Is Canon's New 70-200mm Worth the HIGH Price?

—

The original Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS was an incredibly compact telephoto, but that design gave it some noticeable compromises. Now the Canon RF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM Z has arrived in a more conventional form factor, an internal zoom, teleconverter support, and a heavy emphasis on video capability. Is this new lens the best option for Canon shooters? We got cold to find out.

—

0:00 - Intro
2:35 - Design and handling
3:59 - Close-up performance
4:29 - Autofocus
5:13 - Bokeh
6:03 - Flare and LoCA
6:38 - Breathing
7:09 - Sharpness
8:40 - Compared to original
9:58 - Should you buy it?

[MylesJP]

I agree that the title is a little misleading. I'd actually like to see a video on teleconverters and what their impact is on IQ.

[Wildridefilms]

I think you might want to change the title of the video. I assumed this was a video that breaks down teleconverters and whether they're needed with current high resolution cameras.
I stayed because I still enjoy watching you guys

[ogmike]

dude you do not need the length advantage while shooting but the fact the old one fits standing VERTICALLY in most camera bags is insane and is the best part

[dris]

That lens is $4500 in Canada! Ack. I got a brand new EF 70-200 2.8 L IS III last year for $2000 cdn and it's just as sharp and focuses just as accurately as the original RF version, and I saved over $1000 over that version as well. These lens prices are getting out of hand.

[benjhaisch]

You know it’s getting good when Chris has ice in his beard.

[ItsWillLee]

They had 26 letters to choose from, so they picked "Zed" ?
So creative lol

[reginaldwalton]

The fact that I couldn't use a teleconverter on the original RF 70-200 was the reason I didn't purchase that lens. But when the new one came out, I jumped on it immediately, along with the new 24-105 2.8. Loving them both.

[funtaril]

I thought this episode would cover various teleconverters and how their impact on IQ changed since DSLR days

[hitf]

The lens is great. I scored the black one and it makes a perfect match to my 24-105 Z. But, the optional powered zoom attachment really sucks. There are 2 models, more expensive one has the port for the external controller. They're both eye-wateringly expensive though. The zoom button on them is just a simple one-stage button that does not change speed as you press it, making it completely useless for video. The only way to get the functionality of a standard pressure-sensitive zoom control is to get the more expensive one and pair it with the external controller. But you cannot mount the external controller to the lens or the power zoom controller so you need a rig to get this all set up. So, power zoom? Yes. Usable? No.

[lionheart]

Why is the title not about the RF lens guys? 🤔

[pda]

I never had the previous RF lens, but this over the previous generation of EF lenses is astounding. It’s way more balanced. The autofocus is faster, and better. It just hits. It’s worth it.

[jimbruton]

I have the Rf F4 70-200 and use it as a walkaround outdoor lens and rarely need an aperture wider than F4 (If I do I'll use a different lens). It's very sharp and fits my needs and budget friendly. If I need more reach, I'll go with the RF 100-500 F4-F7.1. Manufacturers like Canon are betting on the video/hybrid market and now producing lenses that fit that category. In the near future stills, photocentric cameras will be the realm of only either mobile phones for the social media population or medium format for the pro studio photographers. I feel like hobbyists like me are being left out.

[tondaron]

Can't wait for Nikon to release their new Z mounts RF series

[JGZphotography]

NO! I am still very satisfied with my original EF 70-200mm Vii after 7 years for stills photography. Works superbly on both my R5iis with the adapter. For videographers, I'd say take a hard look. The aspect of pairing the motorized zoom attachment might make this lens a game changer.

[GabePerlPhotography]

I still have my 70-200mm USM II and works well so maybe in a few years might upgrade ! 🙂

[lbiggs]

Very informative. I will wait for a 70-150 f2

[lbiggs]

It's too cold for me, so thank you for taking the time to review the lens.

[orange-you-later]

This dude just dunked a $3000 lens into a basketball hoop 🙃

[sedevacante]

Could you zoom in on the older one to use the teleconverters similar to the 100-500?

[wilhelmw]

Looking forward to the review on using teleconverters with this new lens as stated in the original title.