Canon RF 70-200 2.8 vs RF 70-200 f4 Portrait Comparison (Free RAW Files)

A 70-200 lens is not only a staple in any portrait photographers kit, but also one of the more expensive lens purchases you may have to make. In this video I compare the RF 70-200 2.8 lens to the cheaper, lighter weight RF 70-200 f4 lens. I wanted to know just how big the difference in maximum aperture makes to photos throughout the zoom range, as well as in some real life scenarios.

*Disclaimer* - The RAW files are free to download and can be used for personal evaluative purposes. They must not be used for any commercial purposes.

VIDEO CHAPTERS
00:00 - Intro
1:24 - Headshot Comparison
3:29 - Mid length Comparison
4:53 - 200mm Bokeh
5:14 - 85mm 1.2 Comparison
6:40 - Real World Shots
10:24 - Autofocus
11:10 - Handling
13:00 - Outro

Gear Used:

Cameras:

Lenses:

All My Gear

Camera Setup:

Accessories

Lighting Setup

Audio Setup

*** Please note, clicking any of these links above and buying from Amazon helps support my channel as I get a little commission from each order at no extra cost to you. Thank you for your support. ***

Model Instagram:

Follow me on Instagram:

[Kmalinois_dog_love]

I can definitely see a huge difference between the 2.8 and the F4 and most of it is on the price.

[basilbcf]

I debated (not for long) about whether to get the 70-200 f/4 or pay $1100 more for the f/2.8. If I were a professional making money with portrait shots, I "might" consider the f/2.8/ However, since I would be shooting 80% landscapes and only about 20% portraits (family and grand kids), I decided the lighter, smaller f/4 made more sense for me. It's very easy to toss in a backpack and go hiking with then f/4 as a second lens. As this comparison demonstrates, the differences are real, but at longer focal lengths, not very noticeable. With the money I saved getting the f/4 over the 2.8, I also bought the RF 85 f2 refurbished and still have money left over. As this comparison shows at around 5:40, the 85 f/2 obliterates the background much better than the 70-200 f/2.8 and isn't really too far off from the 85 f/1.2 - for a fraction of the cost. (Personally I think the RF 85 f2 is a killer deal! ). If I need a longer focal length with better bokeh that the 70-200 f/4, I also have an EF 135 f/2 which is an amazing lens. For all these reasons, I bought the 70-200 f/4 and have been extremely happy with that decision.

[sterling]

One of the best comparisons i've seen for these lenses!! Super in depth and having photos side by side at every step was so good to be able to pause the video and have a real good look at the differences. Great shots too well done and thanks.

[joelad]

Great video thank you, it’s helped me no end. Recently bought an R7 and trying to decide which glass lineup to go for. The f4 being much cheaper means I can get another lens to compliment it, whereas the f2.8 takes all the budget.

[hunglemed]

but f2.8 photos have beautiful sun light on model, a bit unfair for f4 :D

[RQL-olsn]

You are building an impressive library of thorough, informative reviews. Keep up the good work. It will only be a matter of time before more and more viewers discover your quality content.

[josecarlosr]

James I want to thank you for making these videos. No one compares lenses as best a you do. You have helped me made some good decisions that I have not regretted when choosing lenses. Every time a new lens comes out. I look forward to watch your video first

[browniepinoy]

I just love your comparison videos. Thanks for also putting the 85 f1.2 in here, too. I didn’t realize the unique swirling bokeh effect at 200mm f2.8 until you mentioned it.

[ops]

C'est la deuxième vidéo de test d'objectif que je regarde sur votre chaîne et je adore.
Merci

[SatWizz]

Always, amazing comparisons with side-by-side images as the hallmark !! Thank You James

[amirjafarian]

Thank you James. I was going to order 2.8 version but after watching this video and checking the raw files going for F4. I already have 28-70 F2 for indoor and bokeh.

[VMLenin]

Thanks for the great comparison video I just needed. I might need the f2.8 at extreme low light situations or best 70-200 portraits, but I’m gonna let my 85mm do it and use f4. Its image quality is good enough and the lightness is just unbelieveable. I might be able to handle some low light situations with the IS, and most importantly it’s much cheaper! It’s a perfect 70-200 for travelers like me.

[jdpst]

Awesome Comparison... I'm debating to add the 70-200 either 2.8 or 4 to the bag for the R5c... .however I already have and LOVE the 24-105mm f4 as it lives on the camera... I also have the nifty fifty 1.8 and honestly for the price I'm completely happy with this set up. I would honestly go with the 70-200mm F4 mainly for the price and size however it has a pretty decent focal overlap. I'm almost contemplating to just going with the 100-500mm, then picking up say a 135mm 1.8 and be done with my set up. Between the 2 lenses I would cover 24-500mm and have the 135 for those super portraits. Also, I'm not always looking to alliterate the background, esp environmental portraits.... I want some of the scene to help tell a story... So I don't mind shooting at F4 or 5.6.

At 5:42 I almost prefer the 70-200 F4 out of the 85mm and the 2.8.... because the background feels still soft but natural... where as the 85mm at 1.2 is almost like added blur.

[mystikmeg]

Brilliant video. The differences are so subtle for portraits in good light.

[ftby]

Absolutely love your comparison videos because who doesn’t wanna see the differences when considering weight and price and size but I noticed your mid length shots the 2.8 you had really pretty dappled sun but you’re f/4 we’re cloudy, making the color and image look completely different. That was a little bit of a bummer. Either way, love the videos.

[michaelmurray]

Thanks for this review, really helped me in choosing the F4. Personally love the fact that at F4 I can get a razor sharp image with the whole face in focus and at the same time obliterate the background. Then for landscape photos I can stop all the way down to F16 and with IS get some great panoramas. Even the video is great, nice and smooth hand held. I really appreciate the most that you provide RAW files as I can actually load them into Lightroom and see for myself the quality at full resolution. Makes all the difference when deciding on a lens. Thanks James

[pkmexplorers]

Really great video. Easy choice for me / f4 ... Sometimes they really look very similar and I do agree with all you said who need f 2.8 vs f4
Great shoot and really mazing work to shows differences . Thanks 👌

[frederickmcdonald]

I found it hard to discern as to which lens I preferred, but at 8:15 in the video the image with Rachel I liked the hands better with the f 4 lens. I sometimes think that there is too much emphasis made on bokeh as I like less of this and more of the details of the model and where the model is. BTW - Rachel is beautiful and such a good model! A very good video all

[lobofilmmaker]

First really good comparison I see between an f2.8 and f4 lens. I am in a different ecosystem (Panasonic) but the difference will basically be the same. You definitely convinced me to get the f4 version for my camera. Great to see the portrait capability with this f4 lens 👍 keep up the great work

[cash]

I just bought the f2.8 version today new for $2499 US and am glad I finally did. It was a hard decision between the two but I figured it’s better to have that extra stop of light than not. However i appreciate the ergonomics of the F4 version a little better.