Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 REVIEW first looks

My Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 review: upgrade your kit zoom! EDIT: 200-800 is the MOST expensive non-L RF zoom.

Equipment used for producing my videos

00:00 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 introduction and rivals
02:24 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 design and controls
04:05 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 focusing
04:46 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 face detection and presentation
05:35 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 focus breathing
06:25 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 landscape quality
07:49 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 portrait quality
08:17 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 bokeh quality
08:53 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 samples and verdict

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

[cameralabs]

My Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 review: upgrade your kit zoom! EDIT: 200-800 is the MOST expensive non-L RF zoom.

Equipment used for producing my videos

00:00 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 introduction and rivals
02:24 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 design and controls
04:05 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 focusing
04:46 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 face detection and presentation
05:35 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 focus breathing
06:25 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 landscape quality
07:49 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 portrait quality
08:17 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 bokeh quality
08:53 - Canon RF 28-70mm f2.8 samples and verdict


As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases

[christopherfrost]

I wish I'd put this much work into my own video! Good to see you there the other day - wish I lived nearer London to get to more of these things.

[bigd]

This is perfect. Small, sealed, bright, light. EXACTLY what most seem to have been asking for and I hope many more of this type to come.

[paulengle]

Honestly, I’m impressed that there is a mid-range with a 2.8 aperture, 28-70 zoom that has image stabilization.

As Gordon points out in the review that the 24-70 f/2.8 and 28-70 f/2 L lenses have far better build quality and image quality, but you’re paying 2-3x for much heavier lenses.

I recently picked up the 24-70 f/2.8 L IS, and it’s an amazing lens. However if this lens existed last fall, I might have picked this up. (I don’t make a living from photography, so one’s mileage will vary.)

[PNWDOM]

Just sold my RF 24-70 L for the new RF 35 L...so this will be perfect on days where a prime isn't enough but not overly committed to the L series zooms.

[deanrobertnoble]

Love my R8, it’s a great camera for me but the new RF are insanely expensive. I have stuck with the adapted EF lenses for the time being due to pricing. For a third of the price you can get a used a 24-70 2.8 which, although heavier, is am sure would rival image quality?

I still use my 24-105 f4. £200 for a really good lens and wider. I do hope Canon license third parties for the Full frame RF mount!

Great review; thankyou!

[photograph_e]

A 2.8 zoom under $1200 and that’s first party is pretty wild, good work Canon! Opening the RF mount(full frame) would still be better though. Would give their engineers more time to make some sweet L series glass while third party can focus on these kinds of RF lenses

[DanYosua]

This is an interesting concept. Lot to like, and a lot that’s not ideal. I worry what this means for the line… it feels like they need many more lenses of this design language (non-L, weather resistant, smart compromises on range) to fill out the lineup. Fearful they won’t let third party help on full frame and instead we’ll continue waiting as they slowly roll out similar mid-range options themselves.

[brokenintel]

Will be interesting if you do a blind test of this vs the rf 28-70 f2 at f2.8!

[Gabson]

6:45 wow, thats really sharp around the corners considering its a "budget" lens. I am astonished. Its simple, light, stabilized. I bet you can shoot a whole wedding with it.

[sethmoyer]

Canon: We have Sigma lenses at home

The Sigma lenses at home:

[bobbluesky]

Complete and informative review.Useful for Canon users, like myself.Thanks a lot.Keep up the good job !

[onlysublime]

1 stop faster? that is twice the amount of light which makes a huge difference in low light. It's why the 28-70 f2 is the unicorn it is. It's my default lens in a 1-camera or 2-camera event setup (85 1.2 is the other lens for a 2-camera setup)).

[btecww]

I am sold. While I have the 28-70 f2 L, it is not a lens I use outside of professional work. Back then I purchased it for $3000. It is big and heavy with a 95 filter element. I have had a near miss or two with it. The Canon RF mount biggest problem is affordable glass. This is a step in the right direction

[travelexplorer]

I am buying lenses from RF system this is a an intelligent lens for Touristic work, I do a lot of Stock, this is a very good approach to not carry the more expensive lenses and not carry the cheapest ones on travel shots, great!

[u]

The issue with Canon’s closed mount (and in ways Nikon too, though to a lesser degree especially after the RED acquisition) is that Canon does not offer something significantly better nor differentiated from the other brands. Faster than F4, F2.8 zooms are no longer unique to Canon. And the competition often does it either better and/or cheaper.

This 28-70 seems like a good product offering but also demonstrates perhaps why Canon has imposed a blockade. The blockade is hurting Canon’s brand image, which is arguably the most valuable thing any company owns. It’s a losing game that Canon’s playing.

IMO Canon has two better plays: open the mount completely so that there can be a range of third party lenses that would make RF mount, the R cameras either more viable as consideration or just more attractive. It’s no secret that customers look to E mount because it’s open.

The second option is to officially partner with select third party manufacturers. The primary two being Sigma and Tamron. Work out a deal such that they can make RF versions of their FF lenses without lock outs (like what Sony does with their 15 fps limit) with Canon’s support. These RF versions are optimised and fully compatible with R cameras just as Canon lenses are. APSC Sigma RF lenses have been priced higher than the E mount equivalents; the premium can remain if indeed the RF variants are fully optimised and not just a mount swop. a vibrant mount will only do Canon good. The R5II, C80 while not revolutionary and without their issues are good products nonetheless. Bringing third party FF into the fold to bolster momentum for this gen would be beneficial.

IMO the camera industry needs to no longer see each other as the “problem”. The real “enemy” are the software companies like Adobe, OpenAI and companies like Nvidia. If and when they completely erode the pro imaging market (which is already happening and no longer theoretical), the customer base for high performance products will drop off. Switching to consumer isn’t that easy, it’s already the terrain of the smartphone brands and companies. Prosumer compacts remain a niche and possibly a fad despite the surge in popularity. The big win the camera industry needs to go for as a collective is to keep the interest in lens based imaging alive and possibly thriving even when there’s an option to generate images for pennies on the dime at speed. Not settling for the petty fighting over scraps left over by the software onslaught

[EdvardKALEN]

Well. It may cost $1, 100, but its design looks like $300.

[gameshoes]

What an unexpected release! Now, time to watch your review…

[melihadalim]

Most expensive non-L lens in the RF mount is the 200-800mm.

[Skux]

This is a great idea actually. The RF 24-50 and 24-105 STM wanted to be travel lenses but were too slow for indoor shooting. This could finally be the perfect one-lens solution for travel (as along as you aren't vlogging).