanfly5964]

I’m happy with the RF version. Was worth the investment. The fact that it’s a telescopic lens did bother me a tiny bit at first, but come to think of it most of my other lenses were telescopic to begin with. At least we have options to choose from.

[@kernzilla]

i think there are a lot of RF haters out there, but most of the people complaining about it haven't utilized the RF much and realize how much better the AF/IQ performance is. I still have my EF 2.8, but cant remember the last time i chose it over the RF. EF is great lens, but the RF is exponentially better (for what I shoot) in all regards. only real downside I see with RF is the lens creep when walking/not shooting. It's nothing overly impactful, but noteworthy.

[@pcsphotographyvideography2556]

Awesome video!! Would love to see how you mix your audio for this video.

[@damiencooper]

Thanks man! I’m actually not happy with the audio quality at All 🙈

[@Stefan1968ful]

You know what? I have the R5 and I did not buy yet even on RF lens. Why? Simply because the EF lenses perform so great on the R5 with adapter. And I use really a wide selection of EF glass, starting from the excellent Canon EF 16-35mm 4.0 via the Canon EF 70-200mm 2.8 II to the stellar Canon EF 600mm 4.0 III. Not to forget the Canon EF 100mm 2.8 Macro.

[@The_Therapeutic_Architect]

I love my EF 70-200 4L USM just fine!

[@tobygroves2112]

YES! Thank you! I've just switched to mirrorless and, whilst I may replace/upgrade some of my EF lenses over time, I'll never sell my 70-200 II. I was horrified when I saw the extending barrel design of the RF version, it's just inferior, end of. I'm actually annoyed that they seem to have done this purely in the name of weight saving. These are professional grade lenses and professionals want the best quality, functionality and usability, regardless of weight. If good glass is too heavy for you, go use a smartphone :)

[@damiencooper]

Yes, they keep doing it. Same with the 15-35 too

[@ALeoHughes]

Couldn't deal with the weight plus having it on a adapter

[@mredben]

The EF is better autofocus and faster?

[@njrivetelite]

When you are shooting figure skaters which shutter speed range do you find yourself most working with to keep them in focus? Shooting with the R5.. I personally stuck with the EF version.. people complain about weight.. but I like that it's built like a Tank.. it just feels well built. I'm sure the RF has it's advantages.. but I'm just not going to think about them and enjoy my EF 70-200 2.8 IS III.

[@thebrothers5871]

Man I have the 24 70 rf and 28 70 rf and now I think I need ef 70 200 after this video with my rig thanks mr cooper

[@chairminh]

If you could only keep the 24 70 or 28 70, which one would it be?

[@thebrothers5871]

The 28 70 f 2

[@RichartAsia]

Excellent points...

[@St8lker]

I understand your point of view... but for me tbe size and weight is more important. I switch from DSLR to EOS R6 and sell all my ef glasses and the adapter too....;-)

[@LuiEvoHiro]

I’m happy with my EF 70-200mm 2.8L III USM ($2k). Use it on all my cameras. 5DSR, R5, and Sony A7sIII👍🏽 At this point the only RF lens I’d consider is the 28-70mm f/2 ... I’d still keep the EF 24-70 2.8 II for it’s versatility.

[@creativegreats6924]

What about saving even more money and going sigma art 70-200ef ?

[@coach_yo]

Which version EF were you using? I picked up a mk ii but want to know if its worth getting a mk iii

[@vishkumar]

Hi I have Canon R5C. Does this Tamron 70-200 2.8 Auto Focus work in Video mode?

[@Y2kphotos]

Just got the ef version ii in like new condition for $700 add $100 for the adapter.

[@모바일게임-n3j]

2:14 what was she zooming at?

[@shadowHunter678]

Isn’t the EF lens automatically force your camera to switch to crop mode which reduce the megapixels?

[@damiencooper]

no, absolutely not

[@KBProduction1988]

You are amazing bro!!

[@damiencooper]

thanks man! :)

[@majorpayne0195]

RF glass is too expensive. From what I have watched, the build quality of EF glasses are better than RF glasses. If the control ring of the RF lens is a big seller for other, just buy the adapter with control ring.

[@McTube2010]

Nice points. For your experience it’s the same for the 24-70? Especially about the ring movement during zoom

[@ByStephenJones]

How does focus breathing compare?

[@ariomstudios7366]

Great review David, have you tried to squeeze in an EFx2 teleconverter between the EF70-200mm and the EF/RF adapter? How do you reckon for that setup and its effects on AF and IQ?

[@ericbernardi9157]

This video was shot in the old downtown of Nice, France. I'm 100% sure :)

[@damiencooper]

Correct 😉

[@yreyez]

Unrelated question here. When you had the C70, did you by any chance came across the idea of using the speed booster with the Canon R5 and sigma 18-35mm? I wondering weather you can gain the extra stop of light assuming you are using the R5 in crop mode and weather is worth the hassle.

[@damiencooper]

No. That would not make any sense at All. 🙈 You couldn’t even use the sigma with it either

[@burritobrosvideos8060]

I bought the rf version. I love it. I liked the ef version but it was too large and heavy.

[@medakidz6319]

What adapter did you use for the EF version.

[@damiencooper]

The canon one with the control ring

[@ryevdee6064]

Really glad you pointed this out, I love throwing zoom in video even, I have a feeling I'd miss how smooth it is on the EF vs all that fuss with the awkward & noisy zoom I see on the RF. When you tested did your Mics ever pick up the noise from it moving in and out?

[@vedranb87]

By the way, are those adapters weather-sealed?

[@kirkdarling4120]

Yes, the adapters are weather-sealed.

[@six16th]

What are you using for your audio? It sounds great but I dont see a mic on you lol

[@damiencooper]

Tentacles under my shirt. I have a review of them online

[@mountainparkselectric1688]

You are correct on the EF vs. RF mounts. I already have the perfect EF lenses and even some of my adapted lenses are nice to have. I also believe that it's nice to see that EF Glass prices are slowly coming down. I bought my first EF 70-200 L IS ii about 7 months ago and the price has come down quite a bit. I think it's a "Buyers Market" right now for EF Glass. Thank you Canon!!! AND thank you #Monkeypixels for such great content. Just this video alone will save so many people a lot of money. That's if they see this before they buy the 6 thousand dollar R5 that includes the lens... P.S. I love the composition in your scenes. Cheers!

[@ankitpixelstudio8210]

Can I use Ef lens on EOS R Body

[@phill5917]

Yes just buy the RF to EF adapter for 100 bucks and you'll be fine.

[@benjamin.kelley]

Selling my EF to buy a new EF...mine came wobbly and loose, would rather sell than get repaired.

[@henrikblomberg4793]

I think the opposite way: I have had my good old EF 70-200 /2.8 around twenty years and it has been repaired three times; still sharp and working well! I will not trade!

[@iDirtyDan]

what camera cage are you using?

[@damiencooper]

smallrig. Tried several, like this one the most. I have a full rig video on my channel

[@MrDvaz]

Own both and looking sell the ef...heavier....longer....plus the rings it makes it very awkward ......besides that the RF is much better glass and the savings not that much!!!! and I have no problem with the extended part of the lens....plus a lot less space in my bag......

[@tossemanden]

Much better format for your videos. Two things: let the person who uses the equipment speak about it. I know it might be hard but you know your stuff so pass it on :-) also try and see if you can use the same camera for the talking head and for the b-roll. I think it would smooth out the look.

[@damiencooper]

Yeah. I always want her to be on front of the Camera 😉 As for the b-roll, I grab b-roll from shoots all over the world with whichever camera I have available at the time 😅 Glad you liked the video though!

[@ElBoyoElectronico]

Ich kann die Logik total nachvollziehen. Irgendwie fühlt sich das RF-Objektiv auch einfach zu teuer an... Mit welcher Kamera und welchem Objektiv habt ihr die Talking Head Parts aufgenommen? Sieht total cool und fresh aus! :)

[@damiencooper]

R5 mit 28-70 aufm RS2 ;). Scheint ja echt vielen zu gefallen. Hätte ich gar nicht gedacht ^^

[@JimSefton]

Interesting summary. I am in the process of upgrading from my 5Dii and 5Diii to the R6 and was considering swapping the 70-200 2.8L Mkii to the RF version... considering the cost to do this I may just buy the EF converter instead and keep the EF version. From what I read though the EF shoots a lot slower (fps) than the RF version. Is that true?

[@aliaksandrafunk7955]

What did you end up doing? Did you stick with the EF? I’m considering R6 but only if EF lenses work fine on it

[@minyuan86]

it is not that the RF version will physically be longer than the EF version when extended. You can easily assume the size of the RF to be similar to the EF from the beginning and your problem solve You can make a small lens physically bigger, but not the other way round. Secondly selling away the EF, renting a RF and buying back the EF... if you plan wisely... you dont even need to waste your money on these. The money you wasted can be easily make up for the cost difference. last the RF is a new lens and it is expected that zoom rings are tighter. basically your points are not valid

[@WOLFTICKVIDEOS]

It's not just a case of it's a new lens and the zoom ring is tighter, it has a completely different design. I'm not sure that even after a proper break in period that it will zoom as smooth and easy as internal zoom versions. In my experience on average it's the 70-200 lens that gets taken into the worst environmental conditions out of all of my lenses, so I'm not sure the new version will hold up long term as well. Not trying to step on a rant, but I thought it was worth mentioning. That's my two cents worth😁.

[@scottmayberry254]

I upgraded to the RF and came to the same conclusion as this video (wish I saw it before I purchased it). If you are an action sports photographer the EF version is much harder to zoom in and out. It takes more effort and I find my photos are more crooked using this lens because I'm fighting the zoom ring so the shots are tilted.

[@AnthonyTadle]

I’m w you heheheh. I was debating for the longest time

[@prakashjokhe6654]

आभार बहोत खुब और अच्छी बात बताई

[@alkaobando]

I’m buying EF L cheaper on second hand stores.