A 70-200mm f/2.8 lens is one of the most versatile and popular lenses among professionals and amateurs alike, and while they are certainly not cheap, they are powerful tools that can handle a wide range of situations from sports, to portraits, to weddings. This excellent video review takes a look at Canon's mirrorless version of the lens, the RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM.
Coming to you from Dustin Abbott, this great video review takes a look at the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM lens. The RF 70-200mm f/2.8L has a major design departure from its DSLR predecessors in that the barrel retracts and extends when zooming, allowing it to be quite compact when not in use. Beyond that, it has all the advanced features you would expect, including one UD (Ultra-Low Dispersion) element and one Super UD element for reduced aberrations, two aspherical elements for reduced distortion and increased sharpness, Air Sphere Coating for reduced flares and ghosting and increased contrast, image stabilization of up to five stops, quick and quiet autofocus system, customizable Control Ring, rounded nine-blade diaphragm for better bokeh, and extensive weather protection. Check out the video above for Abbott's full thoughts.
And that zooming barrel is the only thing I'm not keen on. It's light and sharp and I guess those are the most import things.
I hate the zooming barrels... I'm sure they're fine, but I had a cheap one years ago that eventually lost its resistance and would just flop around.
Forget about using it on a gimble, a rig or anything needing balancing. Dumb idea to try and be small like Sony crap.
You do know that the elements inside still move and shift the weight of an internal zoom lens, right? They will knock the balance off just the same.
I don't notice it anymore(the zoom barrel). What I do notice is how easy I can pack it with my latest run and gun setup. The locking feature is a great failsafe for travel. I shoot for Biz Journals and as much as I want to bring the kitchen sink, it's nice to bring as little as possible. Especially when you have to tour a plant or site where multiple shots are needed.
What was the distance when you were photographing the resolution chart? Quite close I suppose (less than 10 meters). You use this as a proof that the lens is soft in the extreme corners wide open. However, this may not be the case in real life. The sharpness of the lens may change with the distance to the subject. More important: The sharpness area (DOF) of this lens may not be a flat field. Therefore the sharpness in the extreme corners may be good in real life when photographing 3D subjects on a distance. In any case: in real life, how often do you really need pin sharp extreme corners when photographing on f2,8 with a telephoto lens? In my case very seldom, since the extreme corners often are out of focus anyway. Quite often I also add a bit darkness to the corners (vignetting). Just to add the right expression.
Canon is about to come out with the f4 version of the RF 70-200mm. For someone who is primarily a landscaper photographer, is there any benefit at all in spending the money for the heavier f2.8 if it is not tack sharp at f2.8? For most landscapes I shoot at f8. In short, it would be nice to get a comparison video between the two lenses.
Nope, get the f/4 and save your money and back!